Erdogan warns oil companies against drilling in... Cyprus

[ioannis76]

Sigh... You found random maps online and try to attribute them to a Turkish government to claim that Turkey deleted islands. The funny part is that the Kastellorizo island is in that map. You can spot the islands of Kastellorizo and Stroggili right next to the red line on the top. The second map is less visible when it comes to those islands and you somehow present it as how it actually is. The two maps also show drastically different issues. The first one is about continental shelf and the other is about Greek EEZ claim. The real question is, if your position had so much merit why would you resort to such amateurish petty arguments?

Ofcourse, this is a deflection from your failure to address the example I have given concerning Canada and France.

You found random maps online and try to attribute them to a Turkish government to claim that Turkey deleted islands.

Not random at all. As far as spotting Kastelorizzo, I can't but I'll take your word for it. Where is Kastelorizzo's EEZ?

[ioannis76]

btw, here is some more info from the researchgate. There are also very interesting maps accompanying this:

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/...fig2_275683323

[Turkey] argues that the notion of the Continental Shelf, by its very definition, implies that distances should be measured from the continental mainland, meaning that the sea-bed of the Aegean geographically forms a natural prolongation of the Anatolian land mass [23]. In the same context, according to the Turkish aspect the delimitation of the EEZs in the Eastern Mediterranean should follow the principle of natural prolongation, thus not awarding any EEZ effect or CS effect to the islands of the Eastern Aegean and especially to the Dodecanesian small island of Kastelorizo, which is vital for the Greek national interests, as its influence, if recognized, can connect the Hellenic EEZ to the Cypriot EEZ (See Figure 2). Greece, on the other hand, claims that all islands must be taken into account on an equal basis for a full effect when it comes to maritime economic zones (See Figure 3) [25

[PointOfViewGun]

Not random at all. As far as spotting Kastelorizzo, I can't but I'll take your word for it. Where is Kastelorizzo's EEZ?

So, you got the map from a government source?

[ioannis76]

So, you got the map from a government source?

Well, according to marineregions, turkish EEZ is as Greece says:

http://www.marineregions.org/gazette...etails&id=5697

and to fully answer your question, yes, as a matter of fact, if you go here:
http://www.mfa.gov.tr/site_media/htm...limitation.pdf

You can download the full pdf with the preposterous turkish claims over the EEZ, clearly not taking Kastelorizo into account as having a continental shelf. Page 7, btw.

[PointOfViewGun]

Well, according to marineregions, turkish EEZ is as Greece says:
http://www.marineregions.org/gazette...etails&id=5697

Is that website the authority over UNCLOS? No, so, moving on...

and to fully answer your question, yes, as a matter of fact, if you go here:
http://www.mfa.gov.tr/site_media/htm...limitation.pdf
You can download the full pdf with the preposterous turkish claims over the EEZ, clearly not taking Kastelorizo into account as having a continental shelf. Page 7, btw.

Looks like the map you posted earlier is not in that PowerPoint presentation. So, you basically picked a random map, claimed it to be the official Turkish position, and when I asked if you got the map from a government source you used Google to try to find any government affiliated source, which didn't turn out to include the map you used earlier.

Now, you don't seem to realize the difference between a continental shelf and an EEZ as you seem to have used them interchangeably in the case of Kastellorizo. EEZ is straight-forward, though under the principle of equity its not applied directly for islands as well, but continental shelf idea is not. Not all islands have a continental shelf. The island of Kastellorizo sits on the continental shelf of the Anatolian landmass. It has no continental shelf. I have to thank you though. You have provided great examples with that link. Slides between 13 and 17 show examples from Italy/Tunisia, UK/France, Tunisia/Libya, Libya/Malta, and Romania/Ukraine. These examples show us that islands, when they fall in the continental shelf of an other party do not generate the full EEZ that you want them to have. You quite successfully showed it to be an international norm. So, thank you for that.

[kyrtgr]

Is that website the authority over UNCLOS? No, so, moving on...

That site shows all existing delimitations and if there is none it puts the median line.

Looks like the map you posted earlier is not in that PowerPoint presentation. So, you basically picked a random map, claimed it to be the official Turkish position, and when I asked if you got the map from a government source you used Google to try to find any government affiliated source, which didn't turn out to include the map you used earlier.

Who is this guy holding up this map I wonder.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKZRHS8_cSE&t=236s

What ioannis76 posted is the delimitation Turkey wants to do with Lybia and is only the part south-southwest of Crete.
Also on the right you can see what the TCs have claimed as their EEZ, and gave exploration licence to Turkish TPAO for. Magically when Turkish interests are involved islands have both EEZ and CS.

Now, you don't seem to realize the difference between a continental shelf and an EEZ as you seem to have used them interchangeably in the case of Kastellorizo. EEZ is straight-forward, though under the principle of equity its not applied directly for islands as well, but continental shelf idea is not. Not all islands have a continental shelf. The island of Kastellorizo sits on the continental shelf of the Anatolian landmass. It has no continental shelf. I have to thank you though. You have provided great examples with that link. Slides between 13 and 17 show examples from Italy/Tunisia, UK/France, Tunisia/Libya, Libya/Malta, and Romania/Ukraine. These examples show us that islands, when they fall in the continental shelf of an other party do not generate the full EEZ that you want them to have. You quite successfully showed it to be an international norm. So, thank you for that.

According to UNCLOS rules for delimitation of CS and EEZ are the same with the exception that CS can extend beyond 200nm under some circumstances which are not applicable in the Mediterranean.
About islands from UNCLOS

Article 121
Regime of islands
1. An island is a naturally formed area of land, surrounded by water,
which is above water at high tide.
2. Except as provided for in paragraph 3, the territorial sea, the
contiguous zone, the exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf of an
island are determined in accordance with the provisions of this Convention
applicable to other land territory.
3. Rocks which cannot sustain human habitation or economic life of
their own shall have no exclusive economic zone or continental shelf.

As you can see islands that can sustain human habitation or economic life (like Castellorizo) can have both EEZ and CS like any other land territory.
About the examples, if you take the time to read the judgments (as for the France vs Canada arbitration you sited earlier) you will see that the deciding factor is relevant coast length and not positioning on geological CS. Of course this source that supports Turkey's position will take things out of context. In the case of Greece and Turkey, Greece has x2+ coastal length advantage over Turkey. Any delimitation won't be done of each individual island vs the whole of Turkeys coast, but of the total Greece's coasts vs Turkeys coasts that project on each other.

A couple of informative video lectures
On delimitation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EumthmwCHw
On regime of islands
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_aXxs2csco

[PointOfViewGun]

That site shows all existing delimitations and if there is none it puts the median line.

Which is not the reality in various cases involving islands.

Who is this guy holding up this map I wonder.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKZRHS8_cSE&t=236s

He is the current defense minister and he's holding the map of Greek claims as he points out in the video. Why did you ask about it?

What ioannis76 posted is the delimitation Turkey wants to do with Lybia and is only the part south-southwest of Crete.
Also on the right you can see what the TCs have claimed as their EEZ, and gave exploration licence to Turkish TPAO for. Magically when Turkish interests are involved islands have both EEZ and CS.

Is it an official map then? No. The part to the right is not the EEZ line. It is clearly labeled as the continental shelf limit that was conveyed to the UN. The map doesn't show any information about what EEZ Northern Cyprus claims as well. It's not magic that an island like Cyprus has a continental shelf or not by the way. It's a matter of topology.

According to UNCLOS rules for delimitation of CS and EEZ are the same with the exception that CS can extend beyond 200nm under some circumstances which are not applicable in the Mediterranean.
About islands from UNCLOS

As you can see islands that can sustain human habitation or economic life (like Castellorizo) can have both EEZ and CS like any other land territory.
About the examples, if you take the time to read the judgments (as for the France vs Canada arbitration you sited earlier) you will see that the deciding factor is relevant coast length and not positioning on geological CS. Of course this source that supports Turkey's position will take things out of context. In the case of Greece and Turkey, Greece has x2+ coastal length advantage over Turkey. Any delimitation won't be done of each individual island vs the whole of Turkeys coast, but of the total Greece's coasts vs Turkeys coasts that project on each other.
A couple of informative video lectures
On delimitation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EumthmwCHw
On regime of islands
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_aXxs2csco

It's quite misleading to try to liken EEZ to Continental Shelf as much as possible. Their delimitation can differ quite extensively. There is even an UN institution dedicated to delimitation of continental shelf, CLCS.

Judgments are rendered on a case by case basis. There is no rule to apply coastal length in every decision. When they take coastal length into account, however, they likely do not cover the entire coastal length of the state but merely the region in question. So, sure, Greece has a very long coastal length but much of that is not applicable, same as Turkey's. What you need to consider is the coastal length of the region in question. Kastellorizo, with respect to that, has a tiny coastal length compared to the coast line it's neighbors with.

Please feel free to link court decision documents here so that we can all read it since you imply that you read them already.

[kyrtgr]

Which is not the reality in various cases involving islands.

It is not the reality in some cases involving islands but it is the reality in some others and the vast majority of state practice. In any case it is the best approximation and much better than what Turkey is doing by prejudicing any agreement or judgment by eliminating on it's own the effect of islands.
Even ICJ when delimiting is using a 3 stage methodology the first stage of which is the drawing of a provisional median line.
The final limit will be drawn by an agreement between the states or by ICJ/PCA.

He is the current defense minister and he's holding the map of Greek claims as he points out in the video. Why did you ask about it?

I ask because if he a minister of a government and is showing a map on the cameras that makes it official. It's not just a map of the Greek claims, but the map of the Turkish continental shelf as it is clearly labeled, although only in east Mediterranean. On his map Castellorizo is nowhere to be found, not to mention that draws Turkeys CS 6nm off every other island, clearly denying them of their CS/EEZ.

Is it an official map then? No. The part to the right is not the EEZ line. It is clearly labeled as the continental shelf limit that was conveyed to the UN.

Turkey has not conveyed any continental shelf limits to the UN. If it had then it would be posted on Turkeys LOS page of the UN ( https://www.un.org/Depts/los/LEGISLA...EFILES/TUR.htm ) as per article 76(9) of the LOS

9. The coastal State shall deposit with the Secretary-General of the
United Nations charts and relevant information, including geodetic data,
permanently describing the outer limits of its continental shelf. The
Secretary-General shall give due publicity thereto.

You can check other states submissions on this site to understand how it's done.

The map doesn't show any information about what EEZ Northern Cyprus claims as well.

As for north Cyprus, it has an area outlined with yellow line labeled "TRNC licence areas". It's either EEZ or CS claim (but if it's the one it is also the other) made by a non-state that can have none.

It's not magic that an island like Cyprus has a continental shelf or not by the way. It's a matter of topology.

The magic is that only the north part of the island has CS and the south does not according to this map.

It's quite misleading to try to liken EEZ to Continental Shelf as much as possible. Their delimitation can differ quite extensively. There is even an UN institution dedicated to delimitation of continental shelf, CLCS.

First, the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS), as per article 76(8) of the LOS, deals with CS beyond the 200nm (up to 350nm that the extended CS can reach). There is no coastal state in the Mediterranean with more than 200nm of CS for the simple reason that there are no such wide spans of ocean there.
Articles 74 and 83 of LOS that deal with delimitation of EEZ and CS respectively are identical. There is no reason CS limit to be different than the EEZ limit unless neighboring states agree for them to be different (for some reason). If there is no extended CS, state practice and arbitrations to this date have setup a single limit for both zones.

Judgments are rendered on a case by case basis. There is no rule to apply coastal length in every decision.

While you are right that judgments are rendered on a case by case basis, and the Tribunal is free to choose any method it sees fit, there is a trend to use a three stage methodology.
Quoting from the NICARAGUA v. COLOMBIA judgment of 2012 ( https://www.icj-cij.org/files/case-r...D-01-00-EN.pdf )

190. The Court has made clear on a number of occasions that the
methodology which it will normally employ when called upon to effect a
delimitation between overlapping continental shelf and exclusive economic
zone entitlements involves proceeding in three stages. (...)
191. In the first stage, the Court establishes a provisional delimitation
line between territories (including the island territories) of the Parties.
In doing so it will use methods that are geometrically objective and
appropriate for the geography of the area. This task will consist of
the construction of an equidistance line, where the relevant coasts are
adjacent, or a median line between the two coasts, where the relevant
coasts are opposite, unless in either case there are compelling reasons as a
result of which the establishment of such a line is not feasible. (...)
192. In the second stage, the Court considers whether there are any
relevant circumstances which may call for an adjustment or shifting of the
provisional equidistance/median line so as to achieve an equitable result.
If it concludes that such circumstances are present, it establishes a different
boundary which usually entails such adjustment or shifting of the
equidistance/median line as is necessary to take account of those circumstances.
Where the relevant circumstances so require, the Court
may also employ other techniques, such as the construction of an enclave
around isolated islands, in order to achieve an equitable result.
193. In the third and final stage, the Court conducts a disproportionality
test in which it assesses whether the effect of the line, as adjusted or
shifted, is that the Parties’ respective shares of the relevant area are markedly
disproportionate to their respective relevant coasts. (...)

When they take coastal length into account, however, they likely do not cover the entire coastal length of the state but merely the region in question. So, sure, Greece has a very long coastal length but much of that is not applicable, same as Turkey's. What you need to consider is the coastal length of the region in question. Kastellorizo, with respect to that, has a tiny coastal length compared to the coast line it's neighbors with.

Greece has 2000+ islands. Will you take each island and compare it's coastline with the opposite Turkish coastline? How about comparing it with the 1/2000th of the Turkish coastline? This is not how it's done. All the coasts that have a projection on the other state's coastline are taken into account. This is how it has been done until now.

Please feel free to link court decision documents here so that we can all read it since you imply that you read them already.

I have read many of them. I can't remember details of every single one, but the logic they follow is somewhat consistent.
But since you asked for links
https://www.icj-cij.org/en/list-of-all-cases
https://pca-cpa.org/en/cases/
http://legal.un.org/riaa/
knock yourself out

[PointOfViewGun]

It is not the reality in some cases involving islands but it is the reality in some others and the vast majority of state practice. In any case it is the best approximation and much better than what Turkey is doing by prejudicing any agreement or judgment by eliminating on it's own the effect of islands.
Even ICJ when delimiting is using a 3 stage methodology the first stage of which is the drawing of a provisional median line.
The final limit will be drawn by an agreement between the states or by ICJ/PCA.

Not a valid argument as you seem to ignore reality to make it. There can be vast differences when the median line is considered in a vacuum. So, no, it's not really the best approximation.

I ask because if he a minister of a government and is showing a map on the cameras that makes it official. It's not just a map of the Greek claims, but the map of the Turkish continental shelf as it is clearly labeled, although only in east Mediterranean. On his map Castellorizo is nowhere to be found, not to mention that draws Turkeys CS 6nm off every other island, clearly denying them of their CS/EEZ.

Sigh... This is a really stupid persistence on such a failed argument. You probably thought he was somehow using it as an acknowledgment what Greece wants as the right version. He doesn't. He clearly indicates that the map shows what Greece wants. Kastellorizo is not noticeable on the map because its tiny in that scale. The map is only Eastern Mediterranean specific. I guess you have to rely on such laughable material since you lack actual material for your position.

Turkey has not conveyed any continental shelf limits to the UN. If it had then it would be posted on Turkeys LOS page of the UN ( https://www.un.org/Depts/los/LEGISLA...EFILES/TUR.htm ) as per article 76(9) of the LOS
You can check other states submissions on this site to understand how it's done.

I like how you sidestep from defending your own claim and jump to an irrelevant point...

As for north Cyprus, it has an area outlined with yellow line labeled "TRNC licence areas". It's either EEZ or CS claim (but if it's the one it is also the other) made by a non-state that can have none.

Neither of the maps in question, the ones ioannis76, have such a label.

The magic is that only the north part of the island has CS and the south does not according to this map.

The map you're referring to doesn't show anything like that.

First, the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS), as per article 76(8) of the LOS, deals with CS beyond the 200nm (up to 350nm that the extended CS can reach). There is no coastal state in the Mediterranean with more than 200nm of CS for the simple reason that there are no such wide spans of ocean there.
Articles 74 and 83 of LOS that deal with delimitation of EEZ and CS respectively are identical. There is no reason CS limit to be different than the EEZ limit unless neighboring states agree for them to be different (for some reason). If there is no extended CS, state practice and arbitrations to this date have setup a single limit for both zones.

You are right. The CLCS is specifically for areas beyond 200 nm. However, continental shelf and exclusive economic zone can be at odds at some points.

While you are right that judgments are rendered on a case by case basis, and the Tribunal is free to choose any method it sees fit, there is a trend to use a three stage methodology.
Quoting from the NICARAGUA v. COLOMBIA judgment of 2012 ( https://www.icj-cij.org/files/case-r...D-01-00-EN.pdf

Greek position is to ignore anything that comes after the first stage. Thanks for making my argument.

Greece has 2000+ islands. Will you take each island and compare it's coastline with the opposite Turkish coastline? How about comparing it with the 1/2000th of the Turkish coastline? This is not how it's done. All the coasts that have a projection on the other state's coastline are taken into account. This is how it has been done until now.

Greece has over 6 thousand islands, of which only 227 are inhabited. No one really suggested what you're saying. You seem to be arguing against yourself as it was your implication that somehow all of those islands will be taken into account. Majority of islands from groups like Cylades, Sporades, Ionian, or Argo Saronic likely won't ever be taken into account while some will be ignored completely.

I have read many of them. I can't remember details of every single one, but the logic they follow is somewhat consistent.
But since you asked for links
https://www.icj-cij.org/en/list-of-all-cases
https://pca-cpa.org/en/cases/
http://legal.un.org/riaa/
knock yourself out

I guess you didn't really read them when you responded earlier. It's likely you've never even heard of them. I asked for links to their judgments for the examples I've listed earlier. You are giving me random portal links. Not a single link goes to the judgment of a particular case I brought up that you claimed knowledge on.

[kyrtgr]

Not a valid argument as you seem to ignore reality to make it. There can be vast differences when the median line is considered in a vacuum. So, no, it's not really the best approximation.

That's not what the rest of the world think. Median line is used to the vast majority of state practice.

Sigh... This is a really stupid persistence on such a failed argument. You probably thought he was somehow using it as an acknowledgment what Greece wants as the right version. He doesn't. He clearly indicates that the map shows what Greece wants. Kastellorizo is not noticeable on the map because its tiny in that scale. The map is only Eastern Mediterranean specific. I guess you have to rely on such laughable material since you lack actual material for your position.

Are we looking at the same map? I'm talking about the map that Turkish DM is holding. It shows what Turkey claims in east Med (red+green) where the green is the overlap with Greek and Cypriot claims. The yellow outline on the right is the TCs licenced areas to Turkish TPAO. What Turkey wants leave nothing for RoC except for what Turkey considers as Egyptian CS. Castellorizo is not visible on the map because Turkey doesn't think is has any CS/EEZ. Even if it gets what the French got in the "Saint Pierre et Miquelon" case ( http://legal.un.org/docs/?path=../ri...341.pdf&lang=O ) it would have got an uncolored area of 3617 nm2 around it.

I like how you sidestep from defending your own claim and jump to an irrelevant point...

You said that Turkey conveyed it's CS claim to UN and I proved that it hasn't. All claims and correspondence would be in the UN LOS page I provided the link for if you were right. Do you have any other source to prove your claim?

Neither of the maps in question, the ones ioannis76, have such a label.

I'm talking about the map the Turkish DM holds in the video I linked.

The map you're referring to doesn't show anything like that.

I'm referring to the map the Turkish DM holds in the video I linked.

You are right. The CLCS is specifically for areas beyond 200 nm. However, continental shelf and exclusive economic zone can be at odds at some points.

EEZ and CS can be at odds when there is extended CS (200nm to 350nm). Otherwise they have no reason to be different as their delimitation rules are identical. State practice and case law have shown that.
Quoting from the case of BARBADOS/TRINIDAD and TOBAGO ( http://legal.un.org/riaa/cases/vol_XXVII/147-251.pdf )

234. In fact, the continental shelf and the EEZ coexist as separate
institutions, as the latter has not absorbed the former (Libya/Malta, I.C.J.
Reports 1985, p. 13) and as the former does not displace the latter. Trinidad
and Tobago has correctly noted in its argument that the decisions of courts
and tribunals on the determination of a single boundary line have been based
on the agreement of the parties. As the International Court of Justice held in
Qatar v. Bahrain,

The Court observes that the concept of a single maritime boundary does not
stem from multilateral treaty law but from State practice, and that it finds
its explanation in the wish of States to establish one uninterrupted
boundary line delimiting the various – partially coincident – zones of
maritime jurisdiction appertaining to them (I.C.J. Reports 2001, p. 40, at p.
93, para. 173).

235. Yet it is evident that State practice with very few exceptions (most
notably, with respect to the Torres Strait) has overwhelmingly resorted to the
establishment of single maritime boundary lines and that courts and tribunals
have endorsed this practice either by means of the determination of a single
boundary line (Gulf of Maine, I.C.J. Reports 1984, p. 246; Guinea/GuineaBissau, 77 I.L.R. p. 635; Qatar v. Bahrain, I.C.J. Reports 2001, p. 40) or by
the determination of lines that are theoretically separate but in fact coincident
(Jan Mayen, I.C.J. Reports 1993, p. 38).

Greek position is to ignore anything that comes after the first stage. Thanks for making my argument.

Greek position is not to prejudice any agreement or court ruling or arbitration. It's up to the states to agree on a delimitation or, if they fail to do so, to the courts of arbitration to decide about the 2nd stage to reach an equitable result. Turkey on the other hand has made the 2nd stage on it's own and reached a result that fails the test of the 3rd stage in every respect.

Greece has over 6 thousand islands, of which only 227 are inhabited. No one really suggested what you're saying. You seem to be arguing against yourself as it was your implication that somehow all of those islands will be taken into account. Majority of islands from groups like Cylades, Sporades, Ionian, or Argo Saronic likely won't ever be taken into account while some will be ignored completely.

Every island that generates a maritime zone and projects on the Turkish coast within 400nm will be taken into account. Naturally Ionian islands won't be in the equation, but I have the view that the rest of the inhabited islands in the east of mainland Greece will have their east coast as relevant. That being said, enclaving islands like Lesbos, Lemnos and Chios, as Turkey "unofficially" suggests, is out of the question. Even if each gets what Saint Pierre et Miquelon got, the result is much closer to the Greek position. Also even rocks get at least 12nm around them. But of course, as I said earlier, a judgment cannot be prejudiced. All this is up to the tribunal to decide as I don't think any side's position will be accepted by the other side. Greece is willing, but Turkey is kicking and screaming so not to get to court.

I guess you didn't really read them when you responded earlier. It's likely you've never even heard of them. I asked for links to their judgments for the examples I've listed earlier. You are giving me random portal links. Not a single link goes to the judgment of a particular case I brought up that you claimed knowledge on.

This is what you said

Please feel free to link court decision documents here so that we can all read it since you imply that you read them already.

and I did exactly that. Those places are not just portals as you said. They are the official sites of International Court of Justice, Permanent Court of Arbitration and the UNs Reports of international arbitration awards.
I have read what I have read. I won't get into proving that I'm not an elephant. I provide a link and/or a quote when I make an argument. Also I won't do your homework. In the links I provided you will find everything you are looking for if you just bother to make a couple of clicks on your own. Even google brings a good amount of results if you search for a particular case.

[PointOfViewGun]

...

Ugh... I hate this practice of dissecting every single sentence to try to address every single word in a vacuum while actually diluting the discussion to cloud away any failed point on your part. It's really hard to follow for all and not very constructive. You keep deflecting by jumping to a different point each time your claims turn out to be bogus. I entertained it ones but I'll decline it this time.

[kyrtgr]

Ugh... I hate this practice of dissecting every single sentence to try to address every single word in a vacuum while actually diluting the discussion to cloud away any failed point on your part. It's really hard to follow for all and not very constructive. You keep deflecting by jumping to a different point each time your claims turn out to be bogus. I entertained it ones but I'll decline it this time.

... he said after having all his arguments demolished.

[ioannis76]

Magically when Turkish interests are involved islands have both EEZ and CS.

"What is mine is mine, and what is yours is mine".

Also let's add this:

By contrast, Turkey, which concluded EEZ delimitation agreements on the basis of the median line with its neighbours in the Black Sea, has refused to claim an EEZ in the Mediterranean under international law.

It has purported to conclude a continental shelf delimitation agreement with the ‘TRNC’ in September 2011. This ‘agreement’, between the occupying power and its subsidiary creation in the occupied area of Cyprus (declared “legally invalid” by the UN Security Council, Resolutions 541 and 550 and recognised by no other state in the world, except for Turkey), has no validity or standing in international law.

https://cyprus-mail.com/2018/02/11/t...law-sea-facts/

So, the median line applies in the black sea, but in the Aegean/east Med we should go for a "continental shelf delimitation".

LOL. Turkey is behaving like a guy with extremely bad manners, who twists things around according to what suits him.

[PointOfViewGun]

"What is mine is mine, and what is yours is mine".
Also let's add this:
https://cyprus-mail.com/2018/02/11/t...law-sea-facts/
So, the median line applies in the black sea, but in the Aegean/east Med we should go for a "continental shelf delimitation".
LOL. Turkey is behaving like a guy with extremely bad manners, who twists things around according to what suits him.

If you consider no context, sure, Turkey would look like that from a very ignorant standpoint.

[ioannis76]

And it seems that Erdogan is pretty angry at Macron's support for the international arrest warrants for the crew members and companies that support Turkey in its act of piracy against Cyprus:

http://www.ekathimerini.com/241624/a...ort-for-cyprus

Cyprus claims that those arrest warrants are starting to pay off:

http://www.ekathimerini.com/241598/a...ff-sources-say

Fatih arrest warrants paying off, sources say

For the record, the uneducated President of Turkey claimed that the crew of the "Fatih" and its supporting ships cannot be arrested, because turkish ships are guarding them. It appears that he doesn't understand that the warrant stands indefinitely, and that each and every one of these people will no longer be able to leave Turkey, or they will find themselves in handcuffs the moment they step out of the airplane.
Of course, I would prefer some more... drastic measures against Turkey (ie since the turkish fleet is said to be in the area of Cyprus, who is guarding the minor asian Aegean coasts? But of course Greece is in a pre-election period, just like Italy was in the ENI incident, when turkish warships blocked an italian research ship, and even if it wasn't, both contestants (Nea Dimokratia and Syriza) would never do anything to hurt our "friends and neighbors".

[Akrotatos]

Just curious what exactly would you prefer to do in the western Anatolian coast? Really curious as this is a strategy game forum. Because it seems like the perfect move to become a pariah state

[Akrotatos]

Just curious what exactly would you prefer to do in the western Anatolian coast? Really curious as this is a strategy game forum. Because it seems like the perfect move to become a pariah state

[ioannis76]

Just curious what exactly would you prefer to do in the western Anatolian coast? Really curious as this is a strategy game forum. Because it seems like the perfect move to become a pariah state

I really don't think you become a pariah state by acting against a pariah state. It really doesn't work that way.
For starters, organise a big exercise, with amphibious landings, etc. All this, in Greek territory, of course, just in the east border. As far to the east as humanly possible. And of course some overflights, accidental, of course, over areas of our eastern neighbor. That would give them something to worry about, wouldn't it? Erdogan would have to consider that if he were to turn his full force on the eastern mediterranean he might have problems in the Aegean. Turkey claims that it can handle two wars at the same time. Can it, really?

Back in the 80's Turkey attempted to send a research vessel (Sismic 1) to conduct research in our territory. Here is what happened:

https://www.upi.com/Archives/1987/03...4587543819600/

ATHENS, Greece -- Prime Minister Andreas Papandreou warned Turkey Friday against sending a research ship into a disputed part of the Aegean, saying 'hostilities' could erupt, then ordered one of four main U.S. military bases in Greece to stop operations.

Of course, at the time, our mistake was that we did not send the vessel to conduct the drilling, despite turkish threats. Yet, the mobilisation of troops against Turkey (a NATO "ally" at the time when the Cold War was still a fact, as well as the "alliance" of Greece with Bulgaria (a Warsaw Pact country) did NOT, as you can see end with Greece becoming a "pariah". Why would it end like that now, when it is Turkey that is becoming the rogue state, is a mystery. Perhaps you can help solve it.

[Nebaki]

And it seems that Erdogan is pretty angry at Macron's support for the international arrest warrants for the crew members and companies that support Turkey in its act of piracy against Cyprus:

There are many things in your Posts that always needs some clarification and how it comes that even ones again you managed hoard an old Topic but hey here comes your first clarification - Cyprus is an divided Country where you have the North and the South between TURKISH Cypriots and some Greek Cypriots- If something in the past History would go well for Greeks then i guess we can call Cyprus also "Greece" or not? For some clarification what happened on Cyprus:



According to some Greeks the Eastern Mediterranean belongs to them...

[Kyriakos]

At least I hope everyone here does know that only the Republic of Cyprus is internationally recognized. The part occupied by Turkey has no international standing and is just an occupied zone. Occupied zones have no Economic zones, or national waters. At least let's stay within the realm of sanity.

That said, it is quite funny that Erdogan is so out of touch with reality that he thinks he can antagonize anyone. Sure, Turkey can do stuff to Greece, as in do nothing at all, cause there is balance of power, but why not also attack France and whoever else, cause obviously in some lunatic minds Turkey is China, Russia or US.