Egypt stands with international law: Cairo rejects the Turkish–Libyan memorandum as “absolutely null and void” – a firm answer to revisionism and a boost for Athens and Nicosia

Egypt has once again shown where it stands: with international law, with the Law of the Sea and with its partners in the Eastern Mediterranean. On Wednesday, October 21, Egypt’s Foreign Ministry rejected the Libyan House of Representatives’ ratification of the 2019 Turkish–Libyan memorandum, saying the move has no legal effect on Cairo and that it continues to regard the text as “absolutely null and void”, as reported by Daily News Egypt.

According to the ministry, the memorandum violates the principles of international maritime law and the provisions of the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) governing exclusive economic zones and continental shelves. Cairo stressed that the text infringes on its own sovereign rights in its EEZ and continental shelf, and that the Libyan parliament’s ratification does not change its legal position. Cairo also reiterated its opposition to any action that conflicts with Egypt’s declared maritime boundaries.

A principled stance, grounded in UNCLOS

The Egyptian position is the one the law dictates. The memorandum draws a maritime line between Turkey and Libya as if the Greek islands, Crete first among them, did not exist, and as if Turkey and Libya had opposite or adjacent coasts, which they do not. As Athens put it in its own statement, “geography and the international Law of the Sea are not changed by unilateral, legally unfounded parliamentary decisions”. By describing the text as null and void, Cairo applies the same yardstick to which Greece, Cyprus and the European Union have consistently appealed.

The partnership with Greece

Egypt’s stance did not come out of nowhere. In 2020 Athens and Cairo signed a partial delimitation agreement of their Exclusive Economic Zones, which Greece presents as the lawful answer to the Turkish–Libyan memorandum: an agreement between states with a recognised maritime boundary, concluded in line with the Law of the Sea, versus a text that ignores it. Five days before the vote in Benghazi, Athens and Cairo had held the third round of political consultations on Libya, where both sides stressed respect for UNCLOS in maritime delimitation. On the day of the vote, Foreign Minister George Gerapetritis spoke with Egypt’s Badr Abdelatty, who praised the “strategic partnership” with Greece and the trilateral summit with Cyprus.

Egypt and Greece opposed the deal when it was signed in 2019, and Athens rejected the Libyan parliament’s approval this week, noting that the agreement violates international law and regional sovereign rights. The Greek-Egyptian line is now backed by the European Union, whose leaders called the memorandum null and void and expressed solidarity with Greece and Cyprus, as well as by Cyprus and Israel.

Common sense against revisionism

The contrast could hardly be sharper. On one side stand states that rely on treaties, delimitation agreements and the Law of the Sea: Greece, Cyprus, Egypt and the EU. On the other is a text signed in 2019 by a Tripoli government and now ratified by the rival parliament in the east of a divided Libya, which Turkey’s Foreign Ministry welcomed. Libya remains split between rival administrations, with the east under the influence of Khalifa Haftar, and Ankara’s memorandum is a source of friction even among the Libyans themselves.

For Athens and Nicosia, Egypt’s clear rejection matters. It shows that opposition to the memorandum is not a Greek or Cypriot grievance but the position of every coastal state that respects the Law of the Sea, and it strengthens the diplomatic and legal case that Greece says it will pursue, including through its own mechanisms to have the text denounced. In an Eastern Mediterranean marked by revisionism, Cairo, Athens and Nicosia are proving that stability rests on international law and on friendship between neighbours who respect each other’s rights.