Σε περίοδο ενεργειακής κρίσης, η Αν. Μεσόγειος καλείται να είναι μέρος της “λύσης” στο αδιέξοδο. Είναι όμως τόσο εφικτό αυτό το σενάριο;

While not very large, the Mediterranean Sea is multifaceted and significant. As a meeting point of three continents and bordered by Greece, Cyprus, Turkey, Israel, Lebanon, Syria,  Palestine, and others,  it fosters various opposing claims and interests. More so now than ever, the Eastern Mediterranean has emerged as the focal point of intense geopolitical conflict. The discovery of significant natural gas reserves, paired with the global energy crisis, has created a cauldron of competing interests, with every player vying for a piece of the pie.

The area’s newfound (or rather re-discovered) energy wealth has acted as a catalyst, intensifying pre-existing geopolitical rivalries. Many bordering countries, especially Greece and Turkey, have long-standing disputes over maritime boundaries and Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ), based on different interpretations of UNCLOS (United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea). The discovery of significant reserves near Cyprus has reignited heated discussions over sovereignty rights, making cooperation seem like a faraway dream. Turkey’s aggressive stance, including exploratory drillings in contested waters, has caused major unrest in the area, with Greece and Cyprus watching every move with suspicion.

Adding wood to the fire, the Eastern Mediterranean Gas Forum (EMGF), completed by Greece, Cyprus, Israel, Italy, Egypt, Jordan, Palestine, and later France, notably does not include Turkey. The Forum, established in 2019, aims to foster cooperation in the area by aligning and coordinating the actions of buyers, suppliers, and transit countries to realize the full potential of the Eastern Mediterranean gas basin. No matter what one’s feelings are about Turkey, it remains questionable how such a feat can be achieved without one of the largest players in the area.

On a more global scale, the area’s energy reserves have captured the attention of the EU, as it navigates the energy crisis caused by the “Green Transition” and the need to reduce dependence on Russian fossil fuels. Having two out of five neighboring countries within the Union’s borders gives Europe a pathway to new energy sources produced “domestically”, a goal that aligns with its energy security priorities. The US had also expressed support for regional projects, such as the EastMed gas pipeline, a project worked on jointly by Greece, Israel, and Cyprus which is expected to join multiple gas fields and is expected to have an annual capacity of 10 billion cubic metres (bcm) of gas.

Given the increased interest in the area and the imminent need for new energy sources, one would assume that such projects would run smoothly. In a multifaceted world, however, there is never only one agenda at play. Turkey has made it abundantly clear that any plans made without its participation are bound to fail, and the country is ready to defend its rights in the region. On the other hand, Greece and Cyprus have sought out closer ties to Israel and Egypt– to counterbalance Turkish actions. This has only led to more instability, with Turkey forming ties with Libya, through a maritime agreement that has been highly contested by other regional players.

If this wasn’t enough, all the players have varied political and military alliances, as well as active rivalries with each other. Greece and Cyprus are members of the EU, making them bound to the EU agenda. Turkey, whose petition to join has been frozen, has a history of conflict with Greece and has illegally occupied part of Cyprus since 1974. Israel has an active conflict with Palestine and a history of conflict with Egypt. Iran is culturally linked to Turkey and Palestine’s Hamas, who are considered a terrorist group by the US and the EU. Lebanon has border conflicts with Israel and a complex relationship with Syria, which in turn has been linked with Russia and Iran. The web of interconnected interests is a never-ending one, making it very difficult for all players to find common ground. This instability is detrimental to aspiring energy projects, as it creates high risk and deters investments.

It becomes evident that, in such a tension-ridden area, any disagreement can lead to an all-out conflict. Energy is a highly coveted good, with immense possibilities for growth. In an era where more and more importance is given to green technologies and renewable energy sources, the lack of cooperation in the Eastern Mediterranean could be catastrophic to its energy production. Gas is a fossil fuel, and as such its extraction and transport can be dangerous for the environment. Lack of investments in critical infrastructure, caused by high-risk and volatile prices is bound to minimize exploitation. In a fast-paced world, eager to find the next best thing as fast as possible, delays can be interpreted as failures. The Eastern Mediterranean has the spotlight for now, but this is an opportunity not to be missed.

Moving forward, the future of the area stands to face multiple scenarios, both positive and negative. Should there be increased cooperation through shared energy infrastructure, the area stands to gain economic development, prosperity, and long-term stability. The countries involved all stand to improve their energy security and supply, as well as to boost economic capabilities. Cyprus’ “Aphrodite” gas field for example could potentially provide 4.2 trillion cubic feet of gas (Tcf), whose export would be a major contributor to the country’s GDP.  Further exploitation of the area’s other resources, such as wind, solar, and ocean, paired with a strong gas portfolio could even result in a leading position in the energy transition.  For such a thing to happen there is an increased need for diplomatic solutions, to resolve issues like maritime border delimitation and for each state to see the bigger picture. Whether such a feat is possible is a question that can be answered only in time.

Overall, the East Med Energy dilemma has more to do with geopolitics than anything else. It is a multifaceted and complicated issue spanning various domains and jurisdictions and can’t be solved by a simple agreement. The area has the potential to become a major energy hub, but only if its players play nice. While playing nice hasn’t been a traditional practice in international politics, it could be the key to incredible growth, especially at a time when the future of energy is full of possibilities.

Autror: Έλλη Ματθαιάδη

Sources:

Οι απόψεις που αναφέρονται στο κείμενο είναι προσωπικές του αρθρογράφου και δεν εκφράζουν απαραίτητα τις θέσεις του What Politics Means και της συντακτικής ομάδας.
Απαγορεύεται η αναδημοσίευση του άρθρου από άλλες ιστοσελίδες χωρίς άδεια του What Politics Means. Επιτρέπεται η αναδημοσίευση των δύο έως τριών πρώτων παραγράφων με την προσθήκη ενεργού link για την ανάγνωση της συνέχειας στο What Politics Means. Οι παραβάτες θα αντιμετωπίσουν νομικά μέτρα.