A Legal and Geoeconomic Comparison of the Turkish Mavi Vatan Doctrine versus Israels Maritime Doctrine

This thesis examines the evolving maritime and energy order in the Eastern Mediterranean, focusing on the tension between states party to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and regional actors that are non-parties, notably Türkiye and Israel. It asks how maritime delimitation, energy cooperation, and emergent regional institutions such as the Eastern Mediterranean Gas Forum (EMGF) interact to produce de facto legal arrangements that may diverge from, but still invoke, principles of equity and relevant circumstances. Using a doctrinal-analytical method, supported by comparative case analysis of Greece-Egypt, Israel-Cyprus, and Türkiye-TRNC practices, the study evaluates the extent to which coastal states rely on customary international law, ICJ/ITLOS jurisprudence, and bilateral agreements to advance maximal maritime claims or to contain rival claims.