19 March 2021

Increased levels of tension between Greece and Turkey in 2020 in the eastern Mediterranean caused uncertainty for possible future conflict in the region. The primary issue is currently the rights to hydrocarbon gas and oil fields, escalated by the overt activity of Turkish seismic exploration vessels escorted by Turkish naval vessels. Analyst Hans-Kristian Pedersen provides an analysis and possible outlook.

By Hans-Kristian Pedersen, Mediterranean and Black Sea analyst.

Last year saw what initially looked like a significant increase in tension and enmity in the eastern Mediterranean. The cause for concern was the activity of Turkish seismic survey vessels and the accompanying escort by the Turkish navy. At its most calamitous, this culminated in what might best be described as an accident, involving a minor collision between Greek and Turkish naval vessels in the contested area that took place in August 2020. Ankara stated it was solely undertaking seismic explorations in the eastern Mediterranean. However, others viewed the scenario as an exercise in asserting geopolitical stature.

The controversy related to where the survey vessels were deployed, combined with the additional presence of a naval escort. On the one hand this concerns the overall recognition of established geographical demarcation boundaries of the region’s Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) and on the other hand this concerns geopolitical posturing. It could be said that the latter is influencing the former: meaning that geopolitical posturing is at least one likely reason for why Ankara was searching for hydrocarbon resources where it did in the eastern Mediterranean. Turkey is not a signatory to the UN law of the seas (UNCLOS) agreement, which includes the recognition of the 200NM demarcation perimeter of EEZs. Its recent (in late 2019) agreement of bilateral boundaries with Libya was also an effort to extend its geopolitical reach. Nevertheless, challenging the established EEZ boundaries, especially those of Greece and Cyprus underlines the attempt at geopolitical positioning in an area where naval escorts for exploration activity are perceived as unnecessary.

The overall impact and consequence for the shipping community is assessed to be of concern but not assessed to escalate much beyond contentious naval presence. An increase in naval vessels in the area does not in itself cause alarm. However, an increase in presence and imprudent activity can indeed lead to additional potential consequences – such as the incident, accidental or otherwise, between the Turkish and Greek naval vessels. For Turkey, the outcome has, so far, mainly resulted in sanctions. EU sanctions, albeit limited, have been imposed on Turkish officials and entities involved in hydrocarbons exploration in response to the eastern Mediterranean activity. These measures were followed by US sanctions in response to Turkey’s purchase of S-400 missile system from Russia, highlighting the controversial approach by Turkey in pursuing a realignment in its foreign policy.

Recent overtures by Ankara to hold talks with the other regional actors may be an earnest attempt to avoid additional sanctions in the near term. Depending on how these future talks develop, future scenarios, similar to those which led to the sanctions, cannot be ruled out. As such, the oscillating relationship between the regional actors is most likely set to continue. However, any actual serious naval escalation is considered unlikely, as the mutual dependencies and overall goal of political stability in the region is simply too great to be discarded. Geopolitical posturing is expected to continue. As well, there remains the potential for miscalculations between naval vessels in the contested area, leading to accidents or other low-level incidents.

FREE LIVE DEMO:

Not a user of our Risk Intelligence System yet?

Sign up for a live demo with us or request a 2 weeks full free trial with access to all incidents, assessments and features from vessel or desktop.