Bahrooz Jaafar* and Mehmet Direkli*
Click here to view the PDF
Abstract: The Mediterranean Sea is prone to pollution as it is almost entirely enclosed by land and its warm waters need more than 80-90 years to clean and revive themselves. The dynamic environment and climate variables affect this region, known as the cradle of civilization. Many studies have examined the Mediterranean hydrocarbon issue through varying approaches that provide an understanding of how cooperation or conflict is promoted in the region. The regional security complex approach, securitization theory, resource regionalism, location theory, and the materialist school have been taken into consideration for analyzing the hydrocarbon relations in the Mediterranean. These approaches have focused on the issue's political, economic, security, and geographical aspects, while there is limited analysis of kin-states' role. But the interests of each country and regional conflicts have marginalized environmental problems. This study suggests that studying the role of Greece and Turkey in Cyprus as kin-states contributes to the direction of stability for hydrocarbon gas exploration and highlighting the environmental threats. It applies a new approach to the issue of Mediterranean hydrocarbon relations by utilizing the concept of kin-states and emphasizing the environmental hazards in the Mediterranean region. While hydrocarbon development is deemed a high priority for the world generally and Europe specifically. The study reveals the role of kin-states as powerbrokers as a significant hindrance to the progress of the peaceful development of hydrocarbon infrastructure, ensuring clean energy in the region and reducing the vulnerability of the entire island. It recommends a multilateral approach that puts kin-states at the center of hydrocarbon cooperation. Thus, the matter of environment is analyzed by interpreting the theoretical contribution to international relations
Keywords: environment, hydrocarbon, kin-state, Mediterranean, multilateralism, resource regionalism.
Introduction
Climate change and environmental problems as a catastrophe to humanity, waters and air have become a prominent topic in the science of international relations. Pollution has various sources and causes, including natural gas production and oil transportation via seas. The Mediterranean Sea has a major role in transporting oil to the world, and natural gas has been produced on its shores for more than ten years. Is there an opportunity to not marginalize the environmental issue while the natural gas and oil market still has strategic importance and is seen by the world as a major need?
The Eastern Mediterranean has been regarded as a region where many actors are finding the path to take the lead in issues such as geopolitics and energy. The dynamics of the relations among actors in the region became more competitive with the discovery of gas in the region from Israel to Cyprus in the last decades. Nevertheless, there have been significant attempts toward the cooperation and collective coordination of the Eastern Mediterranean hydrocarbon resources. One approach for coordination is the Egypt-led gas forum which was intended to create infrastructural development and monetize the resources. It evolved into the Eastern Mediterranean Gas Forum which excludes Turkey [1].
The Mediterranean hydrocarbon issue is a regional issue regarding the exploration of offshore gas among several states in the region. The countries that are directly involved include Cyprus, Greece, Egypt, France, Italy, Israel, Jordan, Palestine, Turkey, Syria, and Lebanon. They form a sub-systemic group as they represent direct stakeholders in the exploration of gas from the Eastern Mediterranean region [1]. The systemic analysis provides the explanatory variables that contribute to the understanding of these sub-systemic groups of states. Systemic approaches are insufficient for understanding the hindrances to cooperation in the Mediterranean. The understanding of threats among these actors and their responses analyzed through offensive and defensive realists within the regional power struggle does not shed enough light on the problem. This study examines alternative approaches to understanding the tension in the region through the role of individual actors [2].
We begin by exploring the contribution of alternative theories; namely, the regional security complex theory, securitization theory, materialistic theory, location theory, and resource regionalism [3]. These theories investigate how the natural gas pipeline can bring about regional stability. In the assessment of these theories, it is observed that their analyses focused on the regional level and missed the sub-regional level. However, there are sub-regional elements, which have hindered cooperation in the region. Although these approaches touch on sub-regional elements in their analyses, it is significant to craft an approach that coherently analyzes this element. Therefore, this study progresses to introduce the kin-state approach to the hydrocarbon issue in the Mediterranean as a sub-regional analysis. The kin-state approach focuses on Greece and Turkey’s role in Cyprus as they play the role of parent countries [4].
This study argues that the kin-state approach is beneficial to understanding the dynamics of cooperative or conflictual relations in the Eastern Mediterranean hydrocarbon issue. It examines the kin-states’ role within the hydrocarbon context of the Mediterranean region. Currently, there are two states in the Mediterranean, Greece and Turkey, which play the powerbroker role towards their ethnic communities in Cyprus [5]. The study highlights the implications of this role and how it has hindered cooperation by examining the shift in the behavior of actors towards conflict resolution since the discovery of hydrocarbon gas. It argues that the powerbroking role, while it is significant in conflict resolution and can push ethnic communities towards cooperation, increases the cooperation gap between the ethnic communities within the context of hydrocarbon. This study presents empirical evidence by exploring the details of the powerbroking states on the ethnic communities and how they hinder local capacity in determining the future of hydrocarbon in the region.
While the Greco-Turkish feud is based on territory, it is more conflictual within the Cyprus hydrocarbon. In a new era of hydrocarbon, the tense relations between Greece and Turkey exert pressure on both countries in participating in coordinating and accessing the hydrocarbon fields in Cyprus to improve their economy and military advantage [4]. Finally, this study concludes with an analysis that merges the kin-state approach, multilateralism, and resource regionalism to create a hybrid approach of cooperation in the Mediterranean. This will reduce the impact of the increasing tension between Greece and Turkey over hydrocarbon in the Mediterranean and how it affects regional
Assessing the regional security complex and securitization theory
This approach proposes that energy politics in the Eastern Mediterranean region is a bottom-up regionalization process in the region rather than a top-down dimension of cooperation. It argues that the structure of the international system promotes the top-down approach; Accordingly, it is such a strategy the decision-making procedure occurs at the highest level and is then communicated to the rest of the other participating units. The regional security complex holds that, rather than viewing security from a global perspective, the regional level of analysis displays a more existential threat to states sharing geographical adjacency [6]. The regional security complexity extends beyond the anarchical structure of the system that emphasizes the role of powerful states towards a socially constructed approach which is securitization. Hence, in addition to the states, other actors contribute to the security pattern within a region through the process of interaction. Nevertheless, the regional security complex theory has been employed by scholars to highlight the low level of regional cooperation, amity, and enmity in the Eastern Mediterranean region. The regional security complex introduces the top-down approach within a sub-systemic interaction of states within the same region to establish stability. The energy security in the Mediterranean region interlocks many actors; namely Cyprus, Egypt, France, Greece, Jordan, Israel, Italy, Turkey, the Palestinian Authority, and the Greek and Turkish Cypriot communities in a hydrocarbon security dynamic of this region [1].
Y. A. Stivachtis (2021) [6]. has a different view and counters that the spectacle in the Mediterranean has solely related to a fundamental threat: The global change through the Cold War and shifting of the international structure from the bipolar system to the more polycentric power structure has increased the role of regional power and amity between the Kin states. Therefore, it can be taken advantage of the Regional Security Complex System (RSCS) in defining the Mediterranean region; for that purpose, it should consider the environmental, economic, energy, and other phenomena, such as the refugee flow, for talking about the dynamics of the Mediterranean region. Thus, this can be utilized to realize a conduit to peace and stability [6].
Empirical evidence of the top-down approach is the formation of the Eastern Mediterranean Gas Forum (EMGF) comprising state members on which the outcome of the hydrocarbon exploration impacts [7]. Excluding Turkey, the EMGF was formed in 2018 as Cyprus, Egypt, France, Greece, Jordan, Israel, Italy, and Palestinian authorities’ dialogue on natural gas in the region. Despite the isolation of Turkey, the RSCT explains how Turkey is repositioned to play the role of an ambitious insulator state in regional energy politics. This is because of Turkey’s capacity to promote or hinder any regional security arrangement in the Mediterranean. A positive dimension of the ambitious insulator role was displayed in the management of the Syrian migration crisis by Turkey to counter the effect of the crisis on Europe. However, in the case of the Mediterranean, Turkey by exclusion from the EMGF insulates the level of cooperation that is possible in the region as it reacts to the actions of the members of the forum [8]. Barrinha (2014) [7] explained that Turkey is significant in the sense that its achievement of regional dominance might result in becoming a great power while playing its ambitious insulator role. This can only take place as an Eastern Mediterranean regional power. The constraint to this is the treatment of Turkey as an “outsider”; for example, not being fully a part of the Mediterranean region’s attempt of cooperation forum. Barrinha argued that such exclusion of Turkey in such a regional security complex ignores the role of states in constructing a threat perception in the region. While Barrinha’s study identifies that state agency is important in constructing and deconstructing security perspectives, he does not examine the role Turkey and Greece play as a kin-state in the issue of Cyprus and how it affects regional security [7].
Rumelili et al. [9] pointed out that the EU played a socializer’s role between Turkey and Greece to mitigate conflict in the Aegean Sea and Mediterranean region as an attempt to de-securitize the territorial conflict. Nevertheless, it misses the opportunity to improve the socialization process between the two states in the issue of the Cyprus conflict; therefore, recognizing the kin-states in its discussion. However, since the 2000s has transformed into the role of regionalizing actor by aligning its discourse towards regional interdependency through cooperation in energy investments with states and business groups. This policy was constructed through the elite’s foreign policy normative principles that emphasize their cultural and historical heritage with neighbors [10]. Nevertheless, the current Turkish foreign policy on the issue of Cyprus and its spillover to the Mediterranean energy security reflect tensions in the region and securitize the hydrocarbon issue. This form of analysis, while identifying the link between Cyprus and regional stability, does not explore the role of the kin-states in the energy policy [11].
Iseri’s (2019) [12] study exploring the perspective of securitization theory towards the Mediterranean energy issue recommends that the energy sector should be added to other security sectors because of its uniqueness and the immediate challenges and opportunities that come with the securitization of the energy sector. The shift in Turkey’s policy on the issue of Cyprus with emphasis on energy discoveries, transportation, and security, positions the energy discourse as another sector of securitization that inter-relates with other sectors. This analysis does not explain the role Turkey is playing as it shifts its policy over the years on the Cyprus issue. It focuses on securitization leaving out the socialization between Cyprus and its two kin-states.
Location theory is a geo-economic approach
This approach is connected to the modern geopolitical theory that explores countries' geographical locations [13]. It emerged from an approach that tries to evaluate the international political discourse to understand the political and economic significance of countries' geographic locations. Hence, it argues that the interaction between states and multinational corporations takes place based on national interest, military power, and energy resources as found within a location. Location theory specifically emphasizes the importance of locational determinants that impacts the behavior of actors in a resource area. Hydrocarbon is a determinant that is enmeshed within the geopolitics around the location where it can be found. The limited hydrocarbon energy resources that are explorable and increasing scarcity increase international competition and conflict. The location theory tries to achieve, through commercialization, a win-win scenario for all energy actors. Market rationality is prioritized above all forms of passion and pride that do support the development of a regional energy model. The creation of a regional energy model for the Eastern Mediterranean hydrocarbons through rational choice that promotes the marketplace in energy politics will ensure cooperation among countries. Economic pragmatism, diplomacy, shared regional resources or neutral zone are mechanisms employed to solve the increasing competition among states [14].
The environmental problem and the East-Med gas project
Most of the seas in the world suffer from environmental issues. However, the nature of the conflict over the Mediterranean, particularly in its eastern region, has turned it into a battlefield that many do not care about the extent of the devastation it suffers. And since calamities do not come alone, its waters are among the most affected by global climate change, as their temperature is rising at an accelerating rate, currently reaching 0.12 degrees Celsius per year. The shores of the Mediterranean are also considered one of the regions most affected by the rising sea levels, as most of the industrial and tourism activities in the basin countries are concentrated in low coastal lands [15].
While the cause of pollution is varied in the Mediterranean Sea, an important one is “oil pollution” since about 30% of the world’s ship traffic operates through the Mediterranean Sea. This pollution is not a new phenomenon in the Mediterranean basin, as UNEP has warned in its reports for decades. For example, in the 1990s, the economic activities related to oil were divided into a northern region that consumes “Europe,” which accounts for about 65% of the total oil pollution, and a southern region that produces oil makes 35% of the oil pollution because of the tanker traffic. According to the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), ships have dumped more than one million tons of crude oil into the Mediterranean [16].
The EU and Germany have set themselves ambitious climate and energy policy goals. Given the need to reduce emissions in all sectors of the economy, they now have a different view of the energy situation in the Eastern Mediterranean than they did a few years ago.
Therefore, offshore natural gas imports from the Eastern Mediterranean lose relevance in favor of the region’s prospects for participating in the EU’s emerging green energy economy. Given Europe’s rising demand for renewable electricity, intercontinental power interconnections between European, African and Middle Eastern power grids could become the new normal via the Eastern Mediterranean. It also has regional potential to play a role in the EU hydrogen strategy [17].
Nevertheless, on January 11, 2022, an informal letter sent by the US Secretary Department to the energy departments in Greece, Cyprus and Israel’s foreign minister confirmed that the United States withdrew support for the East-Med gas pipeline. The project has created regional tensions and the excess gas reserves in the region should be used through joint electricity cables to generate and run the regional electricity project, and instead make the region’s problems more committed to serving environmental issues [18].
Although there is ambiguity about the natural gas production in the Eastern Mediterranean and its extended pipeline, is this issue entirely economic and political? Or is it related to geopolitical changes and regional conflicts? Or may it get a chance as a new opportunity to protect the environment and create a regional environmental network?
According to the “European Green Deal,” Europe targets to achieve zero environmental neutrality by 2050. By this roadmap, Europe will no longer rely on oil and natural gas, neither export nor import. The EU’s hegemony has increased in the Mediterranean region after the end of the Cold War. Europe and the countries on the Mediterranean Sea signed the “Barcelona Declaration” agreement in 1999 to promote peace, security, and prosperity and increase cooperation and coherence in the region. Afterward, they formulated another common agreement named the “Euro-Mediterranean Partnership,” which was changed to the pact “Union for the Mediterranean” in 2008. By this means, the EU intervened in the countries in the Mediterranean region to maintain security and prosperity and promote environmental plans [15]. However, we see political conflict and changing regional reality over energy instead of highlighting climate change as a dangerous phenomenon.
Many believe that the natural gas production in Cyprus and Israel, followed by the reserves in Egypt and Lebanon, will be an energy revolution. But a decade passed with little energy impact. The US State Department’s adviser on global energy security Amos Hochstein is one of the sceptics about the East-Med gas pipeline, calling the project a “false dream”, as former Israeli Energy Minister Yuval Steinitz enthusiastically advocated. According to Simon Henderson, a senior fellow at Washington Institute for Near East Policy, the project has been described for ten years, but there has never been such a large amount of gas to fill the pipeline. Henderson has also indicated that Europe needs 540 billion cubic meters of oil annually, while Israel exports only 10 billion cubic meters from the Leviathan field and the rest is used for domestic consumption. According to BP Statistical Review World Energy, Israel’s reserves at the end of 2020 were 600 billion cubic meters or 0.3 per cent of the world’s gas reserves [19]. In addition to this, investors are following Israeli Energy Minister Karin Elharrar’s statement at the end of 2022 that they confirmed her office will focus on renewable energy, especially wind and solar [20].
Therefore, the US administration has called for the suspending and withdrawal of the East-Med gas project and recommended that it should be conducted following European environmental policies. The establishment of a large joint power line to transport and use excess gas produced off the coast of Cyprus, Israel and Egypt with Greece; thus, three neighboring countries on the continent are different from the environment. But this is not so easy, since the project covers a large area of more than 1,300 miles, and it will also cause Turkey’s objection. Legally, these waters have been designated by the UN as an exclusive economic zone (EEZ), which mostly passes through Turkey’s borders [19].
In conclusion, there are two strong arguments as to how to deal with the natural gas projects in the Eastern Mediterranean. The first is that after the US Secretary Department’s decision in early 2022, the gas in the Eastern Mediterranean will be only for the Mediterranean. It won’t be from Europe. Instead of political tensions and military maneuvers, the project should lead to the giving of a common electricity grid, greater awareness of climate change and environmental protection in this sensitive region of our planet.
The second argument is that natural gas and oil have connected with the global energy security and economic crisis; especially after the outbreak of war between Russia and Ukraine. In addition, the western powers needed Turkey to help them in confronting Russia and the East-Med project has caused bother for Turkey for a decade. That’s why the US and EU wanted to make a rapprochement with Turkey before sparking the war in Ukraine.
Materialistic theory
Further perspectives on the analysis of the Mediterranean energy issue flow from international relations theories. Realists and liberals are positioned in the materialistic dimension of theory as they propose the institutionalization of cooperation among states overall. Therefore, the current events of alliance or forum formation in the Mediterranean energy issue can be discussed with materialistic views [21]. The Eastern Mediterranean forum is explained as the tool for dialogue on how the gas in the region will benefit its members of it. This included the monetization of natural resources through investing in the construction of pipelines that links the region to Europe. The materialist approach as analyzed recognizes the weakness of the forum highlighting the exclusion of Turkey and Lebanon and only focusing on gas cooperation. Hence, it is stated that materialistic theory recognizes the inclusion of all members in the institution that would offer sustained cooperation among states and in more than one area. The outcome is a multilevel and multi-issue approach. For instance, materialistic scholars question the outcome of a unilateral approach from any actors in the region such as military exercises on the seas, and increased investment towards exploration within the exclusive economic zones [22]. The absence of shared values and objective among the actors have created an exclusive path to achieving their materialist goal in the region evidenced by the inclusion or exclusion of actors. The protracted conflicts such as the Cyprus conflict and how Greece and Turkey have influenced the outcome as well as the Palestinian issues and how Israel has affected the current outcome shows limited regional cooperation. Other issues include the internal instability challenges facing Libya and Syria which limits their participation in the region and highlights the low degree of stakeholders in the region’s gas exploration. The impact of the kin-states’ roles in Cyprus on the low degree of cooperation has not been examined in the materialistic theory despite Turkey and Greece’s claims and rights to exploration.
Resource regionalism between states
Apart from the materialistic theory, resource regionalism also focuses on the monetization of the resources but on a denser pattern of interdependence among the producers, consumers, and the routes of the pipelines. The economic incentives that are created for the state who participates in the supply chain of gas are a result of effective collaboration to develop the infrastructure [23]. A significant assumption of resource regionalism posits that peace will take place in countries where the energy infrastructure such as pipelines has been mounted. One significant mechanism identified in the theory is the complexity and costly nature of the energy infrastructure, which will require cooperation in policy coordination among multiple actors for mutual gain and development. This theory envisages that this pushes states towards dispute resolution. Furthermore, the continuous existence of the pipelines signals the continuity of cooperation among states as they will continue to generate incentives that keep states at peace. Another assumption, as highlighted to be the basis of resource regionalism, is the high-level communication and channels resulting from international political and business interests in the region. Lastly, it is assumed that cooperation that begins within the issue areas such as natural resources mostly spreads to other areas, which incorporate bilateral and multilateral efforts to protect the energy infrastructure to sustain incentives [24].
The resource regionalism approach identifies three empirical cases to justify itself. Firstly, the creation of the Economic Coal and Steel Community in 1951 and the European Atomic Energy Community in 1957 mitigated the hostility between Germany and France which became the foundation of European regional stability. Secondly, the gas delivery contract between the Federal Republic of Germany and the Soviet Union in the 1970 and 80s displayed the resolution of enmity between the two adversaries as they signed the 20 years agreement. Both the FRG and the Soviet Union initiated their partnership through gas, and it expanded into the post-Berlin war and post-Soviet period. The last example is the US foreign policy toward the construction of an oil pipeline between Azerbaijan and Armenia was an attempt to resolve the conflict between the two nations into cooperation [25].
The case of Cyprus is sui generis about resolving conflict through the gas pipelines. Unlike many other conflicts, the Cyprus conflict is primarily an internal conflict rather than an interstate conflict as observed in the three examples of resource regionalism. The internal division in Cyprus is a result of civil war; therefore, the island does not have a unified foreign policy on the energy issue or the capacity to fully engage in a unified negotiation with other countries regarding the exploration of hydrocarbon gas but rather negotiates with itself to resolve the conflict and partitioning of the island before proceeding to the energy issue. Conflict over the sharing of political and economic resources within a country hinders a unified front that could allow for resource regionalism. (See Libya and Syria’s absence in EMGF as additional examples.) Therefore, internal conflict resolution becomes a pre-requisite for resource regionalism in the Mediterranean [26].
The partitioning of Cyprus created the separation between the Greek and Turkish Cypriot communities that have independent governments. Furthermore, the conflict exists between a de-jure country and a de-facto state, which signals that a government (Republic of Cyprus) is recognized as the representative of the whole island while the other government (Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus) is unrecognized yet has an established political structure with features of an independent country [27].
Resource regionalism in the case of Cyprus is only possible within the context of kin-states. Firstly, the two sides of the island have historically strong ties with their kin-states that cannot be detached. For example, Northern Cyprus has increased closeness to Ankara in policies toward conflict resolution. The absorption of TRNC into Turkey rather than an unrecognized independent country has been on the agenda with the transportation issue of making it a domestic airport for economic benefits. The Greek political influence on the Republic of Cyprus in its ascension to the European Union and local elections in addition to that ministerial position occupied by pro-Greece ideologies have been consistent [28]. Secondly, the two kin-states are regional actors seeking cooperation and resource interest in the Mediterranean. Thirdly, the kin-states can play roles that reduce the impact of conflict within the island to promote resource regionalism. Fourthly, the kin-state approach contributes to resource regionalism in understanding and proffering possible paths to regional stability in the Mediterranean.
Greece and Turkey, like the historical examples of resource regionalism [24], are two independent kin-states which have historical enmity and have over the years sought to resolve conflicting territorial issues. Both states compete for regional relevance in the Mediterranean. It is upon this premise that this study proceeds with the concept of kin-states to identify the role of Greece and Turkey as kin-states to the Republic of Cyprus and Northern Cyprus respectively within the hydrocarbon energy politics
The concept of kin-states in the hydrocarbon dialogue
The direct or indirect involvement in the affairs of a co-ethnic group beyond the borders of a state should for ethnic, religious, political, or economic ties introduces the concept of kin-state. Kocadal (2016) [4] stated that kin-states exist when a dominant ethnic group in a state identifies with the same ethnic group existing in another state. Unlike a diaspora population, this co-ethnic community has citizenship and rights and has significantly long historical connections with the hosting state where they exist.
Kocadal (2016) [4] expressed his research in terms of the mediating role of kin-states in international conflict through his typology. He identified that kin-states could play four different roles: promoter, quasi-mediator, powerbroker, and enforcer. Analyzing the role of kin-states as a promoter, he presented loose ties towards the co-ethnic community by playing a role that supports the needs of the ethnic community rather than taking the lead in seeking the demands of the community. The quasi-mediators shift towards closer relations with the co-ethnic community. The enforcer’s role focuses on pushing the kin-state to provide support during a state of war to their ethnic communities. The promoter, quasi-mediator, and enforcer roles are currently not being played by the kin states as they focus on powerbroking. This study builds and explores the powerbroking role played by kin-states in the hydrocarbon dialogue using Kocadal’s conceptualization of roles.
The powerbroking as a mediation role
The powerbroking role of kin-states occurs as an extensive control of the process of mediation by the kin-state through mechanisms of manipulation to push ethnic communities towards changing the dynamics of the conflict. These mechanisms involve re-orienting the local actors about their ties to the kin-state, providing political and financial support to the locals, and ensuring that locals who support kin-state objectives can achieve political dominance in the ethnic community. Overall, the position of the local community is shaped so that its involvement in both formal and informal negotiation aligns with the kin-state. This role is assumed by the kin-state when there is a high level of dependency of the co-ethnic group on the kin-state and has limited capacity to oppose the kin-state. As powerbrokers, unilateral action is possible by the kin-state based on the dependency of the smaller community. This, therefore, becomes an intrusive form of intervention in the conflict. This study argues that the discovery of natural resources in the conflict region pushes kin-states to play the power brokering role [29].
Shifting roles of Greece and Turkey
The role of kin-states in the hydrocarbon issues is observable in the case of Cyprus. Ethnic and economic resources are a justification of kin-states in playing a role in the ethnic community. Greece and Turkey are involved in helping their ethnic communities in Cyprus to seek access to land and power. The grip of both kin-states on the Greek and Turkish Cypriot communities has become stronger with the discovery of hydrocarbon in Cyprus [11].
Before the independence of Cyprus, Greece played a significant role in promoting the interest of its Greek community in Cyprus. This form of interaction with the Greek Cypriot community began gradually with a limited form of engagement (such as diplomatic, economic and financial support, etc.) [30]. This includes seeking Cyprus’s interests at the international level through negotiating for independence and post-independent arrangements with the other ethnic community, Turkish Cypriots in Cyprus. The internationalization of the Cyprus issue [31] has been lobbied consistently by Greece at the international level to push for different statuses such as independence, and recognition of the Republic of Cyprus as the representative government of the island while sanctioning the Turkish Cypriot government area that proclaimed the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus [32]. Further action includes getting the Greek Cypriots to say no to the Annan Plan in 2004 and promoting the ascension of Cyprus into the European Union. At this stage, the ties with Cyprus have continuously become stronger and therefore shift from promoter to powerbroker, a move that is currently common in Turkey and the TRNC government [33]. The powerbroking role of Greece has involved lobbying internationally and unilaterally seeking actions and sanctions against the TRNC. The question is whether without Greece’s lobby in favor of Cyprus there would be this current level of sanction against the TRNC. Before 1983, the Turkish Cypriot community had the opportunity to participate in the international areas of postal, aviation, and sports; however, the Greek Cypriot lobby supported by their strong ties with Greece has been able to ensure international sanction on Northern Cyprus [34].
On the other side, Turkey’s interaction with the Turkish Cypriot community had pushed TRNC towards negotiation and “getting to say yes” to the Annan Plan of 2004 in the referendum. However, there is an increasing reluctance to push the Turkish Cypriot community to agree to the bicommunality that it once supported [10]. This gap between the communities is widening as the kin-state rolls back in its comprise of the negotiation [29]. Subsequent negotiations have taken place under the last two TRNC governments; however, the current government moves farther away from negotiation. Mr. Dervis Eroglu (Former TRNC president 2010-2015) has favored peace, Turkey nevertheless emphasized the attachment to the “mother country”. Mr. Mustafa Akinci (Former TRNC president 2015-2020) has supported many dimensions of talks in Geneva and several informal meetings with Greek counterparts for the reunification of the island. He has continually promoted his stands for the bizonal bicommunal federation and a rotational presidency for the island. He has had more contact with the Greek Cypriot President and community than his predecessors and successor. The gap between both communities has however widened since the current President, Ersin Tatar won the 2020 election. President Tatar has stronger ties with the “mother country” and has made a statement that creates an increasing gap between the two communities in Cyprus. Therefore, the role of Turkey as a kin-state hereby shifts from quasi-mediator towards a more powerbroking role rather than promoting just the interest of the ethnic community. The hydrocarbon and gas exploration issue would encourage the powerbroking role of Turkey and less likely to move toward quasi-mediator if it is kept being ignored in the EMGF[36] .
Powerbroking in hydrocarbon issues hinders a common agenda
Powerbroking is important since it is a mediation style for achieving peace. However, when the context changes and the powerbroking negotiation style is not discontinued by the kin-state, it hinders achieving a common agenda in an issue area. While both Turkey and Greece had represented the Turkish and Greek Cypriot communities in the pre-independence era, power brokering at the stage supported the independence of Cyprus [34]. However, the post-independence powerbroking role has become a spoiler, especially in the exploration of hydrocarbon in the island’s offshore oil fields.
Power brokering role heightened tension between kin-states
As Europe is experiencing a significant rise in the price of oil, alternative sources of oil and gas supply for Greece are most crucial and it has been making efforts by pushing Cyprus (RoC) into an alliance with Israel for the creation of pipelines for the exploration of gas [34]. Turkey’s relationship is a mix of cooperation and competition with suppliers like Iran and Iraq where the Kurdish minority have gained a presence, yet the supply of oil and gas is important to Turkey. To avoid blockage of supply, an alternative oil and gas source is key for Turkey’s diversification of energy sources, therefore, taking lead in brokering the direction of TRNC oil and gas exploration. Turkey has used its drone and naval power presence, upgrading the military facility on the northern part of the island, and political empowerment of Turkish Cypriots advocating for a two-state solution as opposed to the bicommunal federation as a means of maintaining the status quo for its drilling objectives. The uncoordinated drilling efforts from both sides pushing their kin-state into alliance or actions for exploration have heightened tension in the region as they challenge each other’s rights to drilling [35].
Power brokering is exercising intrusive power towards ethnic communities abroad
There has been a limited directional move on the side of Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot communities toward explorations. Analyzing the statement of President Nicos Anastasiades, his emphasis has been on opposing Turkey’s drilling action of dispatching its ship in the offshore region of Northern Cyprus where the RoC has claimed to be its Exclusive Economic Zone. There is less statement on the pipelines and alliance from President Nicos Anastasiades as Greece has been playing the role of a powerbroker in leading its kin-state in alliance with Israel and Egypt amongst others. Barely has the Turkish Cypriot community also carved a direction for its exploration of gas independently of its “mother country”. Rather the Turkish government has stated that the primary objective of its hydrocarbon exploration around Cyprus is to safeguard the right of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. Both Turkey and Greece have a significant influence on the kin communities in Cyprus. This limits the communities themselves from charting a course for the future of the country and the hydrocarbon resource [36].
With the global energy price rise, all states are searching for the next closest alliance to seek oil supply. Since there is a heavy dependency of the kin communities on their kin-states, the kin-state justifies its action of pursuing a national interest in gaining access to energy. Greece and the EU draw closer to paying much attention to the oil and gas and seeking means to push the supply to the mainland. Greece’s economic crisis has positioned it as a country that regularly seeks a bailout from the European Central Bank. Access to control energy supply through Cyprus would change the trajectory of its relations as one of the worse economies within the EU [37]. The Turkish Cypriot community is more highly dependent on Turkey than the Greek Cypriot community. It has received, apart from direct financial support, several supplies ranging from water to the supply of electricity from Turkey. Therefore, the mother-child relationship persists as the kin-state continues to justify its presence and role in the management of the offshore resources of the kin communities. The outcome is that the ownership of the process of accessing the resources might be up to the kin-states’, and this is more so for the Turkish Cypriot community than their counterparts. Hence, the power-brokering role makes the local communities lack ownership of the outcome of negotiations on hydrocarbon energy because of the pursuance of national interests by the kin-state. Further justification posits that the national interest of the kin community and kin-state barely differs, and when it does, the kin-state interests take precedence [38].
Multilateralism as a path to Mediterranean hydrocarbon coordination
Multilateralism in international relations has a long history that can be traced to the League of Nations and the United Nations; however, beyond trade and security, the energy sector is moving towards more multilateral cooperation and therefore being recommendable for the Mediterranean and hydrocarbon issue [39]. In this context, multilateralism does not refer to multilateral institutions or international organizations but rather a method of cooperation upon which the behavior of the states hinges upon. Cooperation through an ordering principle that is applied to all members is not necessarily the creation of an institution, but the coordination that holds substantive qualitative principles that are adaptive and reproductive. The adaptive and reproductive nature simply refers to meeting the immediate need for the peaceful development of the energy sector in the Mediterranean. The achievement of this will lead to the expression of the reproductive character of multilateralism in other areas. For multilateralism to be effective in the region, it must accept the legitimacy of all members within the energy issue, creating an indivisibility of interest, reciprocity within the energy sector, and dispute settlement in the production, pricing, and distribution of gas [40].
Acceptance of the legitimacy of all members
The inclusion of parties directly connected to the hydrocarbon issue is key to achieving a multilateral that will enhance resource regionalism. Several coordinates have not been accepted in the attempts at collective coordination such as Turkey, Lebanon, Libya, and Syria. The argument has been the unstable nature of the political atmosphere in Libya and Syria; however, Turkey and Lebanon, which have a stable capacity to independently begin exploration, should not be excluded. Subsequently in the post-crisis era of Libya and Syria, they must also be added to the multilateral arrangement that will promote the region’s effective management of the resources. The goal is to avoid unilateral or bilateral approaches which will heighten tension in the exploration of gas in the region. The benefits of multilateralism in trade (within the principle of the most favored nation, as in the case of the World Trade Organization) and security (within the principle of collective defense) mandates that multilateralism in the energy trade and energy security in the Mediterranean[41].
The role of clean energy in improving the energy security of Cyprus
Energy security is a significant metric for ascertaining development orientation in different countries and regions. There is a limitation of energy resources, while energy demand is increasing, and there is continuous development in countries. This has created substantial energy needs, suggesting that energy security is a significant priority in each country's development. The fundamentals issue of energy security According to the EU energy security strategy, a projection of the Union's net import dependency for 20 years was made. It was stated that the Union's net import would increase from about 62% of demand recorded in 2010 to 65% in 2020. The dependency projection for 2030 was set at 72-73% [42]. However, there has been an unfortunate collapse of the EU gas supply. The data from the BP statistical Review of World Energy showed that the projected net gas imports for 2030 after the subtraction of domestic production, were reached in 2016. Although Cyprus as an island appears to be surrounded by gas reserves, it does not use any gas in its energy mix, despite efforts to import gas in LNG form to generate electricity that has been ongoing since 2007 [43]. This has created a huge gap in the demand and supply of energy in both sides of the island. According to the vulnerability index study carried out by [44], which considered indicators like energy intensity, energy import dependency, the ratio of energy-related carbon emissions to TPES, electricity supply vulnerability and non-diversity in transport fuels, to assess the energy security of a country, their study showed that the greatest level of vulnerability amongst European nations was recorded in RoC, with a score of 0.75. Another study by [45] investigated the energy security of the European nations, by taking into consideration of eight basic indicators (energy intensity, carbon intensity, import dependency on oil, gas and coal, and primary energy production). Their result showed that the greatest energy security risk was measured for Estonia, Slovenia, and RoC. Studies have reported that Cyprus is highly energy dependent, and shows a very low value of the energy security index (below minus 25) [46], with a high possibility of a continuous decline in the energy security trend. A study by [47] also investigated the energy security index of 28 European states using environmental and social aspects of the countries. Their study conclusively found that the highest level of energy security was recorded in Estonia, while the lowest was in RoC and Malta. With the RoC being the most developed part of the island, it also represents the challenges faced in the Northern Cyprus.
Since the creation of the European Union, the energy industry has experienced a constant modernization process. While guaranteeing supply diversification and energy security, a complete shift to sustainable, clean energy is being achieved [48]. The 1997 release of the European Commission's White Paper on Renewable Energy Sources (RES) marked a significant shift in this process. Since then, RES development and promotion have been acknowledged as a game-changing and essential component of EU climate and energy security. The energy mix diversification index, which is an indicator of energy security, will show that Cyprus could become an energy-secure country if the renewable potential in the Island is harvested towards energy production using a multilateral approach led by kin-states. This will reduce energy dependence and imports. In the context of energy mix diversification, a study by [49] showed that countries like the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary are highly dependent on the main supplier of natural gas (Russia). In the environmental dimension, the low share of renewable energy in the energy mix in Poland resulted in the country having a low sustainable energy security index.
Conclusion
The phenomenon of hydrocarbon rivalry in the East Mediterranean does not seem like an opportunity to protect the environment. But the countries of the Mediterranean basin -particularly Turkey, Cyprus, Greece, Israel and Egypt- view the natural gas issue as a sensitive opportunity related to national security, in order to improve their economic interests and gain more power for their countries. Out of all the theories that attempted to explain the hydrocarbon cooperation issue in the Mediterranean, none of them examined the role of kin-states. Therefore, this study contributes to the literature on the Mediterranean by examining the two states that have kin communities: Greece and Turkey. This selection of countries is because all the other countries in the Mediterranean have no conflictual relationship which hinders any form of cooperation. However, Greece and Turkey are each other’s strongest adversaries in the region because of the historical feud and the ongoing Cyprus issue. The discovery and exploration of hydrocarbon, oil, and gas have further increased the tension between the two countries. Building upon the roles the kin-states play towards their kin communities, this study shows that from being a promoter or quasi-mediator, Greece and Turkey have moved toward becoming a powerbroker as the conflict continues to linger until the talks about rights to hydrocarbon discovery and exploration. Their role as powerbrokers has hindered the progress of the peaceful development of hydrocarbon infrastructure in the region; since powerbroking heightened tensions between the two countries, exercised an intrusive power leading to unilateral actions, and pushed the interests of kin-states rather than the ethnic communities while overpowering them in interaction with other actors in the region. This study suggests that ideal multilateralism that involves the acceptance of the legitimacy of the actors that are directly involved in the region including both kin-states, establishing an indivisible energy interest by unifying national policies without creating an exclusive club would promote an energy infrastructural development that favors all parties despite the lingering Cyprus conflict. The argument is that energy like coal and steel in Europe would unite and integrate the region to serve as an alternative gas hub for Europe and the world at large. Policies of any cooperation arrangement in the Mediterranean should consider these qualitative substances of multilateralism beyond the inclusion of three or more states. Through multilateralism, the suggestion of a resource regionalism approach can be furthered in the region creating a stable and orderly Mediterranean.
PDF
About Authors
Bahrooz Jaafar, is from the Kurdistan Region of Iraq; he has Ph.D. in international relations from Cyprus International University- Nicosia. He is also the founder and head of the Mediterranean Institute for Regional Studies. His focus areas are; Energy geopolitics in the Eastern Mediterranean, energy security and ongoing conflicts in the Middle East, especially Iraq and Turkey, The role of multinational firms in increasing productivity, strengthening human resources and diversifying economic resources.
Mehmet Direkli, is currently Chair of the Department of International Relations and Political Science in Cyprus International University. His research areas are Cyprus Conflict and European Integration.
Click here to download the research - PDF
References
[1] E. Ogurlu, “Natural Gas in the Eastern Mediterranean: Means of Regional Integration or Disintegration?,” LAÜ Sos. Bilim. Derg., vol. VIII, no. I, pp. 35–49, 2017, [Online]. Available: https://dergipark.org.tr/download/article-file/317180
[2] E. Oğurlu, “Rising Tensions in the Eastern Mediterranean: Implications for Turkish Foreign Policy,” IAI Work. Pap., vol. 12, no. March, pp. 1–15, 2012, [Online]. Available: http://mercury.ethz.ch/serviceengine/Files/ISN/141637/ipublicationdocument_singledocument/a4f2eacb-86ee-49ba-b096-445f5dfbf1c4/en/iaiwp1204.pdf
[3] V. Mehmet, O., & Yorucu, “Location theory and the modern geopolitics of hydrocarbons in the eastern mediterranean.,” Mod. Geopolit. East. Mediterr. Hydrocarb. an Age Energy Transform., pp. 21–41, 2020.
[4] “A Conceptual Typology of Kin‐State Mediation - Kocadal - 2016 - Negotiation Journal - Wiley Online Library.”
[5] Z. Tziarras, “Israel-Cyprus-Greece: A Comfortable’ Quasi-Alliance.,” Mediterr. Polit., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 407–427, 2016.
[6] Y. A. Stivachtis, “A mediterranean region? Regional security complex theory revisited,” Vestn. Rudn. Int. Relations, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 416–428, 2021, doi: 10.22363/2313-0660-2021-21-3-416-428.
[7] A. Barrinha, “The Ambitious Insulator: Revisiting Turkey’s Position in Regional Security Complex Theory,” Mediterr. Polit., vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 165–182, 2014, doi: 10.1080/13629395.2013.799353.
[8] I. N. Grigoriadis, “HELLENIC STUDIES LA TURQUIE EN MUTATION,” vol. 20, no. 1. 2012.
[9] B. Rumelili, “Turkey: Identity, foreign policy, and socialization in a post-enlargement Europe,” J. Eur. Integr., vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 235–249, 2011, doi: 10.1080/07036337.2011.543528.
[10] A. Sözen, “A paradigm shift in turkish foreign policy: Transition and challenges,” Turkish Stud., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 103–123, 2010, doi: 10.1080/14683841003747062.
[11] Spiliopoulou, “Cyprus, Greece, Egypt agree to boost defence cooperation,” 2015. https://thearabweekly.com/cyprus-greece-egypt-agree-boost-defence-cooperation
[12] E. Işeri and A. Ç. Bartan, “Turkey’s Geostrategic Vision and Energy Concernsin the Eastern Mediterranean Security Architecture: A View from Ankara,” New Geopolit. East. Mediterr. Trilateral Partnerships Reg. Secur., pp. 111–124, 2019.
[13] O. Mehmet and V. Yorucu, “Location Theory and the Modern Geopolitics of Hydrocarbons in The Eastern Mediterranean,” Lecture Notes in Energy, vol. 78. pp. 21–41, 2020. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-43585-1_3.
[14] M. East, C. Changes, N. Challenges, and E. Relations, The Israeli European policy network: renewing the Middle East climate changes in security and energy and new challenges for the EU-Israel relations. 2008. [Online]. Available: http://www.iepn.org/images/stories/papers/renewingthemiddleeast.pdf
[15] M. A. Lange, “Climate Change in the Mediterranean: Environmental Impacts and Extreme Events,” Iemed, no. Climate Change in the Mediterranean. p. 16, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.iemed.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Climate-Change-in-the-Mediterranean_-Environmental-Impacts-and-Extreme-Events.pdf
[16] Al3loom, "Causes of pollution of the waters of the Mediterranean and its sources." {Online}. Translated from Arabic to the English language. June 19, 2021. Available:
https://al3loom.com/%D8%A3%D8%B3%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%A8-%D8%AA%D9%84%D9%88%D8%AB-%D9%85%D9%8A%D8%A7%D9%87-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A8%D8%AD%D8%B1-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A3%D8%A8%D9%8A%D8%B6-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%AA%D9%88%D8%B3%D8%B7-%D9%88/
[17] M. ; Rau, G. ; Seufert, and K. Westphal, “The Eastern Mediterranean as a focus for the EU’s energy transition: deep-rooted enmities and new opportunities for cooperation between Greece, Turkey and Cyprus,” no. 8, 2022, [Online]. Available: https://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/78294
[18] Reuters, “U.S. voices misgivings on East-Med gas pipeline - Greek officials,” 2022. https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/us-voices-misgivings-eastmed-gas-pipeline-greek officials-2022-01-11
[19] S. Henderson, “Reality Check for Israel’s Natural Gas Plans, The Washington Institute for Near East Policy.,” 2022. https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/reality-check-israels-natural-gas-plans
[20] I24News, “Energy Minister_ Israel Wants To Focus On Renewable Energy - I24NEWS.” 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.i24news.tv/en/news/israel/politics/1639586438-energy-minister-israel-wants-to-focus-on-renewable-energy
[21] D. Deudney, “Geo-Geopolitics-As-Theory-Ejir-Deudney.Pdf.” 2000.
[22] F. Yalvaç, “Approaches to Turkish Foreign Policy: A Critical Realist Analysis,” Turkish Stud., vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 117–138, 2014, doi: 10.1080/14683849.2014.892238.
[23] R. Mills and F. Alhashemi, “Resource regionalism in theMiddle East and North Africa:Rich lands, neglected people.” pp. 1–42, 2018. [Online]. Available: www.brookings.edu/doha
[24] S. Tagliapietra, “Energy Relations in the Euro-Mediterranean,” Energy Relations in the Euro-Mediterranean, 2017, doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-35116-2.
[25] J. Kotilainen, “Reproducing the Resource Periphery: Resource Regionalism in the European Union.” pp. 109–123, 2021. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-84606-0_6.
[26] K. Tastan and T. Kutschka, “The Implications of Eastern Mediterranean Gas for Turkey,” no. 7, 2019, [Online]. Available: http://www.jstor.com/stable/resrep21243
[27] N. Caspersen, “Recognition, Status Quo or Reintegration: Engagement with de facto States,” Ethnopolitics, vol. 17, no. 4. pp. 373–389, 2018. doi: 10.1080/17449057.2018.1495360.
[28] J. Ker‐lindsay, “The Policies of Greece and Cyprus towards Turkey’s EU Accession,” Turkish Stud., vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 71–83, 2007, doi: 10.1080/14683840601138153.
[29] O. Kocadal, “Peacemaking for Power-sharing: The Role of Kin-states,” no. October, 2012.
[30] J. S. F. Parker, “The Cyprus Revolt: An Account of the Struggle for Union with Greece,” International Affairs, vol. 55, no. 2. pp. 314–314, 1979. doi: 10.2307/2616363.
[31] A. Bayefsky, “The UN and the Jews,” Commentary, vol. 117, no. 2, pp. 42–46, 2004.
[32] E. Akçali, “Getting Real on Fluctuating National Identities: Insights from Northern Cyprus,” Antipode, vol. 43, no. 5, pp. 1725–1747, 2011, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8330.2010.00787.x.
[33] A. Sözen and K. Özersay, “The Annan Plan: State succession or continuity,” Middle East. Stud., vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 125–141, 2007, doi: 10.1080/00263200601079773.
[34] T. Bahcheli, “Searching for a Cyprus settlement: Considering options for creating a federation, a confederation, or two independent states,” Publius, vol. 30, no. 1. pp. 203–215, 2000. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.pubjof.a030061.
[35] B. ŞAHİNGÖZ and A. TÜTÜTNCÜ, “Arms Race Between Turkey and Greece: Time-Varying Causality Analysis,” Sosyoekonomi, no. June, pp. 25–36, 2020, doi: 10.17233/sosyoekonomi.2020.03.02.
[36] Michael, “Anastasiades says may opposes Turkey’s plans in Cyprus’ EEZ.,” Cyprus Mail., 2019. https://cyprus-mail.com/2019/06/04/anastasiades-says-may-opposes-turkeys-plans-in-cyprus-eez
[37] A. Katsanidou and Z. Lefkofridi, “A Decade of Crisis in the European Union: Lessons from Greece*,” J. Common Mark. Stud., vol. 58, no. S1, pp. 160–172, 2020, doi: 10.1111/jcms.13070.
[38] Reporter, “Turkey to dispatch second drillship this month. Cyprus Mail.,” 2019. https://cyprus-mail.com/2019/06/03/turkey-to-dispatch-second-drillship-this-month/ Accessed 20 March 2022
[39] T. Meyer, J. L. De Sales Marques, and M. Telò, “Towards a new multilateralism: Cultural divergence and political convergence?,” Towards a New Multilateralism: Cultural Divergence and Political Convergence? pp. 1–224, 2021. doi: 10.4324/9781003118671.
[40] M. Telò, “The crisis of international trade and its cultural and political implications,” Towards a New Multilateralism. pp. 71–94, 2021. doi: 10.4324/9781003118671-7.
[41] A. Liaropoulos, K. Sapountzaki, and Z. Nivolianitou, “Adopting risk governance in the offshore oil industry and in diverse cultural and geopolitical context: North Sea vs Eastern Mediterranean countries,” Safety Science, vol. 120. pp. 471–483, 2019. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2019.07.032.
[42] T. Tsakiris, “The importance of east mediterranean gas for eu energy security: The role of Cyprus, Israel and Egypt,” Cyprus Rev., vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 25–50, 2018.
[43] BP, “BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2017,” 2018.
[44] E. Gnansounou, “Assessing the energy vulnerability: Case of industrialised countries,” Energy Policy, vol. 36, no. 10, pp. 3734–3744, 2008, doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2008.07.004.
[45] A. C. Badea, C. M. Rocco S., S. Tarantola, and R. Bolado, “Composite indicators for security of energy supply using ordered weighted averaging,” Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf., vol. 96, no. 6, pp. 651–662, 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2010.12.025.
[46] M. Radovanović, S. Filipović, and D. Pavlović, “Energy security measurement – A sustainable approach,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 68, pp. 1020–1032, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2016.02.010.
[47] A. Angelis-Dimakis, G. Arampatzis, and D. Assimacopoulos, “Monitoring the sustainability of the Greek energy system,” Energy Sustain. Dev., vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 51–56, 2012, doi: 10.1016/j.esd.2011.10.003.
[48] European Commission, “Energy 2020,” Eur. Comm., p. 28, 2010, doi: 10.2833/78930.
[49] J. Brodny and M. Tutak, “The comparative assessment of sustainable energy security in the Visegrad countries. A 10-year perspective,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 317, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128427.