The Eastern Mediterranean, where the whispers of history meet the roaring demands of the present, is once again alive with ambition. Türkiye’s latest move, a proposed maritime agreement with Syria, sends ripples across the region. Not merely a political maneuver, it is a statement of purpose: a step toward reclaiming balance in a sea burdened by competing claims and unspoken grievances.
This isn’t Türkiye’s first effort to reshape the region’s maritime dynamics. In 2019, its agreement with Libya challenged Greece’s claims and ensured Türkiye’s access to vital energy corridors. Now, the proposed accord with Syria follows the same path: practical solutions that respect the geography and avoid rigid interpretations of maritime law. Türkiye is not seeking confrontation but rather fairness and cooperation to solve ongoing disputes.
As expected, Greece has reacted strongly to this development. The country issued warnings to Ahmed al-Sharaa, threatening the leader of Syria’s current administration to ensure that the group that toppled Bashar Assad’s dictatorship remains on the European Union’s list of terrorist organizations.
Al-Sharaa’s statement was noteworthy: He expressed that his organization – currently administrating Syria – would be dissolved at a National Dialogue Conference. Therefore, Greece’s threats now appear outdated, as the realities on the ground in Syria have shifted. Its ability to influence the region through such arguments is fading.
Türkiye, in contrast, offers a vision that is based on fairness. Greece insists on interpreting international law, particularly the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), in a way that grants small islands like Kastellorizo or Meis – just a few kilometers from the Turkish coast – vast maritime zones. Türkiye argues this approach is neither fair nor realistic.
Under the principle of fairness, maritime boundaries should reflect the geographical situation. Giving tiny islands large maritime zones undermines the rights of larger coastal states. Greece’s claim about Meis would limit Türkiye’s access to key energy resources in the Eastern Mediterranean. Türkiye’s position is not only legitimate but also reflects common sense.
Rather than becoming stuck in prolonged legal battles, Türkiye prefers negotiation and mutual agreements. Its deal with Libya proved the effectiveness of this approach and the proposed agreement with Syria builds on that success. This strategy demonstrates Türkiye’s ability to lead by seeking solutions that respect sovereignty and promote stability.
The Eastern Mediterranean is not just a region of political debates; as is known, it is also rich in energy resources. Oil and natural gas reserves beneath the sea offer economic growth and energy security opportunities. Türkiye’s agreement with Syria could open the door to these resources, strengthening its economy and energy independence.
But this is about more than energy. Türkiye’s efforts reflect a broader vision for the region. By working directly with Ahmed al-Sharaa’s administration, Türkiye demonstrates that cooperation is possible even in a region often defined by conflict. This contrasts with the policies of Greece and the Greek Cypriot Administration of Southern Cyprus, whose confrontational tactics rely on rigid legal arguments and outdated narratives. Türkiye’s focus on dialogue and practical solutions sets a more constructive example.
Recent changes in northern Syria further show how Greece’s objections are losing relevance. For years, Greece used Syria’s internal dynamics to support its own arguments. Today, however, the region has moved on, and Türkiye’s pragmatic approach has made it a stronger and more credible actor.
Türkiye’s stance is not just about defending its interests. It is about finding solutions that are practical and fair. Bilateral agreements, like the one proposed with Syria, respect the shared interests of neighboring countries and avoid the rigidity of international frameworks that do not account for regional realities.
This approach also avoids the delays and uncertainties of international court battles. Türkiye’s focus on direct negotiations with neighbors ensures faster, more effective results while fostering better relationships. It shows Türkiye is a country willing to act decisively for mutual benefit, not just to win arguments.
In the long term, such agreements do more than solve current disputes. They strengthen partnerships that can last through future challenges. Türkiye is not only protecting its rights but also setting an example for how stability and cooperation can emerge from a history of conflict.
The proposed agreement with Syria is more than a political or legal move; it is a reflection of Türkiye’s historical leadership in the region. Türkiye is not just defending borders or seeking resources. It presents a vision for how the Eastern Mediterranean can move past its divisions toward a shared future built on fairness and mutual respect.
This moment is not only about drawing maritime lines or accessing energy reserves. It is about shaping the region’s near and far future. Türkiye’s actions remind us that even in the most divided areas, cooperation and diplomacy can lead to progress.
As the waves of the Eastern Mediterranean continue their timeless rhythm, Türkiye navigates them with purpose and clarity. It offers hope that fairness and dialogue can replace tension and competition, paving the way for a more stable and prosperous future for all.
