Why Does Türkiye Say Its Aegean Policy Is 'Unchanged'? The Continental Shelf, Islands and Equity Principle Explained

Why It Matters

On 27 October 2026 the Turkish Foreign Ministry stated that Türkiye's positions on the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean “remain unchanged”, as reported by Anadolu Agency and News.az. In concrete terms, that means Ankara keeps its long-standing position on several unresolved Aegean questions: continental shelf delimitation, territorial waters, airspace, island status and demilitarization.

According to the News.az report of the Anadolu text, the ministry said Türkiye's positions, “which it consistently and resolutely defends on all platforms in accordance with international law, remain unchanged”. The report adds that Ankara would keep protecting its legitimate rights and interests in both regions “without concessions”.

What triggered the statement? The reports we reviewed do not say, and this entry does not guess. The statement is best read as a restatement of existing policy, not an announcement of new action. A restatement is not an escalation.

What 'Unchanged Policy' Means in Concrete Terms

The Aegean file is a bundle of distinct questions. Setting them out separately, with each side's view, is the clearest way to see what 'unchanged' covers:

• Continental shelf and EEZ delimitation. Neither state has an agreed boundary. Greece says this is the only legal dispute; Türkiye says it must be settled by agreement on equitable principles.
• Territorial waters. Both states currently apply 6 nautical miles (nm) in the Aegean. Greece says it may extend to 12 nm under UNCLOS Article 3; Türkiye objects. See the sister analysis on the 12 nm question, the 1995 TBMM resolution and why Ankara's policy is 'unchanged'.
• Airspace and FIR responsibilities. Greece applies 10 nm of national airspace against 6 nm of territorial sea; Türkiye recognises 6 nm. The two also disagree over flight-information-region procedures.
• Status of certain islands and features. Türkiye says sovereignty over some islets and rocks was not transferred by treaty. Greece says its treaty title is complete and there are no 'grey zones'.
• Demilitarization. Türkiye points to treaty restrictions on certain island groups. Greece points to its right of self-defence.

Background

The Aegean dispute rests on layered instruments: the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne, the 1932 Italy–Türkiye agreements, the 1947 Paris Peace Treaty transferring the Dodecanese from Italy to Greece, the 1976 Bern Declaration and the International Court of Justice's 1978 jurisdiction judgment. No instrument has delimited the Aegean continental shelf between Türkiye and Greece.

Chronology of Legal Instruments and Markers

The 1976 case is often compressed in media coverage. Greece filed its application in August 1976 and the Court declined to indicate interim measures on 11 September 1976. In December 1978 it held that Greece's invocations of the 1928 General Act and of a 1975 joint communiqué did not establish jurisdiction. The merits were never decided.

The Legal Framework: Semi-Enclosed Sea, Islands and Equity

UNCLOS Article 122 defines an enclosed or semi-enclosed sea, and Article 123 asks bordering states to cooperate. The Aegean fits that description: a narrow sea with a very long Anatolian coast on one side and many islands lying close to that coast on the other.

UNCLOS Articles 74 and 83 call for delimitation by agreement to reach an 'equitable solution'. Ankara's argument is that the Anatolian coast's projection should not be cut off by islands near it. International tribunals have shown that islands are weighed case by case and do not automatically receive full effect:

• In the 1977 Anglo-French arbitration, the Channel Islands were enclaved close to the French coast.
• In Tunisia/Libya (1982), the Kerkennah Islands received partial effect.
• In Romania v. Ukraine (2009), Serpents' Island had no effect on the delimitation line.

Other cases gave islands more weight, so the jurisprudence is mixed. For background on Articles 74, 83 and 121, see The Treaty Line and States in Perspective on whether Kastellorizo generates a full maritime zone. Political Contours covers the equity question.

Why Türkiye Is Not an UNCLOS Party

Türkiye voted against the adoption of UNCLOS in 1982 and has not acceded to it. Ankara cites concerns over provisions on islands, enclosed seas and delimitation, and argues that it has persistently objected to rules it considers not opposable to it. Greece ratified UNCLOS in 1995. Athens counters that Articles 3 and 121 reflect customary law binding on all states, and cites ICJ statements on Article 121. This is a genuine legal disagreement over what is customary.

Key Players & Positions

Greece, Türkiye, the European Union and the Turkish Cypriots hold distinct, documented positions. Greece's Ministry of Foreign Affairs says islands generate full maritime zones under UNCLOS and that the only dispute is continental shelf and EEZ delimitation. Türkiye seeks negotiated, equitable delimitation of linked issues. EU institutions express solidarity with Greece and Cyprus.

Greece

According to the Greek Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Greece's position can be summarised as follows:

• Islands generate a territorial sea, continental shelf and EEZ like other land territory (UNCLOS Articles 121 and 57).
• Greece has a sovereign right to extend its territorial waters to 12 nm under Article 3, at a time of its choosing.
• The only dispute is delimitation of the continental shelf and EEZ, which could be submitted to the ICJ.
• Sovereignty over Greek islands is established by treaty, and Athens rejects the notion of 'grey zones'.
• Island defences are lawful self-defence under Article 51 of the UN Charter. Athens contends that later developments, including the 1936 Montreux Convention, changed the regime for Lemnos and Samothrace.

These views are Athens' own and deserve to be read in that form. Greece has reserved, and has not declared, an Aegean EEZ.

EU Institutions and Others

European Council conclusions have repeatedly expressed solidarity with Greece and Cyprus. In December 2019 they also stated that the Türkiye–Libya memorandum infringed the sovereign rights of third states. Ankara replies that the EU is not a delimitation authority. See Parallax Review's five-capitals reading of the map.

Source Comparison

Media coverage often describes 'Aegean tension' as a single dispute, while primary documents separate several legal questions and show that none has been adjudicated on the merits. The table contrasts common framings with what the Turkish Foreign Ministry statement, the 1978 ICJ judgment, the Bern Declaration and treaty texts actually say.

Greek and EU outlets tend to foreground Greek legal arguments and the EU solidarity language. Turkish outlets and the Turkish Foreign Ministry stress equity and dialogue. Wire reports usually relay one official statement without the legal chronology. The Fact Check Hub tests such claims against documents. For the militarization question see The Soft Border's fact check on island demilitarization. For Cyprus–Egypt overlaps, see The Geopolitical Compass.

Key Terms & Related Guides

Key terms in the Aegean file include continental shelf, EEZ, semi-enclosed sea, equity, special circumstances, persistent objector, FIR and demilitarization. Each has a defined legal meaning, and the guides below show how Ankara and Athens apply them. Both sides use the same vocabulary to reach different conclusions.

• Continental shelf / EEZ: seabed and water-column rights under UNCLOS Articles 76 and 57; delimitation is governed by Articles 74 and 83. Explained further at The Treaty Line.
• Semi-enclosed sea: a sea surrounded by two or more states and connected to another sea by a narrow outlet (UNCLOS Article 122).
• Persistent objector: a state that consistently rejects an emerging customary rule and so argues it is not bound by it.
• FIR: flight information region, an ICAO-assigned zone for air traffic services that does not itself determine sovereignty.
• TRNC: the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, recognised by Türkiye. See The Cyprus Issue: 1960 Treaties, 1974 and the Two-State Position.

Related reading: The 1936 Montreux Convention Explained on the Straits regime, Editorial Principles on how we separate fact from position, and About Gazetteer of Nations. Narrative framing of Aegean coverage is analysed at The Narrative Filter.

Gazetteer of Nations presents Türkiye's official positions and strategic doctrines as a clearly labeled national perspective alongside the documented record. Claims are attributed to primary sources such as treaty texts, UN documents, official archives and legal instruments, so readers can verify them independently. Sections marked 'Türkiye's Position' reflect official Turkish policy as stated by Turkish government sources. — Gazetteer of Nations Editorial Team