Turkish Transport Minister Abdulkadir Uraloglu introduced Tuesday that Turkey will signal an settlement with Syria to determine an Unique Financial Zone (EEZ), in accordance with Turkish media outlet TGRT.
“We’ll finalize a maritime jurisdiction settlement with the Syrian administration. Moreover, we’re growing an emergency motion plan that encompasses air, rail, highway, and communication companies. Airports may even be reactivated,” he reportedly said.
Athens is intently monitoring these developments. Greek diplomatic sources responded by noting the “state of affairs in Syria is transitional” and “doesn’t legitimize any such settlement.”
In accordance with the TGRT report, Uraloglu’s assertion was made after a cupboard assembly held Monday.
Ankara’s focus has lately shifted again to the potential advantages Turkey may acquire from its strengthened position in Syria following the collapse of the Assad regime. This features a renewed curiosity within the Japanese Mediterranean and the maritime boundaries within the area.
Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis lately determined to tell – in coordination with Cypriot President Nikos Christodoulides – EU leaders in regards to the reported revival of plans for an EEZ settlement between Turkey and Syria, modeled after the Turkish-Libyan settlement, in an effort to carry consideration to a problem that had been largely ignored by the political management in most European international locations.
Elevating consciousness throughout Europe is a strategic device that Athens, and particularly Nicosia – straight impacted by the Turkish plan – may leverage.
In a completely believable situation, the EU may, in some unspecified time in the future, embody in one in every of its Summit conclusions a name for the respect of the sovereign rights and jurisdictions of the states bordering Syria, not solely on land but in addition at sea. For Greece, that is seen as a practical objective, particularly given the adverse precedent of the Turkish-Libyan settlement, signed in 2019.
The EU had formally condemned this settlement, stating that it couldn’t have authorized impact because it violated the rights of third states.
This story has been up to date.
