The Greece-Turkey dispute in the Aegean and the ICJ sea border delimitation case of Ukraine-Romania: similarities and differences in a comparative perspective

Abstract

On 16 September 2004, Romania filed an Application instituting proceedings against Ukraine in respect of a dispute concerning "the establishment of a single maritime boundary between the two States in the Black Sea", thereby delimiting the continental shelf and the exclusive economic zones appertaining to them. Five years later, on 3 February 2009 the International Court of Justice (ICJ), issued a decisive decision on the simultaneous delimitation of the Continental Shelter and the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) between Ukraine and Romania, ending a long going dispute. In the case concerning Maritime Delimitation in the Black Sea between Romania and Ukraine the ICJ has delimited the sea borders of the two countries, mainly by using the middle line method, a delimitation method which is supported by Greece. The judgment of the Court directly affects the dispute between Greece and Turkey concerning the delimitation of the continental shelf and EEZ between both States. The reason is that there are many similarities but still many differences between the two disputes. The Court concluded that only the presence of Serpents Island required a minor adjustment of the provisional equidistance line. The result was that Romania won 79,3% of the disputed sea area. Also, the ICJ didn't take into account at all the Black Sea as a closed or semi-enclosed sea. This is a positive aspect for Greece, as Turkey's position is to insist that the Aegean Sea is a closed or semi-enclosed sea. The aim of this paper is to analyze how the ICJ sea border delimitation case of Ukraine-Romania affects the Greece-Turkey dispute in the Aegean in terms of a potential political solution.