The maritime dispute between Türkiye and Greece and its impact on government policy.

Sammanfattning: This paper sought to analyse which underlying motives impacted the stances and policies taken by Greece and Türkiye regarding their disputed maritime border. The maritime border consists of two distinct areas, the Aegean Sea, and the Eastern Mediterranean Sea. The analysis chose to study the two areas separately since there are differences between them. The study was conducted through the lens of Morgan and Palmer’s general theory of foreign policy, in which a state either acts reactively to preserve the current situation, or proactively to try and change it. The result of the study shows that both states acted because of security related, economic, and hegemonic motivations as well as to protect their sovereignty and national rights. Security concerns played a significant role in the dispute, as both states deemed the other to be a threat. Because of this, both Greece and Türkiyeacted reactively against each other. At the same time, Türkiye was also found to be more likely to act proactively compared to Greece who often either acted in response to Türkiye or indirectly through its allies such as the EU or Egypt.