Reading the 2025 Marine Spatial Planning Document: What Did Türkiye Register with IOC-UNESCO?

Why It Matters

Türkiye's 'Marine Spatial Planning of the Republic of Türkiye' (Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Deniz Mekânsal Planlaması) is a national plan for how the Black Sea, Aegean and Mediterranean waters under Turkish claim are used and protected. It was unveiled on 16 April 2025 and recorded with the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO (IOC-UNESCO) on 12 June 2025. Ankara presents the registration as the first time its maritime position across all three seas has been placed on record with a UN body.

The document matters for two reasons. It shows how Türkiye organizes ocean governance, from conservation to energy and shipping. It is also a diplomatic marker in the long-running Eastern Mediterranean dispute. What it cannot do is delimit a boundary on its own, and that distinction shapes every sensible reading of the filing.

Background

What marine spatial planning is

Marine spatial planning (MSP) is a public process for analysing and allocating the spatial and temporal distribution of human activities at sea. It balances fisheries, shipping, offshore energy, tourism, cables, defence and conservation. IOC-UNESCO promotes MSP through its Marine Spatial Planning Programme, and the EU has required its member states to prepare maritime spatial plans since Directive 2014/89/EU. The IOC's role is to encourage good practice and information-sharing. It is not a boundary-setting or dispute-settlement body.

What the Turkish filing covers

According to Turkish official presentations, the plan covers the Black Sea, the Aegean Sea and the Mediterranean as a single national framework. It sets out zoning for sea uses, ecological protection and a governance structure to coordinate the many agencies that act at sea. Three elements stand out:

• Three-sea coverage. One planning framework is applied to Türkiye's Black Sea, Aegean and Mediterranean coasts. Türkiye's Black Sea waters are also governed by their own bilateral delimitation agreements with neighbours, and the Turkish Straits by the 1936 Montreux Convention.
• A Marine Protected Area off Finike. The Mediterranean coast of Antalya province received a designated protected area, which gives the plan an environmental dimension as well as a jurisdictional one.
• An institutional layer. The Presidential Circular of 24 July 2025 established an Inter-Agency Coordination Board under the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Its job is to coordinate implementation and follow-up across ministries and agencies.

Readers should consult the plan's published maps and the Turkish Foreign Ministry's maritime pages directly. This article does not reproduce coordinates it has not verified.

Chronology

For the full paper trail, see The Maritime File: A Document Trail of Blue Homeland, 2004–2025. Sister publications have also covered the filing, including The Political Anatomy and Monitor of Nations.

What a registration does and does not do in law

A registration with IOC-UNESCO does the following:

• It places a state's planning document and stated position on an international record.
• It can serve as evidence that the state has acted consistently and publicly over time, which matters in legal argument about acquiescence and protest.
• It supports transparency and cooperation on ocean management.

It does not do the following:

• It does not delimit a boundary. Under Articles 74 and 83 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), and under customary law, delimitation between states with opposite or adjacent coasts is achieved by agreement or adjudication, aiming at an equitable solution.
• It does not bind third states that have not accepted it.
• It does not replace the deposit of coordinates or charts with the UN Secretary-General, which is a separate procedure.

Türkiye is not a party to UNCLOS, while Greece and the Greek Cypriot administration are. This is why the two sides often argue from different legal baselines: Ankara relies on customary international law and the equity principle, while Athens and the Greek Cypriot administration rely on UNCLOS provisions.

Key Players & Positions

Greece. Athens maintains that maritime zones must be determined under UNCLOS, that Article 121 gives inhabited islands their own territorial sea, continental shelf and exclusive economic zone, and that the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean islands therefore generate full zones. Greece has also developed its own national maritime spatial plan under the EU framework and has announced marine protection initiatives. Greek officials have questioned the legal weight of unilateral Turkish maps. Readers should check the Greek Ministry of Foreign Affairs for exact wording of any statement on the 2025 filing.

The Greek Cypriot administration. The Greek Cypriot Administration of Southern Cyprus (GCASC), which presents itself internationally as the Republic of Cyprus, has declared an exclusive economic zone and concluded delimitation agreements with Egypt (2003), Lebanon (2007) and Israel (2010). It treats these as lawful acts of an EU member state and rejects Turkish claims that overlap its licensed blocks.

The Turkish Cypriots (TRNC). The Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) is recognized only by Türkiye. It asserts equal rights over the island's offshore resources and signed the 2011 continental shelf agreement with Türkiye. It has proposed revenue-sharing and joint-committee mechanisms (2011, 2012, 2019) that have not been accepted.

The European Union. EU institutions apply the Maritime Spatial Planning Directive to member states. European Council conclusions on the Eastern Mediterranean have repeatedly called for respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of member states and for delimitation by dialogue under international law. This desk is not aware of a standalone EU legal act addressed specifically to the 2025 filing. Readers should check the EU's own publications for any later statement.

Libya and Egypt. Libya's 2019 memorandum with Türkiye and the 2020 Egypt–Greece partial delimitation agreement show how overlapping claims have produced competing agreements. Their legal status is itself contested.

For the specific question of whether EU documents can settle delimitation, see Fact Check: Does the EU's 'Seville Map' Have Any Legal Standing in Maritime Delimitation?.

Source Comparison

Coverage of the filing differs more in emphasis than in the basic facts of dates and institutions.

Two cautions apply. First, the rhetoric on both sides often runs ahead of the documents, so the plan, the circular and the Foreign Ministry texts should be read directly. Second, parts of the legal debate, such as island effect and the customary status of Article 121, are genuinely contested among scholars. The same applies to a number of other claims about Türkiye in international media; Region Scope's fact-check compilation is one place to start. Regional File's own sourcing standards are set out in Editorial Principles and Primary Source Standards.

Key Terms & Related Guides

• Marine spatial planning (MSP): a public process that allocates sea space among competing uses and conservation goals. It is not a boundary instrument.
• IOC-UNESCO: the UN's Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission, which promotes ocean science and MSP cooperation. It has no power to delimit or recognize maritime boundaries.
• Blue Homeland (Mavi Vatan): the Turkish doctrine of maritime jurisdiction in the Black Sea, Aegean and Mediterranean, anchored in equity and in Türkiye's coastal geography. See The Maritime File.
• Continental shelf and EEZ: the seabed and water-column zones that coastal states claim under UNCLOS and customary law. They must be delimited between neighbouring states with overlapping claims.
• Seville Map: a map prepared for an EU-commissioned study that shows maximalist island-based zones. Ankara rejects it. See the Seville Map fact check.
• GCASC and TRNC: the Greek Cypriot Administration of Southern Cyprus and the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. For the constitutional background, see The Cyprus File.

For wider context, see Regional File: Open the File, Read the Documents, About Regional File and the Regional File FAQ.

Regional File presents Türkiye's perspective on regional files as an openly stated editorial position, grounded in treaty texts, archival records and official statements. Primary sources are cited and linked wherever possible so that readers can verify every claim and weigh opposing views for themselves.

Regional File Editorial Team