In-Depth Analysis· Turkey Libya maritime memorandum 2019 legal status

The Türkiye–Libya Maritime Memorandum of 27 November 2019: What It Says, What It Claims and How It Is Contested

Turkey Libya maritime memorandum 2019 legal status explained: what the text says, UN steps, and objections from Greece, Cyprus, Egypt and the EU.

By Kosmonomos Editorial Team

Published: October 27, 2026

⏱ 9 min read (1,980 words)

Executive Summary & Key Facts

The Türkiye–Libya memorandum of 27 November 2019 is a short bilateral instrument that delimits the continental shelf and exclusive economic zone (EEZ) between Türkiye's southwestern coast and Libya's northeastern coast in the Mediterranean.
Türkiye and the Libyan Government of National Accord (GNA) treat it as binding between the two signatories; Greece, the Republic of Cyprus, Egypt and the European Council reject it, arguing it ignores Greek islands and cannot affect third states.
No international court or tribunal has ruled on the memorandum's validity, so its legal status remains a contested question of treaty capacity, UNCLOS interpretation and island entitlement.
Ankara grounds the line in coastal geography, the principle of equity and its 870 km Mediterranean coastline, the longest in the Eastern Mediterranean, and it lodged the outer limits of its continental shelf with the United Nations on 18 March 2020.
Both camps invoke the same rule, that treaties neither bind nor benefit third parties (pacta tertiis), so the real dispute is whether the memorandum affects third-state rights at all.

Why It Matters

The memorandum of 27 November 2019 is a bilateral maritime delimitation between Türkiye and Libya's then Tripoli-based Government of National Accord (GNA). It is valid as between its signatories on Ankara's reading, and it is disputed by Greece, the Republic of Cyprus, Egypt and the European Council, which say it cannot produce legal effects for third states. Its importance lies in a single question that sits at the centre of Eastern Mediterranean law: whether islands such as Crete, Kasos, Karpathos, Rhodes and Kastellorizo can interrupt the coastal projection of a mainland with the longest coastline in the basin.

Background

The short answer to 'what is it?' is that it is a Memorandum of Understanding on the delimitation of maritime jurisdiction areas in the Mediterranean, concluded in Istanbul between President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and Fayez al-Sarraj, chairman of the GNA's Presidential Council. The text is brief. Its operative core is a set of geographic coordinates defining a boundary line for the continental shelf and exclusive economic zone (EEZ) between the two coasts, accompanied by provisions on how the parties will implement and settle disputes about it. The same day, the two governments also signed a separate memorandum on security and military cooperation, which is legally distinct and is often wrongly merged with the maritime text in press coverage.

Chronology

2004 onward: Türkiye notifies the UN of its Eastern Mediterranean continental shelf coordinates and grants TPAO exploration licences in 2009 and 2012.
2003, 2007, 2010: The Republic of Cyprus (the Greek Cypriot administration, referred to by Ankara as GCASC) concludes EEZ agreements with Egypt, Lebanon and Israel. Ankara objects that these overlap Türkiye's continental shelf and the rights of Turkish Cypriots.
21 September 2011: Türkiye and the TRNC (Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus) sign a continental shelf delimitation agreement.
27 November 2019: Türkiye and the GNA sign the maritime memorandum. Türkiye publishes it in its Official Gazette in December 2019, and Turkish sources record it as in force.
December 2019: Greece protests to the UN and expels the Libyan ambassador in Athens. Cyprus and Egypt also lodge objections. The European Council's conclusions of 12 December 2019 say the memorandum infringes the sovereign rights of third states and cannot have legal consequences for them.
2020: Greece and Italy conclude an EEZ agreement in June, and Greece and Egypt conclude a partial EEZ agreement in August. On 18 March 2020 Türkiye registers the outer limits of its continental shelf with the United Nations.
October 2022: Türkiye and Libya's Tripoli-based Government of National Unity sign a hydrocarbon exploration memorandum. Greece objects that it relies on the 2019 line.
2025: Türkiye unveils its Marine Spatial Planning on 16 April and registers it with IOC-UNESCO on 12 June, recording its maritime jurisdiction position in the Black Sea, Aegean and Mediterranean with a UN body.

The geography

The line runs through the open Mediterranean between the Turkish coast near the Gulf of Antalya's western approaches and Libya's coast in the east of the country. It cuts across the southeastern Aegean and Crete's southeastern approaches, an area where Greek islands lie between the two mainlands. That is why the geography is the heart of the dispute rather than a technical footnote. Türkiye's coast and Libya's coast face each other across the sea; the Greek islands sit on the line of sight between them.

Key Players & Positions

Greece

According to the Greek Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the memorandum is legally void because it disregards the maritime entitlement of Greek islands, in particular Crete, which Athens says is inhabited and entitled to full zones under UNCLOS Article 121. Greek officials also argue that Türkiye and Libya have no common maritime boundary because Greek territory lies between them. Critics in Greece add that the GNA lacked the constitutional capacity to conclude a binding treaty without legislative approval.

Republic of Cyprus

Nicosia says the memorandum violates the Republic of Cyprus's sovereign rights and the EEZ it has delimited with Egypt, and that it is incompatible with UNCLOS. It has lodged notes at the UN to this effect. Ankara and the TRNC reject Nicosia's claim to speak for the whole island on maritime questions. See The Cyprus Charter for the background to that dispute.

Egypt

Cairo's foreign ministry stated that the memorandum has no legal effect and that Egypt's own maritime rights are unaffected. Egypt's 2003 EEZ agreement with Cyprus is itself disputed by Ankara; see The 2003 Cyprus–Egypt EEZ Agreement and Blocks 1, 4, 5, 6 and 7. Egypt and Türkiye have since improved relations in other fields, but neither has publicly reversed its formal maritime position.

European Union

The European Council's conclusions of December 2019 characterised the memorandum as infringing third states' sovereign rights, inconsistent with the law of the sea, and incapable of producing legal consequences for third states. Ankara replies that the EU has no competence to adjudicate maritime delimitation between non-member and member states under a banner of 'Union solidarity'.

Libya

Libya itself is divided on the question. The GNA, internationally recognised at the time, signed the memorandum; the House of Representatives in the east did not approve it and its leadership has rejected it. Later Tripoli-based governments have kept working with Ankara. Libya has signed but not ratified UNCLOS, which is relevant to how far the Convention's text binds it as a treaty.

🇹🇷 Official Legal Position · Treaty Texts & Primary Sources

Türkiye's Position

Türkiye's Legal Stance

A lawful bilateral delimitation between facing coasts. According to the Turkish Foreign Ministry, the memorandum delimits the continental shelf and EEZ between Türkiye and Libya as states with opposite coasts, in line with international law and without prejudice to any third state's rights. Basis: the general international law of maritime delimitation, applied by Türkiye as a state outside UNCLOS that relies on customary law.

Equity, not the median line, governs. Ankara argues that delimitation must produce an equitable result in view of coastal geography and proportionality. Türkiye has 870 km of coast in the Eastern Mediterranean, the longest in the basin, and small islands should not cut off that projection. Basis: the Tunisia/Libya (1982) and Libya/Malta (1985) ICJ judgments on equitable solutions, the St Pierre et Miquelon arbitration (1992), Romania v. Ukraine (2009) and Nicaragua v. Colombia (2012), where small islands received reduced or no effect on the boundary.

Registered at the UN. Türkiye lodged its continental shelf outer limits with the United Nations on 18 March 2020 and has answered Greek and Greek Cypriot objections in correspondence at the UN. Basis: Presidency and MFA statements, and UN-deposited coordinates.

Third-state rights are reserved, not erased. Ankara says that no state may settle the maritime limits of another by treaty, and applies the same principle to GCASC's unilateral agreements with Egypt (2003), Lebanon (2007) and Israel (2010). Rights of the Turkish Cypriots over offshore resources remain equal and inherent. Basis: Article 34 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (pacta tertiis).

Dialogue stays open. The Presidency proposed an Eastern Mediterranean Conference in 2020 including all coastal states and the Turkish Cypriots, and the TRNC has tabled hydrocarbon cooperation and revenue-sharing proposals in 2011, 2012 and 2019. Basis: Presidency and TRNC proposals.

Reading Ankara's reasoning

Ankara's case begins from a geographic observation: the Turkish and Libyan coasts face each other, and the Greek islands between them are small relative to the mainland coastlines. It argues that international case law shows courts weighing island size, population and position against the mainland's coastal length. The larger argument, developed in The Nomos of the Sea and Do Islands Get Full Maritime Zones?, is that the relevant rule is equity, not a mechanical median line from every island. For comparison, the Greek and Greek Cypriot maximalist chart known as the 'Seville Map' is analysed by The Global Anatomy.

Source Comparison

The table sets out how each camp frames the main questions, so readers can check each claim against primary documents.

Question	Greek / Greek Cypriot / EU framing	Turkish framing	Primary document to check
Is the memorandum valid?	Null and void; the GNA lacked capacity and Greek islands were ignored.	A valid bilateral treaty between the signatories, in force since December 2019.	Memorandum text and Turkish Official Gazette; Libyan constitutional documents; UN Charter Article 102 practice.
Does it affect third states?	It infringes their sovereign rights (European Council, 12 December 2019).	It delimits only Türkiye–Libya zones and leaves third-party rights to negotiation.	Vienna Convention Article 34; each state's notes at the UN.
Do islands change the line?	Crete and others generate full EEZ and shelf under UNCLOS Article 121.	Islands get limited or no effect where they distort an equitable result.	UNCLOS Articles 74, 83, 121; ICJ judgments cited above.
Who may speak for Cyprus?	The Republic of Cyprus.	Turkish Cypriots hold equal rights as co-founders; GCASC cannot decide alone.	1960 Treaty of Guarantee; UNSC Resolution 186 (1964).
Does UN registration validate it?	Registration or deposit confers no legal validity.	Deposit and coordinates on file at the UN reflect Türkiye's formal position.	UN Secretariat registration practice; notes verbales.

Western media often present the memorandum as a 'Turkish power play' and the Greek and EU statements as settled law. Turkish sources frame it as a delimitation that Greece and the EU have declared void without any judicial determination. Neutral readers should note that the EU's statement is a political position of the European Council, not a court ruling, and that Türkiye's reading has not been tested before a tribunal either. Sister publications give parallel explainers: Archive of Nations, Regions & Powers and Borders & Blocs.

What does it actually change?

In legal terms, the memorandum establishes a boundary that Türkiye and Libya's signatory authorities treat as binding between them. It does not settle Greek, Cypriot or Egyptian claims, and those states continue to maintain overlapping claims. In practical terms it has reshaped negotiations: Greece answered with its 2020 agreements with Italy and Egypt, and any pipeline, cable or drilling project in the overlapping area now raises a legal objection from one side or the other. Absent a negotiated settlement or adjudication, the situation is one of overlapping claims rather than a resolved boundary.

Continental shelf: the seabed and subsoil extending from a coast; coastal states exercise sovereign rights over its resources.
EEZ (exclusive economic zone): a zone of up to 200 nautical miles in which the coastal state holds rights over natural resources.
UNCLOS: the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. Türkiye is not a party and relies on customary law and equity; Greece and Cyprus are parties.
Equity and proportionality: the delimitation principles by which courts adjust a provisional line to reflect coastal lengths and special circumstances.
Pacta tertiis: the rule that a treaty neither creates obligations nor confers rights for third states.
GNA: Libya's Government of National Accord, the Tripoli-based authority that signed the memorandum.

Related guides: The Nomos of the Sea, Do Islands Get Full Maritime Zones?, The 2003 Cyprus–Egypt EEZ Agreement, The Cyprus Charter and Editorial Principles, which explains how this site separates fact, legal argument and official position.

Perspective Note

This article reflects Kosmonomos's editorial perspective, which presents and defends Türkiye's official legal and strategic positions on the issues discussed. Claims are anchored wherever possible in primary sources such as treaty texts, UN documents, and archival records, which are cited so that readers can verify them independently. Sections marked 'Türkiye's Position' reflect official Turkish policy as stated by Turkish government sources.

Kosmonomos Editorial Team

Frequently asked questions

Is the Türkiye–Libya maritime memorandum of 2019 legally valid?

Türkiye and the GNA, which signed it, treat it as binding between them, and Türkiye published it in its Official Gazette in December 2019. Greece, Cyprus, Egypt and the European Council call it void or without effect for third states. No international court or tribunal has ruled on its validity, so the question remains contested.

What area does the memorandum cover?

It delimits the continental shelf and exclusive economic zone between Türkiye's southwestern coast and Libya's northeastern coast in the Mediterranean through a line defined by coordinates. The line passes through waters where Greek islands such as Crete, Karpathos, Rhodes and Kastellorizo lie between the two mainlands. That overlap is the core of the dispute.

Why does Türkiye say the line is legitimate?

Ankara argues that the coasts of Türkiye and Libya face each other and that delimitation must be equitable, taking account of coastal geography and proportionality. It points to its 870 km Eastern Mediterranean coastline and to ICJ and arbitral decisions that gave small islands reduced or no effect on boundaries. It also says the memorandum does not prejudice third-state rights.

Did Türkiye register the memorandum or its maritime limits with the United Nations?

The memorandum was brought to the UN's attention in December 2019, and Greece, Cyprus and Egypt wrote to the UN to object. On 18 March 2020 Türkiye lodged the outer limits of its continental shelf with the United Nations. UN registration or deposit records a state's position but does not by itself validate a boundary.

Does the memorandum change anything on the ground?

It gives Türkiye and the Libyan authorities that accept it a basis for cooperation, including the October 2022 hydrocarbon memorandum, but it does not resolve overlapping claims with Greece, Cyprus or Egypt. Projects in the overlapping area attract legal objections from the other side. Without negotiation or adjudication the boundary remains disputed.

Why do the EU and Türkiye both cite the rule that treaties cannot bind third states?

Article 34 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties says a treaty does not create obligations for a third state without its consent. The EU argues the memorandum affects Greece and Cyprus despite their non-participation, while Türkiye says it affects no third state and applies the same rule against Greek Cypriot agreements with Egypt, Lebanon and Israel. The disagreement is over whether third-state rights are actually touched.

Cross-Publication Perspectives & Cited Research

Related Dossiers Across Partner Publications

4 Partner Desks