Customary international law does not offer guidance on foreign military activities within the EEZ because of the variance in state practices
In light of the ambiguity of treaty obligations under UNCLOS regarding military operations in the EEZ, it is useful to consult customary international law. However, state practice regarding such activity is as diverse as states themselves.86 Although all states possess sovereign equality under the UN Charter, states have differing, and at times conflicting, interests and various factors influence their perspective regarding military operations in the EEZ. For instance, a fledgling coastal state without a strong navy may not prioritize the freedom of navigation as much as a state with an advanced military would. In fact,
The struggle to define the EEZ is a political tug-of-war involving a large number of states with dissimilar history, unequal resources, and different maritime interests. This diversity engenders an acute sensitivity about relative rights and privileges, and negotiations tend to end up being viewed through the lens of a zero-sum perspective.87
According to some commentators, there is no reason why economic and military activities cannot coexist in a maritime zone.88 Nevertheless, as military technology continues to advance,89 less developed states continue to make greater claims in the EEZ.90 As state practice regarding military operations in the EEZ continues to evolve in a dynamic system, national practice is inconsistent and remains in dispute.91 In many ways, the legal status of the EEZ will continue to develop through the interaction of competing interests and ‘claim and counterclaim.92