Mustafa Başkara, director of the Center for Maritime Law Research (DEHUKAM)—the institute that prepared Turkey’s Maritime Spatial Planning framework and the legislative proposal for the “Blue Homeland” doctrine—reiterated Ankara’s demand in an interview with CNN Türk.

According to sigmalive.com, Başkara argued that the route of the Great Sea Interconnector (GSI) passes through areas that Turkey considers part of its continental shelf, and that any activity in those areas must take place with its consent.

He also accused Greece of advancing “maximalist” positions on maritime zones and violating the demilitarization status of Aegean islands.

“Turkey’s permission is required for work on its continental shelf”

Mustafa Başkara outlined Turkey’s arguments concerning the subsea cable, referring to the coordinates Ankara submitted to the United Nations in March 2020. He also invoked the 2019 Turkey–Libya memorandum and the maritime delimitation agreement Turkey signed with the self-proclaimed Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus in 2011, arguing that these agreements establish Turkey’s claims over the maritime areas in question.

“First, let us begin with the area for which Turkey submitted to the United Nations, in March 2020, the coordinates defining the boundaries of its continental shelf in the Mediterranean. The boundaries of Turkey’s continental shelf throughout the Mediterranean were indeed submitted to the United Nations in March 2020. This is the area.

“In fact, this area relates to the delimitation agreement we signed with Libya in 2019. The area has also been formally recorded through the delimitation agreement we signed with the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus in 2011.

“For activities to be carried out within these areas, Turkey’s permission is required in order for work to be conducted on the Turkish continental shelf.

“Turkey has exclusive rights over activities carried out on the seabed. Other states may exercise these rights, but decisions concerning the route, the manner and the location of work in these areas must be made jointly with Turkey, and authorization must be obtained from Turkey following the appropriate notification.”

The GSI as an alternative to EastMed

The DEHUKAM director linked the electricity interconnection project to the EastMed natural gas pipeline, arguing that the subsea cable was promoted as an alternative means of transporting energy from the Eastern Mediterranean to Europe. According to his account, the proposed route includes maritime areas over which Turkey claims rights.

“Looking at the current situation, what is the background of the project known as the Great Sea Interconnector?

“In fact, an earlier attempt had been made to transport oil and natural gas resources from the region around Israel to Europe through a pipeline in this area, which we called the EastMed pipeline.

“As an alternative scenario, the so-called Great Interconnector was designed as a solution through which Israel and the Greek Cypriot Administration of Southern Cyprus could convert the region’s resources into renewable energy and transmit the electricity to Europe via cables.

“A mechanism is being prepared to transport electricity generated by activities in this region, as well as by other activities that will take place, to Europe through cables that would also cross the Turkish continental shelf.”

“If permission has not been requested, the project cannot proceed”

Asked by a CNN Türk journalist why Greece had not sought Turkey’s permission, Başkara insisted that Ankara’s demand was not directed exclusively at Athens, but applied to any state planning activities in areas Turkey considers part of its continental shelf. He argued that the coastal state must have a say in determining the routes of subsea cables and pipelines.

The journalist asked:

“Why, then, was permission not requested from Turkey concerning the Turkish continental shelf? What do you think is the reason behind this?”

Başkara replied:

“If permission has not been requested so far, then this simply cannot go ahead. This process does not concern Greece alone. Anyone intending to carry out work on Turkey’s continental shelf must obtain authorization for that work. That is our expectation as well.

“Although other states may carry out work involving underwater cables and pipelines, the coastal state to which the continental shelf belongs has a say in determining the route.

“This process must be conducted with respect for that right.

“If the activity is ultimately to take place, it will be subject to the authorization Turkey grants in this regard.”

Accusations of “maximalist” Greek positions

Başkara extended his argument to the Aegean, claiming that Turkey possesses continental shelf rights ipso facto and accusing Greece of attempting, through its positions on maritime zones, to include in the project’s route areas claimed by Ankara.

“Regarding the section on this side of the median line, Turkey—in fact, if we accept under international law that this is our continental shelf—respects this area. However, Greece, with its maximalist views…”

At this point, the journalist interjected:

“It wants to pass through this area as well.”

Başkara replied:

“Of course. It will certainly pass through this area as well. Because this is an area where the coastal state automatically has rights, without any notification being required, our continental shelf rights in the Aegean are also preserved and permanent.”

Claims concerning the militarization of Greek islands

In the final part of the interview, the discussion shifted to the status of the Aegean islands. The DEHUKAM director argued that many Greek islands, including Rhodes, should remain demilitarized, accusing Athens of violating its relevant obligations. He also invoked NATO’s position, although the excerpt did not cite any specific decision by the Alliance.

The journalist referred to the arming of islands subject to demilitarized status, while Başkara argued:

“The Dodecanese, Kastellorizo—in fact, many islands in this region, including Rhodes—should not have a militarized status. The position regarding islands without military status is very clear, and NATO also maintains its position regarding islands without military status in the Aegean Sea.

“We can say that we observe Turkey being on the right path, while Greece continues to persistently commit this violation,” he concluded.