“…

Territorial waters and the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) are two distinct maritime areas defined by international law. Territorial waters extend 12 nautical miles (22 km) and are subject to a state’s full sovereignty, while the EEZ extends up to 200 nautical miles (370 km) for the exclusive exploitation of resources.

Territorial Waters (Territorial Sea)

• Range: Up to 12 nautical miles (approximately 22 km) from the coast.
• Sovereignty: Full and complete sovereignty over the waters, the seabed, and the airspace.
• Rules: Vessels from other countries may pass through, but they must comply with local laws and pose no danger.

Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ / Waters of Economic Interest)

• Range: Up to 200 nautical miles (approximately 370 km) from the coast.
• Rights: Exclusive rights to explore for and harvest fish, oil, and gas, or to generate energy (wind, hydro).
• Rules: This is not a territory fully controlled by the state; other countries retain the right to navigate freely and operate aircraft.

…”

The preceding lines were generated by an internet search engine.

Within the framework of the “territorial waters” preparatory committee for the “Persian Gulf Council,” no request was made to delineate EEZs. This could be done at a later date but is not urgent.

The map delineating the territorial waters of the Persian Gulf countries must be presented and countersigned by each representative of a Persian Gulf country present on the committee.

As for what N.D. plans to do with this survey countersigned by the major countries—including, at a minimum, Iran, Oman, the United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia—I’ll leave it to you to guess what sensible use might be made of it.

However, as a prerequisite for moving forward, each country is asked to have available within its own country (not necessarily at the meeting) a specialist in international maritime law. Why? The “Persian Gulf Council” has no international authority to replace the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea with another convention that would allow a state to claim rights over another country’s territorial waters. This request is intended to avoid discussing irrational solutions that do not comply with existing international law.

What conclusions do you draw from this? … starting with the Iranian representative? Don’t make me call you ignorant and a fool who invents international law that does not exist. We could imagine a legal framework delegated to the “Persian Gulf Council” by several countries to supervise and control maritime traffic in the Strait of Hormuz. But if that were the case, it would not be a single country acting unilaterally and dictatorially to establish a body to supervise and control the Strait of Hormuz; rather, the “Persian Gulf Council” would define and accept these rules of supervision and control and enforce them. All of this would be carried out in accordance with the democratic rules—yet to be defined—of the Persian Gulf Council.

July 26, 2026

Naej DRANER (naej.draner@gmail.com)