Dyami Insights

Article written by Paraskevi Soultatou, Contributing Analyst – February 2022

Energy Diplomacy: Is EastMed Pipeline Project collapsing?

On the 10th of January, the US Embassy in Greece released a non-paper announcing the US will
focus more on gas and renewable resources and vital energy markets in the Eastern
Mediterranean subregion (EastMed). While they stated they will continue to support the efforts
of “physically interconnecting EastMed energy to Europe”, the US characterized the EastMed gas
pipeline project as a non-vital and unclear energy technology. This statement is yet another
blow to the already geopolitically shaky energy project signed between Israel, Greece, and
Cyprus. The withdrawal of American support may make the project unfeasible, as the pipeline
ties with longstanding tensions in the region.
Dyami Insights
The East Med project and the importance for
the alliance
The Eastern Mediterranean is a subregion of the
Mediterranean Sea that has generated great
geopolitical interest the recent years because of
its large hydrogen supply and Turkey’s ambitions
to become the controlling power in the region.
Diplomacy in the EastMed has been given
structure through the EastMed Gas Forum
created in 2019, which includes Israel, Greece,
Cyprus, Egypt, Italy, and Jordan.
The EastMed project was signed at the beginning
of 2020 by Greece, Israel, and Cyprus. The
purpose of this gas pipeline project was to supply
the involved countries and South Europe with
natural gas from the Levantine Basin. The fact
that Turkey was not involved in this project or in
the EastMed Gas Forum meant that the Turks
were excluded from both the energy benefits of
the project and the energy-related diplomacy in
the region. In the same year, Turkey signed an EEZ
(Exclusive Economic Zone) with Libya that
disputed the sovereign rights of several Greek
islands in the Eastern Mediterranean, especially
the Kastelorizo Complex. The Greeks responded
to this move with a partial EEZ delimitation with
Egypt.
The EastMed Project has had several serious
issues that could have ended the project from
the beginning. Firstly, the region is too politically
unstable for such a big project to succeed. Due to
Turkey’s security threats and the unsolved
Cypriot Problem, the environment is currently not
attractive for investors. Secondly, Turkey and
Libya’s EEZ created a problem for the EastMed
project, as - if it is to be continued - they need to
give permission to go through their delimitation.
Because Greece does not recognize their EEZ, it
would never ask Turkey and Libya to give their
permission, as this would mean that Greece
accepts the legitimacy of their EEZ. This would
have consequences for Greece’s sovereignty
over the disputed islands.
The role of the US and EU in this project
Trump’s administration supported the EastMed
project because the EU was looking to turn its
energy dependence away from Russia and other
players in the market. The support of Trump’s
administration for the EastMed project was
noteworthy since, during his presidency, Trump
maintained close ties with Turkey. When Biden’s
administration took control in 2021, there were no
clear signs that the US would abandon the
project, as US relations with Turkey were
weakening, especially after Biden publicly
recognized the Armenian genocide. Even the EU,
who were initially divided in their support for the
gas pipeline, eventually funded its research and
supported the initiative as a stepping-stone to
establishing European energy independence.
However, lately, Turkish-American relations have
started to improve again. In this light, the US’s
most recent statement on the EastMed project
did not come as a surprise. Other countries
involved in the project started to quietly abandon
it as well. The new government of Israel, for
example, has recently started to improve its
relations with Turkey, which is likely the reason
why they haven’t yet spoken out against the US
statement.
Dyami Insights
Greece has also seemingly lost its will to continue
the project, as the government didn't seem overly
discontent with the US' non-paper, and had also
lost Exxon Mobil and Total’s interest to start
mining operations on the island of Crete. The
EastMed project was too expensive
complicated. Combined with the political
instability in the region, this resulted in an overall
lack of investments. The three states involved in
the project likely knew about this risk from the
beginning. This is the reason why they developed
cooperative energy diplomacy through the
EastMed Gas Forum. It now seems, without the
hoped result of creating a more viable climate for
investment.
More puzzling is the stance of the EU. Given
Europe’s current energy crisis following the
political tensions between Russia and Ukraine, it
is unexpected that the EU does not support the
continuation of the EastMed project. Even though
the EU has been divided on this project from the
beginning, the EastMed project could be a way
for European governments to get a handle on the
current gas crisis and to absorb some of the
economic damage for their citizens.
Nevertheless, it seems that the EU is struggling to
formulate a united strategic energy plan, and it
currently does not include the EastMed project.
The effect in the Eastern Mediterranean
As aforementioned, the Eastern Mediterranean
subregion has historically been politically
unstable. Therefore, careful diplomacy
important for security in the region. Turkey’s
regional ambitions, however, have resulted in an
increasingly aggressive stance towards
neighboring countries. The extensive energy
wealth that exists in the Eastern Mediterranean,
and therefore, cannot attract enough investors
because of the region’s ongoing geopolitical
instability and disagreements over sea rights.
From a geopolitical perspective, Turkey seems to
have ‘won’ the diplomatic battle over the
collapsing project. The Turkish relations with
Israel seem to be better than they were before
and this is a serious threat for both the future of
the EastMed project and Greece’s and Cyprus’
diplomatic influence in the region. For the
foreseeable future, the Cypriot Problem has no
prospect for resolution, and this is the biggest
obstacle for Turkey, Greece, and Cyprus to create
a fruitful environment for energy cooperation and
better diplomatic relations.
Last but not least, the energy diplomacy of the EU
seems to be generally sluggish, and it is even
more apparent in this region. The EU’s focus on
green energy is commendable, but it needs to be
combined with projects that are to a lesser extent
green in order to satisfy Europe’s energy needs.
While the EU’s diplomatic relations with Turkey
are currently in a good state, it is not enough to
help Greece and Turkey overcome their
disagreement in order for an energy diplomatic
cooperation in the subregion.
In the end, the fact that the EastMed project
would lose the support of the US was an overall
predictable outcome. What was not predictable,
however, is the fact that even the states involved
didn’t show a substantial effort in keeping the
project alive. The energy diplomacy of the
EastMed hasn’t yet succeeded in creating a
stable environment for investors and the
geopolitical tensions are still an obstacle to hard
to overcome for the moment.
is
 Dyami Insights

About DEWIS:
About the author: Paraskevi (Evi)
Soultatou Dyami Early-Warning for International Security is a project
developed by Dyami Strategic Security Solutions team. The
Paraskevi (Evi) is passionate about
project’s goal is to analyze current threats to international
international security and cooperation and is
security, review trends, and keep relevant and precise
specialized in nuclear strategy and
intelligence. She holds a Sociology bachelor information circulating. Follow us on our channels to keep
from the University of Crete and two masters, yourself up to date with analyses, infographics, and news!
an MSc in International and European Affairs
from the University of Piraeus and an MA in
Security,. Paraskevi at the moment is a
Research Intern at IDIS Institute of Athens, she
lives in the Netherlands and cooperates with
three more think tanks

This publication is copyright © Dyami B.V.