Page 18 of 18 FirstFirst ... 89101112131415161718
Results 341 to 351 of 351

Thread: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

  1. #341

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

    Quote Originally Posted by ioannis76 View Post
    And the minister of Infrastructure of Turkey just posted a map that pretty much includes all the Greek islands of the Eastern Aegean as well as the Kastelorizzo region in the Turkish search and rescue area of responsibility. How this is NOT a declaration of war, is beyond me:

    Yes, they didn't bother to cut out the territorial waters of the Greek islands that would look tiny in that map. They're not just gonna let Turkish sailors stranded because the search and rescue areas have not been deliminated. If you feel like this is declaration of war tough luck for you.


    Quote Originally Posted by ioannis76 View Post
    This does NOT give Turkey the right to unilaterally expand its territory. Turkey needs to understand that. In order to even go to court and reach a court decision, both parties need to sign the UNCLOS. Turkey refuses to sign the UNCLOS, believing that if they don't they pretty much have the right to do whatever they want. Well, that's not the way it goes. Turkey decided by itself that islands should have no EEZ whatsoever, and that's that.
    It doesn't give Greece the right to unilaterally expand its territory either. Turkey doesn't need to sign UNCLOS to go to court as well.


    Quote Originally Posted by ioannis76 View Post
    Turkey's arrangement in the Black Sea is the equidistance principle, which is exactly the UNCLOS.
    Black sea is a region where such a sea border does not create any overlapping claims. The expansion was done in 1960s, quite many years before UNCLOS II.


    Quote Originally Posted by ioannis76 View Post
    And yet the map you yourself posted actually shows Egypt as part of the pipeline. Which makes me wonder why the rest of your post would try to lie about it while it's there for everyone to see.
    I think your selective quotation is what's there for everyone to see.


    Quote Originally Posted by ioannis76 View Post
    The decision of Greece regarding the pipline is in accordance to the rule of the UNCLOS. Not the odd exceptions that occur. Turkey attempts to use exceptions to a law that she herself hasn't even signed. Turkey acts as if there is already a court decision giving her the area, while there isn't one.
    Nope. It violates UNCLOS principle of equity. Adjustments due to principle of equity is not an exception. It's the norm encapsulated in many real world applications.
    Last edited by PointOfViewGun; October 18, 2020 at 06:38 AM.
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  2. #342

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

    Yes, they didn't bother to cut out the territorial waters of the Greek islands that would look tiny in that map. They're not just gonna let Turkish sailors stranded because the search and rescue areas have not been deliminated. If you feel like this is declaration of war tough luck for you.
    Actually, it appears that you are unaware that the Hellenic area of Responsibility was delimitated in 1950 by ICAO and was declared to the ICO in 1975. It coincides with the Hellenic FIR and is in accordance with both the IMO and the ICAO.
    Therefore the SAR areas were delimitated some 45 years ago.
    As for their territorial waters, they are "tiny" according to Turkey.

    It doesn't give Greece the right to unilaterally expand its territory either. Turkey doesn't need to sign UNCLOS to go to court as well.
    It gives Greece a much, much better right.

    Turkey doesn't need to sign UNCLOS to go to court as well.
    So, based on which law does Turkey intend to go to court? The "law" of who has the most ships? Even there, Turkey is already minus one frigate (without Greece's even launching a missile, but that's what one gets for messing with a nation that fought large scale naval battles even thousands of years ago).

    Black sea is a region where such a sea border does not create any overlapping claims. The expansion was done in 1960s, quite many years before UNCLOS II.
    There was the UNCLOS I.

    I think your selective quotation is what's there for everyone to see.
    Does the map show Egypt as part of the pipeline deal, or not? Yes it does, case closed. Next.

    Nope. It violates UNCLOS principle of equity.
    Even here Turkey evokes a law that she hasn't signed. Sign the law, and let's go to court based on the UNCLOS, and let the court decide if it does or if it doesn't. Just sign the law.

    The Truth is Hate for those who hate the Truth.

  3. #343

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

    Quote Originally Posted by ioannis76 View Post
    Actually, it appears that you are unaware that the Hellenic area of Responsibility was delimitated in 1950 by ICAO and was declared to the ICO in 1975. It coincides with the Hellenic FIR and is in accordance with both the IMO and the ICAO.
    Therefore the SAR areas were delimitated some 45 years ago.
    As for their territorial waters, they are "tiny" according to Turkey.
    That's International Civil Aviation Organization, ICAO. You're confusing FIR with SAR. SAR was never deliminated in the Aegean as it relies heavily on each countries' claims.


    Quote Originally Posted by ioannis76 View Post
    It gives Greece a much, much better right.
    Much much better right? Making up rights now?


    Quote Originally Posted by ioannis76 View Post
    So, based on which law does Turkey intend to go to court? The "law" of who has the most ships? Even there, Turkey is already minus one frigate (without Greece's even launching a missile, but that's what one gets for messing with a nation that fought large scale naval battles even thousands of years ago).
    First you gotta decide if UNCLOS is international norm or not. You can't call it international norm one second then declare Turkey's inability to invoke it an other second.


    Quote Originally Posted by ioannis76 View Post
    There was the UNCLOS I.
    And?


    Quote Originally Posted by ioannis76 View Post
    Does the map show Egypt as part of the pipeline deal, or not? Yes it does, case closed. Next.
    It doesn't.


    Quote Originally Posted by ioannis76 View Post
    Even here Turkey evokes a law that she hasn't signed. Sign the law, and let's go to court based on the UNCLOS, and let the court decide if it does or if it doesn't. Just sign the law.
    I'm commenting here, not Turkey. You need to come up with other deflections.
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  4. #344

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...



    Turkey is really throwing down the gauntlet to the europeans

  5. #345

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

    That's International Civil Aviation Organization, ICAO. You're confusing FIR with SAR. SAR was never deliminated in the Aegean as it relies heavily on each countries' claims.
    LOL, no. In fact, when the turkish F-16 piloted by Cicekli (I do not know his rank) and the late pilot Naim Erdogan was... well, lost near the island of Chios, back in October 8, 1996, it was the Greeks who conducted the SAR operation.
    Here is the pilot, enjoying the hospitality of the Greek hospital of the island of Chios:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EBrmzSZz-E
    He was later returned to the turkish authorities, of course.
    If it was as you say, then the pilot would have been recovered by the turkish SAR units, since we can't possibly accept that the F-16 was... lost within what Ankara recognizes as Greek territory? What on Earth would it be doing in that area?

    Much much better right? Making up rights now?
    Nope. I don't need to. The UNCLOS is giving those rights to me. What is Turkey's claim, again?

    First you gotta decide if UNCLOS is international norm or not. You can't call it international norm one second then declare Turkey's inability to invoke it an other second.
    Why doesn't Turkey sign the law if she evokes it? Because the law doesn't suit her. Well, too bad for Turkey.

    It doesn't.
    Yes it does. Here is the map again:


    You know you're weakening your own arguments with this attitude.

    I'm commenting here, not Turkey. You need to come up with other deflections.
    Of course, but we're talking about Turkey's attitude. We're not talking about the latest football match.

    The Truth is Hate for those who hate the Truth.

  6. #346

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

    Quote Originally Posted by ioannis76 View Post
    LOL, no. In fact, when the turkish F-16 piloted by Cicekli (I do not know his rank) and the late pilot Naim Erdogan was... well, lost near the island of Chios, back in October 8, 1996, it was the Greeks who conducted the SAR operation.
    Here is the pilot, enjoying the hospitality of the Greek hospital of the island of Chios:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EBrmzSZz-E
    He was later returned to the turkish authorities, of course.
    If it was as you say, then the pilot would have been recovered by the turkish SAR units, since we can't possibly accept that the F-16 was... lost within what Ankara recognizes as Greek territory? What on Earth would it be doing in that area?
    No, if it was as I say, it has no physical effect on whose ships arrive at the scene first. It would only be undisputed if the plane fell within the territorial waters of Greece. In that case, with F-16s flying speed, it wouldn't take much to fell into.


    Quote Originally Posted by ioannis76 View Post
    Nope. I don't need to. The UNCLOS is giving those rights to me. What is Turkey's claim, again?
    No it doesn't. It doesn't work that way. UNCLOS doesn't give the right to act unilaterally to party states.


    Quote Originally Posted by ioannis76 View Post
    Why doesn't Turkey sign the law if she evokes it? Because the law doesn't suit her. Well, too bad for Turkey.
    It didn't because UNCLOS allowed situations like this open to interpretation without clear rules. Turkey was present in the convention and made its objections but the convention was dragging on many of the powers that had clear borders wanted it to be over. Why did Greece invalidate ITCLOS (the judiciary body of UNCLOS) jurisdiction?


    Quote Originally Posted by ioannis76 View Post
    Yes it does. Here is the map again:
    You know you're weakening your own arguments with this attitude.
    Already explained why its not. You can't wish your claims to be true. I wish we could, but no.


    Quote Originally Posted by ioannis76 View Post
    Of course, but we're talking about Turkey's attitude. We're not talking about the latest football match.
    Then don't equate what I argue with what Turkey does. Simple.
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  7. #347

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

    No, if it was as I say, it has no physical effect on whose ships arrive at the scene first. It would only be undisputed if the plane fell within the territorial waters of Greece. In that case, with F-16s flying speed, it wouldn't take much to fell into.
    It doesn't work like that. You may say what you like, but the fact is that areas of SAR are defined, and it's not "whoever arrives there first", because if it was like that, one would get in the way of the other, and the SAR operation would be near impossible to coordinate. The "whoever arrives there first" is a surefire way to put lives at risk.

    No it doesn't. It doesn't work that way. UNCLOS doesn't give the right to act unilaterally to party states.
    What is Turkey's claim again?
    Oh, yeah, "we have more frigates than you".

    It didn't because UNCLOS allowed situations like this open to interpretation without clear rules.
    The UNCLOS does the opposite of what you say. It sets crystal clear rules for the resolution of the EEZ issues. It's just that the rules are not to Turkey's liking.

    Why did Greece invalidate ITCLOS (the judiciary body of UNCLOS) jurisdiction?
    It didn't. Greece excludes issues of Hellenic national sovereignty that Turkey defines as "gray zones" (ie even some inhabited Greek islands) from the jurisdiction. And it makes perfect sense, since we cannot be discussing about Greek territory (including inhabited Greek islands, such as Agathonisi), particularly with a country such as Turkey, that is prone to ethnic cleansing.

    Ie, if Turkey thinks that areas inhabited by Greeks will be left to its mercy, without paying a heavy blood toll, Turkey should think again.
    The only way to get Agathonisi is with war.

    Already explained why its not. You can't wish your claims to be true. I wish we could, but no.
    Actually you haven't. You know, it wouldn't hurt your argumentation to admit, once in a while, that you were wrong.
    In fact it might help it.

    Then don't equate what I argue with what Turkey does. Simple.
    Your posts seem to be coming straight from the rhetoric of the turkish foreign ministry. Not really my fault.

    The Truth is Hate for those who hate the Truth.

  8. #348

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

    Quote Originally Posted by ioannis76 View Post
    It doesn't work like that. You may say what you like, but the fact is that areas of SAR are defined, and it's not "whoever arrives there first", because if it was like that, one would get in the way of the other, and the SAR operation would be near impossible to coordinate. The "whoever arrives there first" is a surefire way to put lives at risk.
    That's the way it is in Aegean since the parties have not agreed on a SAR. They have overlapping claims.


    Quote Originally Posted by ioannis76 View Post
    The UNCLOS does the opposite of what you say. It sets crystal clear rules for the resolution of the EEZ issues. It's just that the rules are not to Turkey's liking.
    If that was the case there wouldn't be any of these ICJ cases we've pointed out before. You built your case on ignoring them. It is a matter of fact that in many cases Greece's interpretation of UNCLOs is not applied by ICJ.


    Quote Originally Posted by ioannis76 View Post
    It didn't. Greece excludes issues of Hellenic national sovereignty that Turkey defines as "gray zones" (ie even some inhabited Greek islands) from the jurisdiction. And it makes perfect sense, since we cannot be discussing about Greek territory (including inhabited Greek islands, such as Agathonisi), particularly with a country such as Turkey, that is prone to ethnic cleansing.
    Ie, if Turkey thinks that areas inhabited by Greeks will be left to its mercy, without paying a heavy blood toll, Turkey should think again.
    The only way to get Agathonisi is with war.
    Greece declared ITCLOS invalid for articles 15 (Delimitation of the territorial sea between States with opposite or adjacent coasts), 74 (Delimitation of the exclusive economic zone between States with opposite or adjacent coasts) and 83 (Delimitation of the continental shelf between States with opposite or adjacent coasts). So, no, gray zones is not one of the issues Greece declared ITCLOS to have no jurisdiction over.


    Quote Originally Posted by ioannis76 View Post
    Actually you haven't. You know, it wouldn't hurt your argumentation to admit, once in a while, that you were wrong.
    In fact it might help it.
    I have though. Post #337. You ignored it.


    Quote Originally Posted by ioannis76 View Post
    Your posts seem to be coming straight from the rhetoric of the turkish foreign ministry. Not really my fault.
    Not even close, but sure.
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  9. #349

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

    That's the way it is in Aegean since the parties have not agreed on a SAR. They have overlapping claims.
    This is the Greek statement on SAR, which stands on the ICAO:

    Search and rescue in the event of an aircraft accident is governed by the 1944 ICAO Convention (Annex 12) as well as by the ICAO rules. The Greek search and rescue area was designated by an ICAO Regional Air Navigation Agreement in 1952 and coincides with the Athinai FIR.
    https://www.mfa.gr/en/issues-of-gree...nd-rescue.html

    Where does the turkish statement stand?

    WHEN was it made?

    If that was the case there wouldn't be any of these ICJ cases we've pointed out before. You built your case on ignoring them. It is a matter of fact that in many cases Greece's interpretation of UNCLOs is not applied by ICJ.
    The ICJ cases were the exception. The UNCLOS is the rule. And it's not "Greece's interpretation of the UNCLOS", the UNCLOS is crystal clear. Islands have the full EEZ rights of the continental land masses. In case of overlapping, the median line is set. There are provisions for free maritime movement (so the argument that we had from the turkish side, that the map would close down the Aegean sea is invalid).
    And since you evoked the ICJ, Greece unilaterally went to the International Court:

    Since then, the repeated Turkish attempts to violate Greeceís sovereign rights on the continental shelf have become a serious source of friction in the two countriesí bilateral relations, even bringing them close to war (1974, 1976, 1987).

    In 1976, Greece brought this very serious issue before the UN Security Council and unilaterally resorted to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague. Turkey refused to come before the Court, invoking its non-recognition of the Courtís jurisdiction. The Court did not examine the substance of the issue for reasons of formality, due to lack of competence.
    https://www.mfa.gr/en/issues-of-gree...tal-shelf.html

    So, Turkey neither accepts the UNCLOS, nor the ICJs rulings. What does Turkey accept?

    The Truth is Hate for those who hate the Truth.

  10. #350

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

    Quote Originally Posted by ioannis76 View Post
    This is the Greek statement on SAR, which stands on the ICAO:
    https://www.mfa.gr/en/issues-of-gree...nd-rescue.html
    Where does the turkish statement stand?
    WHEN was it made?
    From ICAO Annex 12:
    2.2 Search and rescue regions2.2.1 Contracting States shall delineate the search and rescue regions within which they will provide search and rescue services. Such regions shall not overlap and neighbouring regions shall be contiguous.
    Note 1.— Search and rescue regions are established to ensure the provision of adequate communication infrastructure, efficient distress alert routing and proper operational coordination to effectively support search and rescue services. Neighbouring States may cooperate to establish search and rescue services within a single SAR region.
    Note 2.— The delineation of search and rescue regions is determined on the basis of technical and operational considerations and is not related to the delineation of boundaries between States.
    2.2.1.1 Recommendation.— Search and rescue regions should, in so far as practicable, be coincident with corresponding flight information regions and, with respect to those areas over the high seas, maritime search and rescue regions.
    Looks like Greece is treating a recommendation as a right. I am not sure of this magical ICAO Regional Air Navigation Agreement from 1952 as nothing comes up but the Hamburg Convention, International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue of 1979, requires parties to agree on it to delimitate search and rescue area:
    2.1.4 Each search and rescue region shall be established by agreement among Parties concerned. The Secretary-General shall be notified of such agreement.

    Quote Originally Posted by ioannis76 View Post
    The ICJ cases were the exception. The UNCLOS is the rule. And it's not "Greece's interpretation of the UNCLOS", the UNCLOS is crystal clear. Islands have the full EEZ rights of the continental land masses. In case of overlapping, the median line is set. There are provisions for free maritime movement (so the argument that we had from the turkish side, that the map would close down the Aegean sea is invalid).
    ICJ cases were the exceptional situation that required their judgment. The case between Turkey and Greece is similarly an exception case. Simply put, Greece ignores the principle of equity that UNCLOS highlights. ICJ doesn't. Hence, any similar case brought against a judgment committee receives a different application than the one Greece wants.


    Quote Originally Posted by ioannis76 View Post
    And since you evoked the ICJ, Greece unilaterally went to the International Court:
    https://www.mfa.gr/en/issues-of-gree...tal-shelf.html
    So, Turkey neither accepts the UNCLOS, nor the ICJs rulings. What does Turkey accept?
    Yes, Greece unilaterally went to ICJ. Countries normally don't do that. Sides come together to form an understand on what topics ICJ will cover and they present that understanding to ICJ in writing. ICJ cases are held based on that.
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  11. #351

    Default Re: The Fight for Mediterranean: Turkey, Greece, France, Libya, Egypt ...

    And here is an update on the Search and Rescue areas that Turkey disputed recently:
    https://greekcitytimes.com/2020/11/0...greece-aegean/

    The official response of the ICAO Secretary General Fang Liu. Just goes to show how preposterous the claims that Turkey makes are, in an obvious effort to gain something by removing them from the table if negotiations do occur.

    Yes, Greece unilaterally went to ICJ. Countries normally don't do that. Sides come together to form an understand on what topics ICJ will cover and they present that understanding to ICJ in writing. ICJ cases are held based on that.
    Like I said, we can't discuss every single ridiculous claim that Turkey makes. Turkish may even claim the island of Crete, or even Peloponisos. They just make as many claims as possible, believing that they can get something for nothing. Well, it doesn't work like that. The point is that Turkey doesn't want to sign the UNCLOS, nor does she want to go to the ICJ. If Turkey says that the ICJ does not have the authority to deliberate on such issues, and if Turkey doesn't accept the UNCLOS, there is no legality whatsoever in Turkey's claims.

    Anyway, my personal view is that we should just go to war and get this over with. And a large scale one, at that.
    Last edited by ioannis76; November 03, 2020 at 01:28 PM.

    The Truth is Hate for those who hate the Truth.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •