Turkey Greece Relations and Maritime Disputes

[Foinikas]

I have better solution, you give me Meis. There is already a nice mosque there. lol, if there is no island, then no EEZ issues.

View attachment 186609

Ok,you give Imbros and Tenedos back.

 

[hyperman]

So you admit islands can have a 200 nm EEZ?

Islands don't have EEZ, but if we are negotiating there would need to be ruled, otherwise its just arbitrary, there is no legal principle.

 

[Foinikas]

Islands don't have EEZ, but if we are negotiating there would need to be ruled, otherwise its just arbitrary, there is no legal principle.

A simple google search will prove you wrong,again.

 

[hyperman]

Ok,you give Imbros and Tenedos back.

How about Greece fights for Meis, and if it can't defend a tiny island with 300-400 senior citizens hundreds of miles from greece, thats right off the coast of anatolia, then Turkey keeps it.

Doesn't sound good? no? then no EEZ as a compromise for one tiny island hundred of miles from Greece.

 

[hyperman]

A simple google search will prove you wrong,again.

View attachment 186612

View attachment 186614

View attachment 186613

Foinikas, Turkey is not bound by what it hasn't signed. Thats how state relations work at the most basic level.

 

[Foinikas]

How about Greece fights for Meis, and if it can't defend a tiny island with 300-400 senior citizens hundreds of miles from greece, thats right off the coast of anatolia, then Turkey keeps it.

Doesn't sound good? no? then no EEZ as a compromise for one tiny island hundred of miles from Greece.

So again,your only argument as a Turk is "war".

Foinikas, Turkey is not bound by what it hasn't signed. Thats how state relations work at the most basic level.

Of course my dear,Turkey doesn't care about international law. And that's where all our problems start. Turkey isn't a signatory of the Treaty of Paris either,but complains "islands no weapons,islands no weapons".

Everything starts from Turkey's stance on international law and treaties. Whenever it suits Turkey,a treaty is valid,whenever it doesn't,it's not important.

But always,always...every conversation ends up with the usual

"You do what I say or we go to war. Turkey is stronger so we do what we want. So either you like it or we go to war"

 

[Desert]

Stop always answering with the whole catalog of the turkish magic weapons.
In case of a conflict all the western members of NATO will take the Greek side.
You are in NATO only because you are a lock against russia in the black sea... nothing more.

That's why Turkey needs to acquire nuclear weapons of its own.
who knows what Europe or Nato can do to Turkey one day.

 

[Desert]

Since there is a better relations now between Egypt and Turkey , I think we may witness a re-draw of EEZ with Turkey and Libya , Turkish proposal of EEZ map is better than we have with greece or cyprus.

 

[hyperman]

So again,your only argument as a Turk is "war".

No, my options are keep things frozen as is, with the status quo, and in the meantime we negotiate, and as the bare minimum Meis cannot have and EEZ, maybe the other islands can or cannot, that can be determined via bilateral agreement in negotiations, and Turkey could as a compromise agree to adjustments to its current positions.

If no agreement can be found, ok no problem, keep the status quo and keep it frozen.

But let it be known to all parties, that Turkey will not accept fiat accompli, so if greece breaks the status quo, then turkey will break the status quo in a proportionate manor, and then we go up the escalation chain, if all out war breaks out, then everything is at play.

But Turkey doesn't want to do that it prefers the status quo and negotiations. But the position on the matter of Meis, Turkey cannot accept an EEZ for this island.

If Greece decides, its lost patience with the negotiations and the status quo, Turkey is prepared. It will never accept Fiat Accompli.

 

[hyperman]

Of course my dear,Turkey doesn't care about international law.

International law is only law and binding on people who sign a document.

If countries across Africa, Asia and South America and elsewhere signed a treaty about something, but European countries didn't, is it international law?

regardless

"Now is not the time to talk about international law." I think someone said that recently. lol

 

[Foinikas]

No, my options are keep things frozen as is, with the status quo, and in the meantime we negotiate, and as the bare minimum Meis cannot have and EEZ, maybe the other islands can or cannot, that can be determined via bilateral agreement in negotiations, and Turkey could as a compromise agree to adjustments to its current positions.

If no agreement can be found, ok no problem, keep the status quo and keep it frozen.

So basically,Greece is entitled EEZ,but because Turkey has not signed UNCLOS and does not want to recognize international law,we should not take advantage of our EEZ until we agree with Turkey about how much Turks will get out of it,because they don't recognize EEZ and they don't recognize international law. Like,according to California law I'm entitled to this much of yard with my property,but because my neighbor says he doesn't abide by California law 'cause he's a "sovereign citizen",he tells me to negiotate about how much of my yard he'll get or he threatens with physical violence.

If countries across Africa, Asia and South America and elsewhere signed a treaty about something, but European countries didn't, is it international law?

regardless

"Now is not the time to talk about international law." I think someone said that recently. lol

If it's only about Africa or Asia then it's not fucking international law. That's why it's called INTERNATIONAL LAW.

But let it be known to all parties, that Turkey will not accept fiat accompli, so if greece breaks the status quo, then turkey will break the status quo in a proportionate manor, and then we go up the escalation chain, if all out war breaks out, then everything is at play.

But Turkey doesn't want to do that it prefers the status quo and negotiations. But the position on the matter of Meis, Turkey cannot accept an EEZ for this island.

:'( Turkey doesn't want war. But if you don't give me yours,we'll go to war. So give me yours,because Turkey is a peaceful country and doesn't want to go to war and only wants what's best for others,as long as it doesn't come from Turkey.

AKP foreign policy the last 15 years

If Greece decides, its lost patience with the negotiations and the status quo, Turkey is prepared. It will never accept Fiat Accompli.

And eventually Turkey will eat a Fait(not Fiat)Accompli in the head when it rushes to do something,calling on "muh rights"

 

[BonPlan]

Tomorrow we could bomb Greece into dust. and the world is doing nothing about it.
The Europeans care very little for Greece. Just like in Cyprus.
And I doubt you're even French

I don't care if you think me french or not. It's usual on this forum.
You can be sure of a french reaction in case of. We are linked to Greece with military agreement. Like the help we give to UAE this time, to counter iranian drones.
A help, for exemple, in the form of one or two SSN just in front of your main port... It will be enough to sink all your proud navy.

Don't think you are invulnerable. You are.

 

[BonPlan]

That's why Turkey needs to acquire nuclear weapons of its own.
who knows what Europe or Nato can do to Turkey one day.

To be seen....
It's already difficult for you to fine tune a MBT diesel engine, so for nuc it will takes time... if ever.

 

[hyperman]

If it's only about Africa or Asia then it's not fucking international law. That's why it's called INTERNATIONAL LAW.

yo you have no idea how international law works do you? lol

There is no defined element where it says All continents have to agree or someone from every continent has to agree otherwise its not international law.

The Law is only bound to those states who sign it. Comprende?

There is no magic number of the amount of countries that have to have signed it, no oh it needs to include all continents or whatever.

Half the people in the eastern Mediterranean have not ratified it.



This is like thinking the ICC has jurisdiction over the United States b/c it says International in the title.

If you think Turkey is breaking "International Law", sue Turkey in the ICJ, see which court you get to accept the case, any court you go to will tell you for it to be binding the two parties need to be part the agreement under which the court would have the power to rule.

This is basic understanding of "International Law" and Westphalian Sovereignty vis a vi multilateral agreements, the world is treated as a jungle, and in the jungle the authority comes from agreements between states. Whats decided between states is based on what agreements the countries enter into.

This is like India and Pakistan not signing the NPT, are they breaking "International Law", not really. b/c they aren't signatories.

Did North Korea break the NPT? again legally speaking? no, b/c it withdrew(its legal to withdraw).

So what is the break of the law? the breaking of the law(in regards to states) is when you agree to something but then you don't do it.

Westphalian system - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[hyperman]

Like,according to California law I'm entitled to this much of yard with my property,but because my neighbor says he doesn't abide by California law 'cause he's a "sovereign citizen",

States are not people habibi another mistake in understanding domestic law and international law.

The State has a monopoly on violence and it derives its power from self, by its own existence. So by default it has authority over you(unless it agreed in cases where it relinquished this authority via agreement). International law works in the opposite way. The individual states are sovereign, there is no world government or enforced with a "monopoly of violence" whose right derives from it existing. So law in this manor works via consent unlike domestic law. The Sovereign state give up certain privileges and agrees to bounds based on signing of treaties.