Mereja.Forum

Abe Abraham · Post by **Abe Abraham** » 29 Dec 2022, 17:53

What is behind Al-Sisi's decision to encroach Libya's maritime borders

On December 13, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi issued a presidential decree demarcating Egypt's maritime borders exclusively from the western side, with Libya, unilaterally without referring to the Libyan side. The decision sparked a lot of controversy regarding its content, timing, and justifications for taking it, as well as justifications for its justification from a technical point of view.

Greece was the first to celebrate the decision, which encroaches on Libya's maritime borders and creates a disputed area with Libya that did not exist before. After the Egyptian announcement, Greek Foreign Minister Nikos Dandias called his Egyptian counterpart, Sameh Shoukry, in which he discussed the situation in the eastern Mediterranean, including the Egyptian decision. On December 15, the Greek minister publicly welcomed Sisi's decision to unilaterally demarcate the country's western borders, noting that Athens and Cairo enjoy strong and harmonious relations on a number of issues. The Greek press headlined in a number of its publications, "Egypt cancels the effects of the illegal Turkish-Libyan memorandum of understanding to demarcate the maritime borders."

The Libyan government of national unity completely rejected the Egyptian decision, and responded to the Egyptian move by saying that it is a violation of the Libyan territorial waters and continental shelf, and that Sisi’s decision contradicts what Egypt claims in international forums in terms of respect for Libyan sovereignty and territorial integrity, and is also contrary to international law because it is unfair and not issued by Good faith - as required by the law of the sea - and does not comply with the provisions of international law. The Egyptian regime's traditional allies inside Libya issued, through the foreign affairs and defense committees in the parliament headed by Aguila Saleh, on December 22 a statement declaring their rejection of Sisi's decision and urging the Egyptian regime to reverse it as an unfair decision in accordance with international law, a violation of Libyan sovereignty, and an infringement of the country's borders. Navy.

For its part, the Turkish authorities called on the Egyptian and Libyan parties to start negotiations on the demarcation of the maritime borders between them as soon as possible. The Turkish side also responded to the allegations raised by Greece, the Cypriots and a number of Egyptians regarding the impact of Sisi’s decision on the Turkish-Libyan demarcation line. The semi-official Anadolu Agency quoted diplomatic sources as confirming that Egypt’s unilateral decision to demarcate the western border with Libya through 9 geographical coordinates, “ It does not overlap with the continental shelf of Turkey in the eastern Mediterranean.

From a technical point of view, the decision practically contradicts the Law of the Sea Convention, of which Egypt is a member, as it was taken unilaterally and with complete disregard for the Libyan side, in addition to the absence of good faith in implementation. And assuming that Egypt's true borders are what was announced in Sisi's decree, this was supposed at least to invite the Libyan side to negotiate in this regard based on the fact that the Egyptian declaration created a conflict that did not exist before, as the marine area that was encroached upon An area belonging to Libya, as Cairo has never raised the issue of a dispute with Libya or the existence of a dispute or the existence of a water area belonging to it that the Libyan side usurped.

In terms of content, in addition to creating a new conflict with Libya, Sisi’s decree practically gnaws away part of the Libyan water space, estimated by some to be about 6,800 square kilometers, which is equivalent to about two-thirds of the area of countries such as Lebanon. In this sense, the decree - in its abstract form and if we exclude any other justifications that have not been announced - reflects the Egyptian regime's ambitions in Libyan waters and resources. Al-Ahram newspaper described Sisi's action in one of its headlines as a "preventive measure", attributing it to what sources said was "a consensus that the move is a preventive step in light of the state of instability in Libya."

In other words, the Egyptian side decided to gnaw at Libyan maritime space due to the state of instability in Libya and the country's inability to defend itself in the face of the ambitions or encroachments of others. In confirmation of this behavior, a number of Egyptians justified the unilateral method of this decision by saying that it comes in the context of “urgency to invest the wealth of the eastern Mediterranean,” especially in the area adjacent to the borders with Greece and Libya, which appears to be in harmony with the Greek encroachments on Libyan waters, which reflects an understanding that Libya will be a victim of the abuses of both sides.

The Egyptian side decided to gnaw at Libyan maritime space due to the state of instability in Libya and the country's inability to defend itself in the face of the ambitions or encroachments of others. Confirming this behavior, a number of Egyptians justified the unilateral approach to this decision by saying that it comes in the context of "the rush to invest the wealth of the eastern Mediterranean."

If it was a matter of time, the Egyptian negotiations with Cyprus and Greece over border demarcation took years before an agreement was reached. As for if the matter was related to Egypt's vital interests, then it was supposed to give priority to the demarcation of the maritime borders with Turkey in view of the additional marine areas it secures for the Egyptian side, noting that the negotiations in this regard are stalled by an Egyptian political decision, in contrast to the Egyptian demarcation that took place with Greece, which It comes at the expense of Egyptian lands that the Egyptian side ceded to Athens in an agreement of a political nature.

In terms of timing, Sisi's decision comes at a very critical time for the Egyptian regime, especially in view of the suffocating economic crisis it is suffering from at this stage, and the difficulty of obtaining hot financial support, as it is said, after the Egyptian president revealed that there is a restlessness in providing financial support. By "brother countries", which no longer provide financial support in the form it provided since the military coup in the country in 2013. In addition, this unilateral declaration comes shortly after Egypt signed at the end of November 2022 a memorandum of understanding on "search and rescue" with The Greek side in the eastern Mediterranean, and the handshake that also took place between Sisi and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Doha on the sidelines of the opening of the FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022 matches, and Greece’s announcement of its contract with international companies to search and explore for oil and gas in a disputed maritime area with Libya. .

There are no logical justifications for Sisi's decision, especially since it contradicts what Cairo and Greece were promoting in terms of international law. Did the Egyptian regime want a door to negotiate with Libya? it does not seem so. Does he want to send an indirect message to Greece that the Egyptian position is still in harmony with the Greek vision for the eastern Mediterranean, despite the handshake with Erdogan? Maybe. Does he want to tell the Turks that my moves in the eastern Mediterranean have proven once again that they do not come at the expense of Turkey? Maybe.

But in the end, the justification for the decision may be purely internal, as it is easy to provoke the Egyptians with decisions that extinguish the national and national character.

Given the critical economic situation, and after the size of the concessions made by the Egyptian regime in terms of water to Greece, islands to Saudi Arabia, and companies and assets to the Emirates, and after the bet on Haftar in Libya failed, and on stopping the Renaissance Dam in Ethiopia, the regime finds itself in need of an imaginary and quick victory without any costs.

The last decision may achieve this for him, and he may even believe that it will benefit him if it is established as a de facto policy and an understanding with Greece at the expense of Libya and the rights of the Libyan people in its waters and wealth.

-