Research Article


DOI :10.26650/mecmua.2021.79.3.5211   IUP :10.26650/mecmua.2021.79.3.5211    Full Text (PDF)

Doğu Akdeniz, Avrupa Birliği, Kıbrıs, Deniz Yetki Alanlarının Sınırlandırılması, Münhasır Ekonomik Bölge, Kıta Sahanlığı

Tülay Yıldırım MatMiray Azaklı KöseMerve İspirli Armağan

The Eastern Mediterranean conflict has recently become one of the major issues regarding international relations of Turkey. Developments between Turkey-the Northern Republic of Cyprus bloc and Greece-the Greek Administration of Southern Cyprus (TGASC) bloc, have become a significant subject both for the coastal states of the Eastern Mediterranean region and the member states of the European Union (EU). Focusing on the use of international agreements as the primary means of delimitating the maritime zones has brought about a fevered rush among Eastern Mediterranean coastal states seeking to conclude agreements as quickly as possible. The evidence after the conclusion of the agreements indicates that there may well be overlapping maritime zones in the region. Turkey has announced that the agreements concluded between TGASC under the name of the Republic of Cyprus and certain other states have been deemed invalid by Turkey. This article will analyze the primary legal and political reasons for this Eastern Mediterranean conflict as well as current political developments between Turkey and the EU on the subject. Moreover, the boundaries determined by the agreement on the delimitation of the maritime zones between Turkey and Libya concluded in 2019 are located in the exclusive economic zone claimed by Greece. The EU has announced strict economic and political sanctions against Turkey, siding with Greece. This EU attitude may affect the negotiations and outcome. Given that TGASC and Greece are parties to the dispute, the core of the problem is to what extent islands will affect the delimitation of the maritime zones. At this point, equitable principles should and are applicable also to the islands. Finally, the ultimate principles that will apply to the dispute in question are discussed in the final section of the article.

DOI :10.26650/mecmua.2021.79.3.5211   IUP :10.26650/mecmua.2021.79.3.5211    Full Text (PDF)

Türkiye ile Avrupa Birliği Arasında Doğu Akdeniz Meselesine İlişkin Güncel Siyasi Gelişmeler ve Meselenin Uluslararası Hukuk Boyutu

Tülay Yıldırım MatMiray Azaklı KöseMerve İspirli Armağan

Doğu Akdeniz meselesi son dönemde Türkiye’nin uluslararası ilişkilerindeki en önemli sorunlardan biri haline gelmiştir. Doğu Akdeniz’de Türkiye ve Kuzey Kıbrıs Türk Cumhuriyeti’ne karşı Yunanistan ve Güney Kıbrıs Rum Yönetimi bloğu arasında yaşanan gelişmeler, bölgede kıyısı bulunan diğer devletlerle birlikte Avrupa Birliği ülkeleri için de oldukça önemli bir hâle gelmiştir. Bu makalede Doğu Akdeniz meselesinin hukuki ve siyasi temel sebeplerine değinilmiş ve meseleye ilişkin Türkiye ile Avrupa Birliği arasındaki güncel siyasi gelişmeler irdelenmiştir. Deniz yetki alanlarının esas olarak devletler arasında akdedilecek anlaşmalar ile belirlenmesi prensibi, Doğu Akdeniz’e kıyısı olan devletleri bir antlaşma akdetme yarışına sokmuştur. Ancak bu antlaşmalar neticesinde ortaya çıkan tablo, Doğu Akdeniz’de birbiri ile çakışan deniz yetki alanlarının oluştuğunu göstermektedir. Türkiye, Güney Kıbrıs Rum Yönetimi’nin Kıbrıs Cumhuriyeti sıfatıyla diğer devletlerle yaptığı anlaşmaları hükümsüz kabul ettiğini ifade etmektedir. Türkiye’nin 2019’da Libya ile akdetmiş olduğu deniz yetki alanlarının sınırlandırılmasına ilişkin antlaşma ile belirlenen sınır ise Yunanistan’ın iddia ettiği münhasır ekonomik bölgede yer almaktadır. Diğer yandan Doğu Akdeniz konusunda Yunanistan’dan taraf olan Avrupa Birliği, Türkiye’ye karşı sert yaptırımların uygulanmasını dile getirmektedir. Avrupa Birliği’nin bu tavrı müzakerelerin yürütülmesini ve elde edilecek sonucun içeriğini etkileyebilecek niteliktedir. Belirtmek gerekir ki, hem Güney Kıbrıs Rum Yönetimi hem de Yunanistan’ın tarafı olduğu bu uyuşmazlıkta problemin özünü deniz yetki alanlarının sınırlandırılmasında adalara nasıl bir etki tanınacağı sorusu oluşturmaktadır. Bu noktada adaların da deniz yetki alanlarının sınırlandırılmasında hakça ilkelere tâbi olduğu açıktır. Bu nedenle makalenin son kısmında söz konusu somut uyuşmazlık özelinde hangi ilkelerin gündeme gelebileceği incelenmiştir.


EXTENDED ABSTRACT


Disputes regarding the delimitation of maritime zones in the Eastern Mediterranean have a long history because they do not refer to a purely legal problem. First, the status of the Greek Administration of Southern Cyprus and its presentation and acceptance as the sole representative of the island in the international domain has been subject to objections from Turkey for many years. Because the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus and its maritime borders have not been respected and recognized by, such as Greece and the European Union, a purely legal solution to the problem has not been easily discernible. Therefore, the delimitation of maritime zones between Turkey and Cyprus has continued to be a multifaced problem with both political and legal dimensions. Furthermore, as of 2003, while the Greek Administration of Southern Cyprus rapidly began to conclude bilateral agreements on the delimitation of maritime zones with certain coastal Mediterranean states, Turkey had concluded an agreement with the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus in 2011 and an agreement with Libya in 2019. In the meantime, both the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus and the Greek Administration of Southern Cyprus granted exploration and exploitation licenses to certain companies. Drilling activities by Turkey’s TPAO’s based on these licenses in Northern Cyprus have drawn adverse reactions from Greece and the European Union particularly and raised the tension between these various parties.

According to international law, the delimitation of the exclusive economic zone and continental shelf is solely a matter between the coastal states. However, the European Union has nonetheless become a party to the dispute. Because Greece and Southern Cyprus have become members of the European Union from in 1981 and 2004, respectively, the Aegean Sea and Cyprus have become a part of the borders of the Union. The candidate status of Turkey for the membership in the Union has been recognized from 1999. Because candidate states must comply with the principle of the peaceful settlement of border disputes or give consent to the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for the same, the European Union has taken part in this ongoing Eastern Mediterranean conflict. Therefore, following the analysis of the reasons for the conflict between Turkey, Greece, and Southern Cyprus, the effects of that dispute on the relationship between Turkey and the European Union will be briefly discussed in this article.

It is well-known that Turkey and Greece have a long-standing history of problems regarding the delimitation of maritime zones in the Aegean Sea and the Eastern Mediterranean. The three primary elements of the Turkish–Greek maritime disputes can be summarized as follows: 1) Disagreement on the breadth of Greek territorial waters and the ownership of certain islands or isles in the Aegean Sea; 2) the extent of the two states’ exclusive economic zones and continental shelves in the eastern Mediterranean; and 3) the continuing Cyprus crisis discussed earlier.

The international law concepts of exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf grants certain privileges concerning the exploration and exploitation of energy resources to coastal states. Therefore, the delimitation of these maritime zones represents a significant national economic interest on the part of these states. At the same time, it is considered a matter of sovereignty and national independence by those same states. International law rules regarding delimitation are far from clear and concrete. They are based on the principle of equitable solution and the negotiation and conclusion of international agreements. Greece claims a full exclusive economic zone of 200 nautical miles to its easternmost islands in Eastern Mediterranean; Southern Cyprus similarly claims an exclusive economic zone of 200 nautical miles despite being very close to the southern coast of Turkey. In summary, the extent of maritime zones of the islands has become the most critical element of the dispute. The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea in Article 121 states the following: “«the territorial sea, the contiguous zone, the exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf of an island are determined in accordance with the provisions of this Convention applicable to other land territory.” Accordingly, islands are subject to the principle of the equitable solution without any question. 

The concept of equity has been analyzed and explained by the ICJ case law and has not, overall, consisted of numerus clausus criteria. However, constructing a provisional equidistance line seems the first step, and adjusting this line according to relevant circumstances should then form the second step. Finally, according to the case-law of the ICJ, validating that the line thus adjusted would not lead to an inequitable result by comparing the ratio of coastal lengths with the ratio of relevant maritime areas is necessary. In the case of Serpents’ Island, the island’s location in the area of delimitation has been considered by the ICJ. The court decided that it should not affect the delimitation other than that stemming from the role of the  12-nautical-mile arc of the island’s own territorial sea. As with Serpents’ Island, certain easternmost Greek islands, such as Crete and Rhodes, lying alone and far from the mainland, are not one of a cluster of fringe islands constituting “the coast” of Greece. Therefore, it would be inappropriate to consider those islands to construct a provisional equidistance line between the coasts of Turkey and Greece. 


PDF View

References

  • 1958 Kıta Sahanlığı Sözleşmesi, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 499, 311. google scholar
  • 1982 Birleşmiş Milletler Deniz Hukuku Sözleşmesi, <https://denizmevzuat.uab.gov.tr/uploads/ pages/uluslararasi-sozlesmeler/denizhukuku.pdf>, Erişim Tarihi 24 Aralık 2020 google scholar
  • ‘A Law to Provide for the Proclamation of the Exclusive Economic Zone By Republic of Cyprus’ (UN, 2 Nisan 2004) <https://www.un.org/Depts/los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/ PDFFILES/cyp_2004_eez_proclamation.pdf> Erişim tarihi 27 Kasım 2020. google scholar
  • Açıkgönül Y E, Deniz Yetki Alanlarının Hakça İlkeler Çerçevesinde Sınırlandırılması (Legal Yayıncılık 2012) google scholar
  • ‘Agreement Between The Republic of Cyprus and the Arab Republic of Egypt on the Delimitation of the Exclusive Economic Zone’ (UN, 2003) <https://www.un.org/Depts/los/ LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/PDFFILES/TREATIES/EGY-CYP2003EZ.pdf> Erişim tarihi 27 Kasım 2020. google scholar
  • ‘Agreement Between The Government of the State of Israel and the Government of the Republic of Cyprus on the Delimitation of the Exclusive Economic Zone’ (UN, 2010) <https://www. un.org/Depts/los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/PDFFILES/TREATIES/cyp_isr_eez_2010. pdf> accessed 27 November 2020. google scholar
  • Aksar Y, ‘Is Delimitation of the Continental Shelf and the Exclusive Economic Zone by Arbitrators or the ICJ Really Governed by Legal Rules, or Should It More Accurately Be Seen as a Matter of Arbitrator s (or Judge’s) Discretion?’ in Abuzer Kendigelen (eds), Prof. Dr. Hayri Domaniç’e 80. Yaş Günü Armağanı Cilt: II (Beta Yayıncılık 2001) google scholar
  • Aksar Y, Teoride ve Uygulamada Uluslararası Hukuk II (Seçkin Yayıncılık 2013) google scholar
  • Aksu, F “Doğu Akdeniz Deniz Yetki Alanları Sorunu ve Türkiye-AB İlişkileri”, in Sertaç Hami Başeren (eds), Doğu Akdeniz’de Hukuk ve Siyaset, (A.Ü. SBF Yay., 2013) 159-196. google scholar
  • Antonopoulos, P ‘Cyprus is reopening relations with Syria’ (Greek City Times, 2020) <https:// greekcitytimes.com/2020/05/13/cyprus-is-reopening-relations-with-syria> Erişim Tarihi 26 Kasım 2020. Avrupa Birliği Antlaşması, 1992. google scholar
  • Avrupa Komisyonu Türkiye Raporu (2020) <https://www.ab.gov.tr/siteimages/trkiye_ raporustrateji_belgesi_2020/turkey_report_30.10.2020.pdf> Erişim tarihi 15.01.2021. google scholar
  • Barbados/Trinidad Tobago Davası, Arbitration between Barbados and the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago, relating to the delimitation of the exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf between them, decision of 11 April 2006 United Nations Reports of International Arbitral Awards Vol XXVII 147-251. google scholar
  • Başeren, S H ‘Doğu Akdeniz Deniz Yetki Alanları Uyuşmazlığı’ (2010) 8(14) Stratejik Araştırmalar Dergisi 129. google scholar
  • Başeren, S H ‘Mısır-Yunanistan anlaşması ve Türkiye’nin Doğu Akdeniz’deki Uygulamaları’ (AA, 2020) <https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/analiz/misir-yunanistan-anlasmasi-ve-turkiye-nin-dogu-akdeniz-deki-uygulamalari/1953584> Erişim tarihi 28 Kasım 2020. google scholar
  • Bayıllıoğlu U, ‘Uluslararası Adalet Divanının Romanya ile Ukrayna Arasındaki Deniz Alanı Sınırlandırmasında Serpents Adasının Etkisine İlişkin Tespitleri’ (2010) 7(1) Cankaya University Journal of Law 23. google scholar
  • BM Güvenlik Konseyi’nin 186 nolu kararı (4 Mart 1964) UN Doc S/RES/186. google scholar
  • BM Güvenlik Konseyi’nin 541 nolu kararı (18 Kasım 1983) UN Doc S/RES/541. google scholar
  • Butler, D and Gumrukcu, T ‘Turkey Signs Maritime Boundaries Deal with Libya amid Exploration Row’ (Reuters, 28.11.2019) < https://www.reuters.com/article/us-turkey-libya/turkey-signs-maritime-boundaries-deal-with-libya-amid-exploration-row-idUSKBN1Y213I> Erişim tarihi 1 Şubat 2021. google scholar
  • Cafiero, G ‘Why is Greece mending relations with Assad?’ ( Middle East Eye, 2020) <https://www. middleeasteye.net/opinion/greece-syria-assad-mending-relations-turkey-threat> Erişim tarihi 26 Kasım 2020. google scholar
  • Can, F ‘Doğu Akdeniz’de Ne Kadar Doğal Gaz Var?’ (Euronews, 2020) <https://tr.euronews. com/2019/12/31/dogu-akdeniz-ne-kadar-dogal-gaz-rezervi-var-en-buyuk-payi-hangi-ulkeler-alacak> Erişim tarihi 26 Kasım 2020. google scholar
  • ‘Certificate of Registration’ (UN, 11 Aralık 2019) <https://treaties.un.org/doc/ Treaties/2019/12/20191211%2002-58%20PM/Other%20Documents/COR-Reg-56119-Sr-69975.pdf> Erişim tarihi 28 Kasım 2020. google scholar
  • Corbet, S “Southern EU Leaders Urge Turkey to End ‘Unilateral’ Actions,” (The Washington Post, 10.09.2020) <https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/macron-urges-tough-eu-stance-against-turkish-provocations/2020/09/10/5a53f3dc-f356-11ea-8025-5d3489768ac8_ story.html> Erişim Tarihi 1 Şubat 2021. google scholar
  • Doğru S, ‘Doğu Akdeniz’de Hidrokarbon Kaynakları ve Uluslararası Hukuka Göre Bölgedeki Kıta Sahanlığı ve Münhasır Ekonomik Bölge Alanlarının Sınırlandırılması’ (2015) 119 Türkiye Barolar Birliği Dergisi 503 google scholar
  • Duran, H “BM ve AB Çerçevesinde Kıbrıs Sorununa Güncel Bir Bakış” (2008) 21 Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 119-139. google scholar
  • ‘Eastmed’ (2020) <http://www.igi-poseidon.com/en/eastmed> Erişim Tarihi 28 Kasım 2020. google scholar
  • Elhennawy, N “Egypt, Greece Sign Maritime Deal to Counter Libya-Turkey One” The Washington Post, 2020) <https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/egypt-greece-sign-maritime-deal-to-counter-libya-turkey-one/2020/08/06/896646a8-d802-11ea-a788-2ce86ce81129_story. html> Erişim tarihi 1 Şubat 2021. google scholar
  • Ergüven N S, ‘Karadeniz’de Deniz Alanı Sınırlandırması Davası (Romanya/Ukrayna) ve Uluslararası Hukuk Açısından Etkileri’ (2014) 63(2) Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 309-328. google scholar
  • Ermağan, İ ve Karcı, A “Avrupa Birliği’nin Yumuşak Güç Uygulamaları”, in Dr. Ayhan Nuri Yılmaz ve Dr. Gökmen Kılıçoğlu (eds), Yumuşak Güç ve Kamu Diplomasisi Üzerine Akademik Analizler, (Nobel Yayıncılık, 2018) 411-437. google scholar
  • Eritre/Yemen Davası, Eritrea-Yemen Arbitration (Second Stage: Maritime Delimitation) (2001) 40(4) International Legal Materials 983. google scholar
  • “European Council Conclusions” (12-13 December 2019) https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/ meetings/european-council/2019/12/12-13/ Erişim tarihi 1 Şubat 2021. google scholar
  • European Council, “Statement of the Members of the European Council,” SN 18/21, 25 March 2021. google scholar
  • “European Foreign Affairs Council Conclusions” (13 Temmuz 2020) <https://www.consilium. europa.eu/en/meetings/fac/2020/07/13/ > Erişim tarihi1 Şubat 2021. google scholar
  • European External Action Service, “Statement by the High Representative/Vice-President Josep Borrell on Renewed Drilling Activities by Turkey in the Eastern Mediterranean”, (16 Ağustos 2020) <https://eeas.europa.eu/headquarters/headquarters-homepage/84111/statement-high-representativevice-president-josep-borrell-renewed-drilling-activities-turkey_en> Erişim Tarihi 1 Şubat 2021. google scholar
  • European External Action Service, “Video Conference of Foreign Affairs Ministers: Main Outcomes”, (14 Ağustos 2020) <https://eeas.europa.eu/headquarters/headquarters-homepage/84103/video-conference-foreign-affairs-ministers-main-outcomes_en> Erişim tarihi 1 Şubat 2021. google scholar
  • Evans M D, International Law (Oxford University Press 2003) google scholar
  • Fransa/Kanada Davası, Court of Arbitration for the Delimitation of Maritime Areas between Canada and France: Decision in Case concerning Delimitation of Maritime Areas(St. Pierre and Miquelon), 1992 International Legal Materials 31(5) 1145. google scholar
  • ‘Granted Licences’ (2020) <http://www.mcit.gov.cy/mcit/hydrocarbon.nsf/page16_en/page16_ en?OpenDocument> Erişim tarihi 27 Kasım 2020. google scholar
  • “Greece, Israel, Cyprus Sign Deal for EastMed Gas Pipeline,” (Kathimerini, 02.01.2020) www.ekathimerini.com/248073/article/ekathimerini/news/greece-israel-cyprus-sign-deal-for-eastmed-gas-pipeline> Erişim tarihi 1 Şubat 2021. google scholar
  • “Greece to Request EU Foreign Affairs Council Emergency Meeting amid Tensions over Turkish Drilling”, (Euronews, 2020), <https://www.euronews.com/2020/08/10/tensions-grow-between-greece-and-turkey-over-exploratory-drilling> Erişim Tarihi 1 Şubat 2021. google scholar
  • Gur, V T “Turkey’s Isolation From The Regionalization Process in The Eastern Mediterranean: A Case Study of The Eastern Mediterranean Gas Forum (EMGF)” (Master thesis, Ihsan Dogramaci Bilkent University 2020). google scholar
  • Guyana/Surinam Davası, Award in the arbitration regarding the delimitation of the maritime boundary between Guyana and Suriname, Award of 17 September 2007 United Nations Reports of International Arbitral Awards Vol XXX para. 340-341; Bangladeş/Hindistan Davası, Award of 7 July 2014 <https://pcacases.com/web/sendAttach/383> Erişim tarihi 24 Aralık 2020. google scholar
  • Hoffmann, C “Turkey-Greece conflict in eastern Mediterranean is less about gas than vaccum left by Trump,” (The Conversation,18.08.2020) <https://theconversation.com/turkey-greece-conflict-in-eastern-mediterranean-is-less-about-gas-than-vaccuum-left-by-trump-144691> Erişim Tarihi 1 Şubat 2021. google scholar
  • ‘Italy, Cyprus Say Turkey-Libya Maritime Deal ‘Unacceptable,’ (ABC News, 29.01.2020), <https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/italy-cyprus-turkey-libya-maritime-deal-unacceptable-68618477> Erişim tarihi 1 Şubat 2021. google scholar
  • İngiltere/Fransa Kıta Sahanlığı Davası, Delimitation of the Continental Shelf between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the French Republic (UK, France), International Law Reports, Vol. 54, 6. google scholar
  • ‘Joint Declaration Adopted by the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Cyprus, Egypt, France, Greece and the United Arab Emirates’, (11 Mayıs 2020) <https://www.mfa.gr/en/current-affairs/ statements-speeches/joint-declaration-adopted-by-the-ministers-of-foreign-affairs-of-cyprus-egypt-france-greece-and-the-united-arab-emirates-11052020.html> Erişim tarihi 1 Şubat 2021. google scholar
  • Jan Mayen Davası, Maritime Delimitation in the Area between Greenland and Jan Mayen, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1993, 38. google scholar
  • Katar/Bahreyn Davası, Maritime Delimitation and Territorial Questions between Qatar and Bahrain, Merits, Judgment, I. C. J. Reports 2001, 40. google scholar
  • Kamerun/Nijerya Davası, Land and Maritime Boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria (Cameroon v. Nigeria: Equatorial Guinea intervening), Judgment, I. C. J. Reports 2002, 303. google scholar
  • Karbuz, S “Geostrategic Importance of East Mediterranean Gas Resources,” (2018) Energy Economy, Finance and Geostrategy 237-255. google scholar
  • Karbuz, S ‘Doğu Akdeniz’de ne Kadar Doğal Gaz Var?’ (2019) 12 Bilkent Enerji Notları, <https:// drive.google.com/open?id=1DLMx9kmHcB2P2cTz73jp7yEmooehSDj9 > Erişim tarihi 22 Kasım 2020. google scholar
  • Kaya, İ S ‘Uluslararası Deniz Hukuku Çerçevesinde Doğu Akdeniz’deki Petrol Ve Doğalgaz Kaynakları ile Türkiye’nin Hukuki Konumu’ (PhD, Kırıkkale Üniversitesi 2014) google scholar
  • ‘Kıbrıs’ <http://www.mfa.gov.tr/kibris.tr.mfa> Erişim tarihi 23 Kasım 2020 google scholar
  • ,KKTC‘ (TPAO) <https://www.tpao.gov.tr/kktc> Erişim tarihi 27 Kasım 2020. google scholar
  • Koutantou, A ‘Greece, Israel, Cyprus sign EastMed gas pipeline deal’ (Reuters, 2020) https://www. reuters.com/article/us-greece-cyprus-israel-pipeline-idUSKBN1Z10R5 Erişim tarihi 28 Kasım 2020. google scholar
  • Kuzey Denizi Kıta Sahanlığı Davası, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1969, 3. google scholar
  • Letter dated 11 July 2019 from the Charge d’affaires a.i. of the Permanent Mission of Cyprus to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General Doc. A/73/944 (United Nations 2019) < https://undocs.org/en/A/73/944> Erişim tarihi 28 Kasım 2020. google scholar
  • Letter dated 13 November 2019 from the Permanent Representative of Cyprus to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General Doc. A/74/549 (United Nations 2019) < https:// undocs.org/A/74/549> Erişim tarihi 28 Kasım 2020. google scholar
  • Letter dated 18 March 2020 from the Permanent Representative of Turkey to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General, United Nations General Assembly Doc. A/74/757 (United Nations 2020) <https://undocs.org/en/A/74/757> Erişim Tarihi 24 Aralık 2020. google scholar
  • Libya-Malta Kıta Sahanlığı Davası, Continental Shelf (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya/Malta), Judgment, I. C.J. Reports 1985, 13. google scholar
  • Maine Körfezi Davası, Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary in the Gulf of Maine Area, Judgment, I. C.J. Reports 1984, 246. google scholar
  • ‘No Big Impact on Turkey-EU Relations From Gas Drilling Spat - Pundits,’ (Sputnik International, 16.07.2019) <https://sptnkne.ws/7ppp> Erişim tarihi : 1 Şubat 2021. google scholar
  • Özarslan, B B ‘Uluslararası Hukuk ve Avrupa Birliği Hukuku Açısından Kıbrıs Sorunu’ (PhD, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi 2006) google scholar
  • Peru/Şili Davası, Maritime Dispute (Peru v. Chile), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2014, 3. google scholar
  • Romanya/Ukrayna Davası, Maritime Delimitation in the Black Sea (Romania v. Ukraine), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2009, 61. google scholar
  • Shaw M N, International Law (Cambridge University Press 2017) google scholar
  • Stanic, A ve Karbuz, S ‘The Challenges Facing Eastern Mediterranean Gas and How International Law Can Help Overcome Them’ (2020) Journal of Energy & Natural Resources Law <https:// doi.org/10.1080/02646811.2020.1816739> Erişim tarihi 22 November 2020. google scholar
  • Taşçıoğlu, Ö L “GKRY’nin Münhasır Ekonomik Bölge Anlaşmaları ve Petrol ve Doğal Gaz Arama Çalışmaları” (2018) 4 Social Sciences Studies Journal 5697-5709. google scholar
  • ‘TC Dışişleri Bakanlığı’nın GKRY’nin AB Üyeliği ile ilgili Açıklaması’ (2004) <http://www.mfa. gov.tr/tc-disisleri-bakanligi_nin-gkry_nin-ab-uyeligi-ile-ilgili-aciklamasi-_1-mayis-2004_. tr.mfa> Erişim tarihi 23 Kasım 2020. google scholar
  • Tanaka Y, The International Law of the Sea (Cambridge University Press, 2019) google scholar
  • Temizer, M ‘Türkiye’nin Denizlerdeki Enerji Filosu’ (AA, 2020) <https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/ ekonomi/turkiyenin-denizlerdeki-enerji-filosu/1949802> Erişim tarihi 26 Kasım 2020. google scholar
  • Tunus-Libya Kıta Sahanlığı Davası, Continental Shelf (Tunisia/Libyan Arab Jamahiriya), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1982, 18. google scholar
  • ‘Turkish and Greek Warships Collide in Eastern Mediterranean,’ (Independent, 14.08.2020) www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/turkey-greece-war-mediterranean-erdogan-ships-collide-a9670416.html> Erişim tarihi 1 Şubat 2021. google scholar
  • ‘Türkiye Cumhuriyeti ile Kuzey Kıbrıs Türk Cumhuriyeti Arasında Akdeniz’de Kıta Sahanlığı Sınırlandırılması Hakkında Anlaşmanın Onaylanmasının Uygun Bulunduğuna Dair Kanun’ (12.07.2012) <https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2012/07/20120712-3.htm> Erişim tarihi 26 Kasım 2020. google scholar
  • ‘Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Hükümeti ile Libya Devleti Ulusal Mutabakat Hükümeti Arasında Akdeniz’de Deniz Yetki Alanlarının Sınırlandırılmasına ilişkin Mutabakat Muhtırası’ (Resmi Gazete, 7 Aralık 2019) https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2019/12/20191207-3.pdf Erişim tarihi 28 Kasım 2020. google scholar
  • ‘Türkiye - KKTC Kıta Sahanlığı Sınırlandırma Anlaşması İmzalanmasına İlişkin Dışişleri Bakanlığı Basın Açıklaması’ (2011) <http://www.mfa.gov.tr/no_-216_-21-eylul-2011-turkiye-_-kktc-kita-sahanligi-sinirlandirma-anlasmasi-imzalanmasina-iliskin-disisleri-bakanligi-basin-ac_.tr.mfa> Erişim tarihi 26 Kasım 2020. google scholar
  • Tzimitras, H ve Hatay, M ‘The Need For Realism: Solving The Cyprus Problem Through Linkage Politics’ (2016) Turkey Project Policy Paper 9 <https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/ uploads/2016/10/turkey_20161005_cyprus_problem.pdf> Erişim tarihi 23 Kasım 2020. google scholar
  • Vatansever, M ‘Kıbrıs Sorununun Tarihi Gelişimi’ (2010) 12 Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 1487-1530. google scholar
  • ‘What the world said after referanda?’ (2004) < http://www.mfa.gov.tr/what-the-world-said-after-the-referanda.en.mfa> Erişim tarihi 31 Ocak 2021. google scholar
  • Yaycı C, ‘Doğu Akdeniz’de Deniz Yetki Alanlarının Paylaşılması Sorunu ve Türkiye’ (2012) 4(6) Bilge Strateji 1-70. google scholar
  • Yüksel, C ve Baran, D ‘Uluslararası Hukukta Doğu Akdeniz Krizi ve Türkiye ile Libya Arasındaki Deniz Yetki Alanlarını Sınırlandırma Mutabakatının Değerlendirilmesi’ (2020) 40(1) PPIL https://doi.org/10.26650/ppil.2020.40.1.0019 Erişim tarihi 28 Kasım 2020. google scholar

Citations

Copy and paste a formatted citation or use one of the options to export in your chosen format


EXPORT



APA

Yıldırım Mat, T., Azaklı Köse, M., & İspirli Armağan, M. (2021). Doğu Akdeniz, Avrupa Birliği, Kıbrıs, Deniz Yetki Alanlarının Sınırlandırılması, Münhasır Ekonomik Bölge, Kıta Sahanlığı. Istanbul Law Review, 79(3), 1067-1101. https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2021.79.3.5211


AMA

Yıldırım Mat T, Azaklı Köse M, İspirli Armağan M. Doğu Akdeniz, Avrupa Birliği, Kıbrıs, Deniz Yetki Alanlarının Sınırlandırılması, Münhasır Ekonomik Bölge, Kıta Sahanlığı. Istanbul Law Review. 2021;79(3):1067-1101. https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2021.79.3.5211


ABNT

Yıldırım Mat, T.; Azaklı Köse, M.; İspirli Armağan, M. Doğu Akdeniz, Avrupa Birliği, Kıbrıs, Deniz Yetki Alanlarının Sınırlandırılması, Münhasır Ekonomik Bölge, Kıta Sahanlığı. Istanbul Law Review, [Publisher Location], v. 79, n. 3, p. 1067-1101, 2021.


Chicago: Author-Date Style

Yıldırım Mat, Tülay, and Miray Azaklı Köse and Merve İspirli Armağan. 2021. “Doğu Akdeniz, Avrupa Birliği, Kıbrıs, Deniz Yetki Alanlarının Sınırlandırılması, Münhasır Ekonomik Bölge, Kıta Sahanlığı.” Istanbul Law Review 79, no. 3: 1067-1101. https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2021.79.3.5211


Chicago: Humanities Style

Yıldırım Mat, Tülay, and Miray Azaklı Köse and Merve İspirli Armağan. Doğu Akdeniz, Avrupa Birliği, Kıbrıs, Deniz Yetki Alanlarının Sınırlandırılması, Münhasır Ekonomik Bölge, Kıta Sahanlığı.” Istanbul Law Review 79, no. 3 (Aug. 2022): 1067-1101. https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2021.79.3.5211


Harvard: Australian Style

Yıldırım Mat, T & Azaklı Köse, M & İspirli Armağan, M 2021, 'Doğu Akdeniz, Avrupa Birliği, Kıbrıs, Deniz Yetki Alanlarının Sınırlandırılması, Münhasır Ekonomik Bölge, Kıta Sahanlığı', Istanbul Law Review, vol. 79, no. 3, pp. 1067-1101, viewed 17 Aug. 2022, https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2021.79.3.5211


Harvard: Author-Date Style

Yıldırım Mat, T. and Azaklı Köse, M. and İspirli Armağan, M. (2021) ‘Doğu Akdeniz, Avrupa Birliği, Kıbrıs, Deniz Yetki Alanlarının Sınırlandırılması, Münhasır Ekonomik Bölge, Kıta Sahanlığı’, Istanbul Law Review, 79(3), pp. 1067-1101. https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2021.79.3.5211 (17 Aug. 2022).


MLA

Yıldırım Mat, Tülay, and Miray Azaklı Köse and Merve İspirli Armağan. Doğu Akdeniz, Avrupa Birliği, Kıbrıs, Deniz Yetki Alanlarının Sınırlandırılması, Münhasır Ekonomik Bölge, Kıta Sahanlığı.” Istanbul Law Review, vol. 79, no. 3, 2021, pp. 1067-1101. [Database Container], https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2021.79.3.5211


Vancouver

Yıldırım Mat T, Azaklı Köse M, İspirli Armağan M. Doğu Akdeniz, Avrupa Birliği, Kıbrıs, Deniz Yetki Alanlarının Sınırlandırılması, Münhasır Ekonomik Bölge, Kıta Sahanlığı. Istanbul Law Review [Internet]. 17 Aug. 2022 [cited 17 Aug. 2022];79(3):1067-1101. Available from: https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2021.79.3.5211 doi: 10.26650/mecmua.2021.79.3.5211


ISNAD

Yıldırım Mat, Tülay - Azaklı Köse, Miray - İspirli Armağan, Merve. Doğu Akdeniz, Avrupa Birliği, Kıbrıs, Deniz Yetki Alanlarının Sınırlandırılması, Münhasır Ekonomik Bölge, Kıta Sahanlığı”. Istanbul Law Review 79/3 (Aug. 2022): 1067-1101. https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2021.79.3.5211



TIMELINE


Submitted15.02.2021
Accepted21.10.2021
Published Online22.11.2021

LICENCE


Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC)

This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work non-commercially, and although their new works must also acknowledge you and be non-commercial, they don’t have to license their derivative works on the same terms.


SHARE




Istanbul University Press aims to contribute to the dissemination of ever growing scientific knowledge through publication of high quality scientific journals and books in accordance with the international publishing standards and ethics. Istanbul University Press follows an open access, non-commercial, scholarly publishing.