Discord between Greece and Turkey over the Extent of Their Continental Shelves in the Aegean

Abstract

The Greek-Turkish controversy over the extent of their continental shelves in the Aegean Sea, only one of many disputes which divide the two nations, dates back to the early 1970s. They have failed to solve it. Greece insists on third party settlement while Turkey gives priority to a settlement by the agreement of the interested parties. They also differ sharply on the substance of the dispute. Greece argues mainly on the basis of conventional law that a delimitation of the continental shelf should be effected by the use of the equidistance principle between the easternmost Greek islands and the west Turkish coast, which would give to Turkey a little more than the seabed of its territorial sea. Turkey, on the other hand, argues on the basis of customary international law that the delimitation should be effected between the mainland’s of the two countries in accordance with equitable principles, thus ignoring those Greek islands on the Turkish continental shelf which would extend the Turkish continental shelf as far as to the middle of the Aegean Sea. This article seeks to examine these two arguments in light of international law, state practice and scholarly opinions in order to contribute to a peaceful solution.