Reviewed by Assist. Prof. Dr. İbrahim KAYA, USAK Senior Researcher and Canakkale Onsekiz Mart University
 

The settlement of the decades-old maritime disputes in the Aegean Sea concerning the respective maritime rights and interests of Turkey and Greece seems to be politically deadlocked, causing
eventually the need to turn to juridical settlement grow even higher. These disputes are, in general terms, the legitimacy of the proposed 12 miles territorial sea of Greece; delimitation of the respective continental shelf areas; and of the possible exclusive economic zones which are yet to be declared in the Aegean Sea. The developments since the Helsinki Summit of 1999 between the European Union (EU) and Turkey concerning the full membership of Turkey have strengthen the prospect for a judicial settlement of the disputes in general and the Aegean maritime disputes in particular. The EU demands determinedly the settlement of them through judicial means if a possible negotiation process fails to yield a solution.
The recent study of Yücel ACER, titled as “The Aegean Maritime Disputes and International Law” addresses these developments and many other significant aspects of settling the Aegean maritime disputes on the basis of international law in a well-structured six chapters. The study demonstrates a novelty in terms of approach to the Aegean disputes. Most studies on the Aegean disputes adopt a political approach assuming that they involve more political considerations than those of legal character. However, this study adopts an exclusive legal approach basing the examinations on the relevant rules and principles of international law. It rests on political considerations only to the extent that the relevant legal rules and principles allow. Consequently, the study seems to fill a significant gap in the legal examination of the said disputes.

Having aimed at revealing how the disputes should be handled within the context of relevant legal rules and what results should be expected at the final account, the study starts in the initial chapters with describing and establishing the necessary factual and legal bases for these purposes. The characteristics of both the Aegean Sea in terms of socio-economical, geographical and geomorphological aspects and of all the major Aegean disputes are reviewed in the first chapter. One can also track back the foot-path of the Aegean disputes and comprehend why these disputes have emerged many decades ago and could not still be settled. In its second part, the chapter identifies the process in which how the settled and unsettled aspects of the status of the Aegean Sea between Turkey and Greece have become a fact.

One of the fundamental issues which are dealt with in the initial chapters is the prospect for settling the disputes on the basis of international law either between the parties or through a third-party such as the International Court of Justice (ICJ). This is quite a significant matter as many previous attempts to submit the disputes to a legal body have failed basically due to Turkey’s preference towards a settlement through direct negotiations. Any change in Turkey’s stance and in other related matters deserve to be born in mind all the time as far as judicial settlement is concerned. The study in this context analyses basically the differences between the Greek and Turkish views as to the means of settling the Aegean disputes. Moreover, it identifies the developments that create a real prospect for settling the disputes on the basis of international law. Developments such as recent good atmosphere in the relations between the two countries, Turkey’s aim to become a full member of the European Union with its preconditions are all examined.

Another fundamental issue relating to the judicial settlement is the relevant rules and principles of international law which is dealt with in Chapter Three. No doubt, these rules and principles constitute the very basis of substantive remarks on the judicial settlement. The chapter gives a comprehensive account of the rules and principles of international law of the sea as to the concepts of the territorial sea, the continental shelf and the exclusive economic zone, their seaward extent and delimitation between two or more States. It also sets out the legal concept of island, and entitlement of islands to the above mentioned maritime areas.

The rest of such a detailed study is devoted to more concrete analysis of the judicial settlement of the Aegean maritime disputes. The reviews largely depend on both the identified characteristics of the Aegean Sea and the relevant rules and principles of international law. It is possible to categorize in general terms the analysis into two separate but closely related area. Firstly, some of the analysis deepen and connect the previously but generally analyzed fundamental aspects such as the respective legal and political stances of the two sides and the delimitation law as tailored in international adjudication. Secondly, other analysis applies these principles, bearing in mind the peculiar characteristics of the Aegean Sea and its maritime disputes, to the Aegean Sea in order to illuminate what results should be arrived in settling the disputes.

In this manner, Chapter Four is exclusively related to the Aegean territorial sea dispute. It establishes initially the relevant legal arguments of the two sides, Greece and Turkey. It then clarifies the legal points which are touched upon in the arguments and thus fundamental to the legal settlement of the dispute. In its third section, the Chapter combines the relevant legal principles with the determination of the seaward extent of the territorial sea, which seems to be the core element of the Aegean territorial sea dispute. In the final section, the chapter analyses the justifiable extent of the Greek territorial sea in the Aegean in the light of both the identified legal principles of international law and the peculiar characteristics of the Aegean Sea. It seems that it becomes possible to judge whether Greece is justified by international law in its intent to extend its territorial waters beyond the present 6 miles.

The following Chapter is related to the second major element of the Aegean maritime disputes, namely the delimitation between Turkey and Greece of the continental shelf and the possible exclusive economic zone (EEZ). The Chapter makes a comprehensive analysis of both the Parties’ relevant arguments and the delimitation law in order to find out what principles have emerged from the conventional and customary law. To clarify the obscurities in the delimitation law, the Chapter makes a comprehensive review of the relevant international judgments that have applied the conventional and customary law to specific cases. It therefore becomes possible to see what principles would be applicable to the settlement of the Aegean delimitation disputes.

The final Chapter is specifically concerned with the application of the delimitation principles to the settlement of the Aegean delimitation disputes. In this context, the Chapter initially establishes that a single line for the delimitation of both the continental shelf and the EEZ in the Aegean is a juridical and factual necessity. Secondly, it establishes all the elements of “equitable delimitation” in the Aegean sea, as required by the delimitation law, ranging from geographical to resource-related and security factors in different sectors of the Aegean. The Aegean Islands get a special emphasis in this context. The Chapter eventually makes a significant contribution to the settlement of the Aegean maritime disputes by indicating clearly a delimitation line as supported by the relevant legal rules and principles identified in the previous chapters of the study.

One word of criticism should be acknowledged here that the analysis does not reflect the examples from state practice in which general principles of delimitation law are applied to specific cases. This would have certainly given a wider latitude in explaining how “equitable principles” should be understood and applied. However, as the author notes in the study that judicial decisions are far more relevant than those examples in the state practice as far as the application of the delimitation law is concerned, this does not seems to be a significant defect.

It is worth mentioning that the study reflects the very recent developments in the context of the Aegean maritime disputes and in the international maritime delimitation judgments. These are such comprehensive tasks that no other studies on the Aegean maritime disputes especially those written in English have attempted to undertake. As it is never the case that legal rules and principles provide clear-cut solutions to disputed matters, the observations rather seem to intend to suggest a meaningful framework in which the Aegean disputes should be handled and settled with reference to the relevant legal rules and principles. By virtue of all these, the study makes many contributions to the understanding of the Aegean maritime disputes and to the settlement of them on the basis of international law.

---

J.T.W. (U.S.A.K.) Book Reviews Department, Suslu Sokak, No. 2, Mebusevleri, Tandogan, Ankara, Turkey