Dr. Konstantinos P. Balomenos*

The adoption of the National Spatial Strategy for the Marine Space (NSSMS), which specifies and maps Greece’s Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP), undeniably constitutes a strategic move of historic significance for the country.

For the first time, Greece—through this MSP—has a comprehensive and institutionalised framework within the European Union (EU) that maps out the uses, activities, and boundaries within its maritime zones and continental shelf, fully reflecting the legal effect of both the mainland and its islands (including islets and rocky outcrops).

As the former Director General for Defence Policy at the Ministry of National Defence (MoD), and having represented the Ministry during the consultation process for the drafting of the NSSMS, I express my satisfaction with the publication of this strategy. At the same time, I wish to warmly congratulate all the officials from the competent ministries who worked towards its completion, as well as the country’s political leadership for successfully coordinating this initiative.

Beyond defining human activity across Greece’s marine waters and outlining their future spatial development—along with the environmental, economic, and developmental benefits this entails—the NSSMS holds significant geopolitical value.

Notably, for the first time, Greece officially maps and delineates in an EU-sanctioned document the boundaries of its maritime space (maritime zones, continental shelf, etc.), affirming full maritime effect for all coastal territories, both insular and mainland. In particular, by recognising the maritime influence of Kastellorizo and Strongyli, the eastern boundary of Greece’s continental shelf now borders the western edge of Cyprus’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ)—thus establishing shared maritime boundaries between Greece and Cyprus.

Also read: The obscure files of an anniversary or David vs Goliath: The Serbian Air Force against the 1999 NATO ‘Allied Force’ Operation

This development is of paramount national significance, as it marks the first time that the principles outlined in the Seville Map—a source of strong objections from Turkey—are enshrined in an official institutional EU document regarding maritime jurisdiction in the Eastern Mediterranean. For context, the Seville Map illustrates the Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) of EU Member States based on the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and clearly records the connection between the Greek and Cypriot EEZs.

Although the Seville Map is not an official EU document, the fact that Greece’s Maritime Spatial Plan reflects its contents in a formal and institutionalised EU framework legitimises the map and grants it legal and political standing within the Union. This shift also impacts the Greek-Turkish dialogue, as Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu explicitly stated in an interview with CNN Türk (17 September 2020) that a precondition for initiating talks with Greece would be for Athens to officially reject the Seville Map.

Against this backdrop, the NSSMS reshapes the dynamics of Greek-Turkish relations and redefines the parameters that have traditionally framed bilateral discussions. For the first time, Greece unequivocally reasserts its positions and formulates a new strategic approach to protecting its national interests in the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean—firmly grounded in international law. Consequently, Greece also reconfigures the agenda of Greek-Turkish negotiations.

Henceforth, any discussion about resolving the Greek-Turkish dispute over the delimitation of the continental shelf and EEZ will be based on Greece’s officially mapped Maritime Spatial Plan, and not on Turkey’s legally unsubstantiated and novel claims. Within this framework, the NSSMS will serve as a foundational reference point not only for Greek-Turkish issues, but also for addressing any future disputes or negotiations between Greece and its neighboring states.

Also read: A reluctant alliance? A different approach to French – Serbian defence relations

This fact is of utmost national importance, as it institutionalised—for the first time in an official EU document—the principles reflected in the Seville Map, which has long provoked strong opposition from Turkey regarding the delineation of maritime jurisdiction areas in the Eastern Mediterranean. For reference, the Seville Map depicts the Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) of EU Member States based on the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and clearly illustrates the maritime continuity between Greece and Cyprus.

While the Seville Map itself does not constitute an official EU document, the fact that Greece’s Maritime Spatial Plan (MSP) now integrates its provisions into a formally adopted EU institutional framework grants the map de facto legal and political weight within the Union. This development significantly influences the Greek-Turkish dialogue, as Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu stated in an interview with CNN Türk (17 September 2020) that a precondition for resuming talks with Greece was a formal declaration from Athens rejecting the Seville Map.

In this light, the National Spatial Strategy for the Marine Space (NSSMS) fundamentally reshapes the landscape of Greek-Turkish relations and alters the parameters that have governed bilateral discussions until now. Greece, for the first time, explicitly redefines its national positions and introduces a new strategic framework to safeguard its sovereign rights and interests in the Aegean Sea and the Eastern Mediterranean, grounded firmly in international law. Through this, Greece also repositions the agenda of the Greek-Turkish dialogue.

From now on, any future discussion concerning the delimitation of the continental shelf and the EEZ between Greece and Turkey will be based on Greece’s officially recognised Maritime Spatial Plan rather than on Turkey’s unsubstantiated and revisionist interpretations. Within this context, the NSSMS becomes not only a strategic planning tool but also a diplomatic instrument—a baseline framework for addressing any current or future disputes or negotiations between Greece and its maritime neighbors.

Also read: OPINION | TIME OF DECISION FOR EUROPEAN DEFENCE AND SECURITY

Within the same framework, Greece’s Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP) reinforces its national positions regarding maritime zones by conferring international legitimacy to Greece. This is because the process Greece followed in drafting its plan mirrors the procedure adopted by other EU Member States—without facing any challenge from any international state or non-state actor. Additionally, the MSP ensures tangible European support for Greece in connection with its energy investment projects (e.g., the submarine electricity interconnection cable between Greece and Cyprus) and serves to undermine Turkey’s contested role in the region.

The National Spatial Strategy for the Marine Space (NSSMS) also has direct implications for national defence and security. The document makes clear that activities undertaken exclusively for the purposes of defence and national security—including search and rescue operations—take precedence over all other maritime activities. Furthermore, it designates specific areas within the maritime spatial units for the conduct of military operations (e.g., firing ranges, training zones, mine warfare areas, and submarine exercise zones).

This provision is of critical importance for national defence and security, as it enhances the operational footprint of the Hellenic Armed Forces in the Southeastern Mediterranean, bolstering their role as a pillar of stability and security in the region. Simultaneously, it institutionalises the international and European character of Greece’s maritime domain.

The publication of the NSSMS also follows recent successful diplomatic and economic initiatives by Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis, particularly regarding the strategic agreement between Greece and the American energy giant Chevron. Just as the commencement of offshore energy exploration south of Crete by Chevron constitutes a de facto recognition of Greece’s EEZ—effectively nullifying the Turkey-Libya memorandum—so too does the NSSMS serve to invalidate Turkey’s “Blue Homeland” doctrine.

The Greek government chose to issue the NSSMS at a time when certain self-proclaimed “super-patriots” within Greece were criticising the Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister for alleged concessions to Turkey. These critics had even claimed that work on the Greece-Cyprus-Israel electricity interconnection project near Kasos had been suspended due to Turkish threats. However, the unfolding developments have proven them wrong and discredited them once again, highlighting a fundamental lack of understanding—both of Prime Minister Mitsotakis’ strategic decisions and of Greece’s current foreign policy orientation.

Also read: OPINION | The future of the National Guard’s AMX-30B2 tanks – Withdrawal or Upgrade?

This decision clearly demonstrates that Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis and the Greek government have not suspended—nor do they intend to suspend—the Greece–Cyprus electricity interconnection project due to Turkish threats. Instead, they opted for a strategic maneuver, choosing to respond to Turkey’s reactions and provocations with a decisive diplomatic counteroffensive—not with hollow rhetoric, but with credible deterrence, setting irreversible facts on the ground and sending a clear message: Greece will not retreat from asserting and defending its national sovereignty and sovereign rights in the Southeastern Mediterranean. Turkey’s reaction to these developments reflects a clear sense of unease and discomfort.

In this context, Turkey finds itself trailing behind with regard to maritime spatial planning. It has nothing official to present in defence of its “Blue Homeland” doctrine, and responded instead via a report in Milliyet newspaper, featuring a supposed scientific study purporting to define a Turkish maritime spatial plan. The subsequent announcement by the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs borders on the farcical and is devoid of legal substance.

In reality, Greece’s issuance of its National Spatial Strategy for the Marine Space (NSSMS) is not a unilateral act, but rather a fulfillment of its obligations as an EU Member State, carried out entirely in accordance with the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)—the same legal framework Turkey has invoked in the Black Sea (despite refusing to recognize UNCLOS as a whole). The delineation of maritime zones is an inherent act of national sovereignty, not a unilateral provocation—a right Turkey itself has exercised, and thus is in no position to accuse others of unilateralism.

Turkey’s threat to submit its own plan to UNESCO and relevant UN bodies is also legally meaningless and carries no consequence for Greece. In support of this, Article 2, Chapter 1, Paragraph 7 of the United Nations Charter clearly states:

“Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state, nor shall it require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter.”

However, the paragraph adds that this principle does not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter VII of the Charter, which pertains to threats to peace, breaches of peace, and acts of aggression.

Viewed from this perspective, who exactly is violating international law? Is it Greece, acting in accordance with UNCLOS and EU regulations? Or is it Turkey, which refuses to respect the sovereignty of the only internationally recognised state on Cyprus—the Republic of Cyprus—while seeking to legitimize its military invasion by pushing for recognition of the illegal secessionist entity in the north as an independent state?

In conclusion, the issuance of the NSSMS is a strategic milestone of historic importance for Greece. It places significant pressure on Turkey and accelerates the process toward delimiting maritime zones in the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean—not based on Ankara’s “Blue Homeland” narrative, but on Greece’s officially recognized maritime spatial framework. This plan not only defines Greece’s maritime boundaries—it also defines Europe’s maritime frontier.

Ultimately, this move strengthens Greece’s negotiating power and redefines the balance in Greek-Turkish relations in the Eastern Mediterranean.

Also read: Mapping of Occupation Forces | The Offensive Positions, the Armaments and the Turkish Claims in Cyprus – INTERACTIVE MAP and Photos

*Political Scientist – International Affairs Specialist, Former General Director – General Directorate of National Defence Policy and International Relations (GDPEADS) of the Ministry of National Defence (HMoND) 

**The views and/or comments expressed in the articles belong to each author and may not constitute an opinion and/or position and/or be adopted as is by the company and/or the site administrators. More in the terms of use of the website.