The resumption of talks between Greece and Libya on the delimitation of maritime zones and the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) constitutes a positive development of particular significance for bilateral relations and stability in the Eastern Mediterranean.
This initiative is not a new beginning. Rather, it forms part of a process that had already commenced in 2009, under the initiative of then Greek Foreign Minister Dora Bakoyannis, when a framework for contacts between the two countries was established for the first time with the aim of delimiting maritime zones in accordance with International Law of the Sea.
This commitment was reaffirmed during my visit to Tripoli in 2012, in my capacity as Greece’s Minister of Foreign Affairs. During my meetings with the Libyan political leadership, a shared intention emerged to advance the process through dialogue, mutual respect, and adherence to international legality. At the time, there was a genuine belief that the two countries could reach a fair and mutually beneficial agreement.
The developments that followed, however, did not allow this effort to continue. Libya’s prolonged instability, internal conflicts, external interventions, and institutional fragmentation created an exceptionally challenging environment.
The diplomatic momentum was effectively lost in 2019. During that period, Greece chose to invest politically primarily in Field Marshal Khalifa Haftar, believing that his opposition to Turkey and to the emerging Turkey–Libya Maritime Memorandum created opportunities for strategic convergence with Athens. It is no coincidence that sections of the international press at the time criticized this approach, arguing that Haftar was viewed as a “friend of Greece because he was an enemy of Turkey.” Regardless of the intentions behind this policy, it limited Greece’s ability to maintain meaningful influence with the internationally recognized government of Fayez al-Sarraj in Tripoli, precisely at a moment when critical developments were shaping the future of Greek-Libyan relations.
The signing of the Turkey–Libya Maritime Memorandum a few months later further complicated the situation. The agreement disregarded fundamental principles of the International Law of the Sea and the legitimate rights of the Greek islands, creating faits accomplis that provoked strong reactions from Greece and a significant part of the international community.
Particular importance must also be attached to Libya’s current domestic political reality. The coexistence of competing centers of power—namely the internationally recognized Government of National Unity in Tripoli and the administration of Khalifa Haftar in Eastern Libya—continues to exert a decisive influence on developments. Greek diplomacy must proceed with caution, as preventing the possible full domestic ratification of the Turkey–Libya Maritime Memorandum remains an important strategic objective.
Greece is right to engage with the internationally recognized government of the country while at the same time maintaining open channels of communication with all actors that exercise real influence over developments. Foreign policy requires consistency in principles, but also realism in assessing the balance of power.
The resumption of talks does not guarantee immediate solutions, nor does it predetermine the final outcome. It does, however, create a necessary framework for communication and understanding that has been absent in recent years. That alone constitutes progress.
Greece has every interest in pursuing relations of cooperation and mutual respect with Libya. The two countries are connected by geography, history, and their shared interests in the Mediterranean. Adherence to international law, the avoidance of unilateral actions, and the strengthening of dialogue constitute the safest path toward achieving a fair and sustainable agreement.
At a time when crises are multiplying and instability is expanding, a return to diplomacy is not merely an option. It is a strategic necessity.