The recent endorsement of the Turkish-Libyan maritime memorandum by Libya’s eastern parliament was anticipated. Turkey’s substantial involvement in Libya over recent years—including military support for the eastern commander Khalifa Haftar and efforts to mediate between rival factions—has shifted perceptions. As a result, Ankara is now perceived more as an ally than a threat by the Benghazi leadership, while also nurturing its ties with the Tripoli government since 2019.
Significance of the Ratification
The ratification of an agreement deemed illegal under international law, particularly by a parliament with a composition that hasn’t evolved since the 2014 elections, bears both symbolic and practical implications. The Presidential Council had previously endorsed the agreement, citing Libya’s state of emergency to grant it legitimacy. However, the recent parliamentary endorsement further cements the agreement within Libya’s political landscape—even though it is geographically and legally questionable. Should a legitimately elected Libyan administration wish to rescind this pact and pursue a lawful agreement with Greece, it would encounter a significant obstacle given its entrenched status.
Implications for Libya’s Exclusive Economic Zone
Under this controversial agreement, Libya stands to increase its exclusive economic zone (EEZ) by at least 20% as Turkey effectively encroaches on Greek sovereign rights. The possibility of any future Libyan government opting for an alternative path that adheres to international law, yet contradicts the interests shaped by the 2019 agreement, seems minimal. Consequently, this leaves little room for lawful negotiation, tightening Turkey’s grip on Libya’s strategic resources.
The recent decision not only confirms Turkey’s leadership in Libya across various sectors—political, military, and economic—but also suggests that Greece will find it challenging to match Ankara’s influence. This reality has serious ramifications for regional stability and intra-state dynamics within Libya.
Potential Responses from Egypt and Greece
Cairo’s reaction to this development will be crucial, particularly as Egypt views the agreement as illegal but maintains relationships with Haftar’s camp. Turkey’s recent alignment with eastern Libyan factions has, interestingly, nudged Ankara and Cairo closer together. Greece, on the other hand, must eschew impulsive reactions but communicate to both Libyan and Turkish authorities that there will be repercussions for this move. While talks with the Tripoli-based government on EEZ delimitation may face challenges, ongoing discussions remain critical, even if they seemed uncertain from the outset.
Turkey’s Strategic Maneuvers
This endorsement can also be interpreted as a tactical maneuver by Turkey, potentially raising the stakes regarding Greece’s initiatives—such as the Great Sea Interconnector electricity link and plans for a marine park in the southern Aegean. Furthermore, Greece now possesses a distinctive opportunity to extend its territorial waters south and west of Crete, particularly given the current lack of even minimal collaboration with the Libyan side.
In summary, this recent ratification of the maritime agreement not only showcases Turkey’s influence but poses significant challenges for Greece and the broader international community. The implications are profound, necessitating a strategic reevaluation for those involved in the region’s geopolitical landscape.