The following letter is in response to the August 30 editorial, “There’s a new game of thrones in the mediterranean”. The Times editorial concedes that international law is on the side of Greece, but seemingly advocates the appeasement of Turkey. Furthermore, many of the facts recounted by the editorial make the case for supporting Greece against Turkey as Ankara is very clearly a major threat to international peace and stability. Turkey’s threats to unleash unlimited numbers of refugees into Europe should further the case for supporting Greece in the Mediterranean. The western world has wronged the historical victims of Turkish genocide and aggression including the Armenians, Assyrians, Greeks, Kurds, and Arabs. America and Europe have a crucial opportunity to correct these injustices and to demonstrate their support for democratic norms and values by supporting democratic Greece and Cyprus against an increasingly authoritarian Turkey.
The Times editorial criticizes the Trump administration for not emulating the previous handling of crises between Greece and Turkey by previous administrations. This argument completely ignores the fact that every previous “resolution” aimed allegedly at defusing conflict between Athens and Ankara resulted in sacrificing Greece and Cyprus to the aggressive designs of Turkey. On January 31, 1996 the Clinton administration forced Greece to remove its flag from an islet that maps and international treaties proved was Greek territory. Such “solutions” were in actual fact nothing more than appeasement. Nothing better demonstrates the moral bankruptcy of the handling of Greek-Turkish conflicts any better than the fact that Turkey maintains its occupation of the northern part of Cyprus almost fifty years after the invasions of that sovereign Republic by Turkish forces.
The Turkish regime under President Erdogan is an international threat to peace and stability. Greece deserves full support from all governments and alliances that claim to espouse international law and democratic values and norms.
Greece Fires Another Warning at Turkey Over Seas Provocations
Εθνικός Κήρυξ
(Ibrahim Laleli/DHA via AP)2/18/2021The National Herald
ATHENS – Talking diplomacy and belligerent at the same time, Greece and Turkey are swapping shots over rights to the Aegean and East Mediterranean, this time with Greek Alternate Foreign Minister Miltiadis Varvitsiotis telling Turkey to back off.
“Turkey must stop acting like an unpredictable neighbor,” Varvitsiotis told state broadcaster ERT, warning that Turkey’s often hostile behavior is undermining the country’s European Union membership hopes that Greece keeps supporting despite provocations.
He noted that the European Council, made up of the leaders of the bloc’s 27 member states, urged Turkey to refrain from “unilateral and provocative activities,” promptly ignored by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.
While issuing tweets and statements allegedly supporting Greece, the EU refused to take up Prime Minister and New Democracy leader Kyriakos Mitsotakis’ demand for sanctions over Turkish plans to drill for energy off Greek islands.
That was done, the EU said, to give failed diplomacy another chance, which immediately led to Erdogan and Turkish officials ramping up the tension and fears of a conflict starting.
The two sides met on Jan. 25 in Constantinople in a 61st round of exploratory talks, the first 60 not going anywhere, and the resumption the first time they held a discussion in four years, although it was a non-binding chat.
They are set to meet again in Athens in March when the EU will again meet and said it would consider sanctions for a third time after backing away the first time two times.
EU leaders are reluctant to take on Erdogan, fearing he will unleash on the bloc – mostly through Greece and its islands – more refugees and migrants who went to Turkey fleeing war, strife and economic hardships in their homelands.
During the hiatus, Turkey has resumed its plans to continue hunting for energy near the Greek islands of Limnos, Skyros and Alonissos until March 2 with no word whether a Turkish vessel would be accompanied by warships or tracked by the Greek Navy.
Blocking Sanctions, Dissing Greece’s Call, Germany Will Keep Arming Turkey
Αssociated Press
Heiko Maas, German Foreign Minister, gives a press conference on the informal virtual meeting on the informal virtual meeting of the foreign ministers of the member states of the Vienna nuclear agreement in Berlin, Germany, Monday, Dec. 21, 2020. (Kay Nietfeld/dpa via AP)12/23/2020 The National Herald
Greece’s insistence that other European Union countries stop supplying weapons to Turkey was rejected by Germany, which sells submarine components and other goods that give Turkey an advantage if a conflict breaks out.
Germany Foreign Minister Heiko Mass rejected the request for an arms embargo on Turkey despite rising tensions over Turkey’s plans to hunt for oil and gas off Greek islands, which has seen warships tracking each other near Kastellorizo.
“I do not find the demand of an arms embargo against Turkey strategically correct. It is not easy to do this against a NATO partner. We saw that NATO ally Turkey easily bought missiles from Russia because it could not buy from the US,” he told the German Press Agency (dpa) as Germany holds the rotating European Union Presidency until the end of the year.
He didn’t mention that Germany has 2.774 million people of Turkish heritage and also blocked Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis’ demand that Turkey be sanctioned for the provocations.
Germany, while tweeting and signaling alleged support for Greece during a long-running dispute with Turkey over seas boundaries in the Aegean and East Mediterranean, has sided with Turkey concerning armaments that are lucrative to German industries.
He was referring to Turkey buying a Russian-made S-400 missile defense system that could be used against Greece and undermines the security of NATO, to which they all belong.
Maas also said he hoped Turkey and Greece would resolve their disputes through diplomatic channels which hasn’t worked yet, the EU also breaking a vow to sanction Turkey, pushing back any discussions until March, 2021.
Spain also has major economic ties with Germany and, along with Italy, also blocked any attempt at sanctions, giving Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan another triumph over the bloc that Turkey has been trying fruitlessly to join since 2005.
The World Is Full of Challenges. Here’s How Biden Can Meet Them.
The incoming administration needs to update American policy to meet the challenges of the 21st century.
By Robert M. Gates
Mr. Gates served as secretary of defense for Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama from 2006 to 2011.
Dec. 18, 2020
Credit…Erin Schaff/The New York Times
President-elect Joe Biden appears to be framing his foreign policy around three themes: re-engaging with America’s friends and allies, renewing our participation in international organizations and relying more heavily on nonmilitary instruments of power. Considering the challenges posed by China and other countries, as well as transnational threats that range from pandemics to climate change, these are, in my view, the correct priorities. (Though, of course, unparalleled military power must remain the backdrop for America’s relations with the world.)
In each case, however, a return to the pre-Trump status quo will be inadequate to the task. In each, it is necessary to reform, revitalize and restructure the American approach.
Our NATO allies, as well as Japan, South Korea and others, will welcome America’s reaffirmation of its security commitments and its switch to respectful dialogue after the confrontational Trump years. But the new administration ought to insist on our allies doing more on several fronts. President Trump’s pressure on them to spend more on defense was a continuation of a theme across multiple presidencies. That pressure must continue.
But it’s not just on military spending that the new administration needs to take a tough stand with allies. Germany must be held to account not just for its pathetic level of military spending, but also for trading the economic and security interests of Poland and Ukraine for the economic benefits of the Nord Stream 2 pipelinerunning from Russia to Germany.
Turkey’s purchase of the Russian S-400 air defense system against repeated American warnings must have costs. (Recently imposed sanctions are a good start.) And Ankara must also be held to account for its actions in Libya, the eastern Mediterranean and Syria that contravene the interests of other NATO allies and complicate efforts to achieve peace. Actions by member states contrary to the interests of other allies ought not be ignored.
The United States needs to take the lead in NATO, an “alliance of democracies,” to devise consequences for member states — such as Turkey, Hungary and, increasingly, Poland — that move toward (or have fully embraced) authoritarianism. There is no provision inthe NATO Charter for removing a member state, but creative diplomacy is possible, including suspension or other punitive steps.
Mr. Biden’s embrace of the international organizations that Mr. Trump has spurned must be accompanied by an agenda for their improvement. Despite their many problems, these organizations serve useful purposes and can be effective conduits for American influence around the world.
In the 1970s and 1980s, the Soviet Union had an elaborate, long-range strategy for seeding its officials throughout the United Nations and associated institutions. China seems to be pursuing a similar strategy today. When we walk away from the World Health Organization and other such organizations, we provide the Chinese with opportunities to dominate them and use them for their own purposes.
The new administration must insist on the far-reaching organizational reform of international organizations (such as the W.H.O.), using all the diplomatic and economic leverage we can muster to make effective reform actually happen. Simply showing up again is not good enough.
Closer to home, as the new administration commits to far greater reliance on nonmilitary tools like conventional diplomacy, development assistance and public diplomacy to protect America’s interests and advance our objectives, it needs to recognize that those tools overall are in serious need of investment and updating. Our national security apparatus — designed in 1947 — needs to be restructured for the 21st century.
The multidimensional competition with China and transnational challenges require the formal involvement of agencies previously not considered part of the national security apparatus and new approaches to achieving true “whole of government” American strategies and operations.
The State Department, our principal nondefense instrument of power, is in dire need of reform, as many senior active and retired foreign service officers attest. In return for meaningful structural and cultural change, the State Department should get the significant additional resources it needs.
In recent years, our international economic tools have centered mainly on punitive measures, such as sanctions and tariffs. We need to be more creative in finding positive economic inducements to persuade other countries to act — or not act — in accordance with our interests. No other country comes even close to the United States in providing humanitarian assistance after disasters, but nearly all other major assistance successes in recent years — such as George W. Bush’s President’s Emergency Plan for Aids Relief or the creation of the Millennium Challenge Corporation — were put in place outside the normal bureaucratic structure or processes.
While the United States cannot compete directly with China’s Belt and Road projects and development assistance, we should look for ways to leverage the power of our private sector. American corporations can partner with the United States government in countries around the world that offer both sound investment prospects and opportunities to advance American interests. The creation in 2018 of the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation was a good start. President Barack Obama’s 2013 “Power Africa” initiative, which was passed unanimously by both houses of Congress and aimed to bring universal electricity access to sub-Saharan Africa, is an example of successful partnering between the private sector and the government.
Finally, America’s strategic communications — our ability to spread our message and influence governments and peoples — are pitifully inadequate and outdated.
In the early 2000s, President Hu Jintao of China committed some $7 billion to vastly expand China’s international media and influence capabilities. By way of contrast, in 1998, Congress abolished the U.S. Information Agency; subsequently, “public diplomacy” was tucked into a corner of the State Department in an organization that today doesn’t even report directly to the secretary of state.
There is no coordination of messaging across the government, and efforts to make better use of social media and other new technologies have been laggard and disjointed. Surely, the country that invented marketing, public relations and the internet can figure out how to recapture primacy in strategic communications.
Misgivings linger abroad about whether American re-engagement (and reliability) will last beyond this new administration — and about the new president’s views on the use of military power. That said, there is considerable relief among most of our allies and friends that Mr. Biden has won the election.
This provides the new president with considerable leverage to revitalize and strengthen alliances and international institutions and to show at home that doing so advances American interests around the world and the well-being of our own citizens. This would be an enduring legacy for the Biden administration.
Robert M. Gates served as secretary of defense for Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama from 2006 to 2011.
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email:letters@nytimes.com.
Even France Turned on Greece, Mitsotakis at EU’s Turkish Walkoff
Αssociated Press
Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis, fourth left, speaks with Austria s Chancellor Sebastian Kurz, fifth left, during a round table meeting at an EU summit at the European Council building in Brussels, Thursday, Dec. 10, 2020. (Olivier Hoslet, Pool via AP)12/13/2020 The National Herald
BRUSSELS — While Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis is trying to show he was satisfied with a European Union meeting that refused to back his call for sanctions against Turkey provocations, major countries in the bloc blocked penalties.
He had been trying to build an international alliance to back Greece over Turkey planning to drill for oil and gas off Greek islands as it has been doing off Cyprus, snubbing its nose at soft EU sanctions.
But while Germany, home to 2.774 million people of Turkish heritage and a major arms supplier to Turkey was expected to keep the EU from issuing sanctions, France – which had aligned itself with Greece – also did.
With Spain and Italy also siding with Turkey against EU member Greece, Mitsotakis was left with nowhere to turn when the meeting resulted only in waiting until March, 2021 to talk about sanctions.
The EU leaders in October said they would penalize Turkey this December unless Turkey stopped its plan to pick up an energy hunt again in Greek waters but didn’t, leaving Mitsotakis to say he was glad Turkey was warned.
French President Emmanuel Macron and Mitsotakis had been pictured in solidarity, smiling and shaking hands and resolving to take a hard line on Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who had even insulted the French leader.
When Macron walked away from him and went along with another delay – which hasn’t worked yet against an emboldened Erdogan – Mitsotakis reversed his own belief in penalties, the EU saying it would only freeze the assets of some Turkish officials it wouldn’t even name.
“Sanctions (against Turkey) are not an end in itself,” Mitsotakis said, adding, however, that the EU will respond with penalties “if Turkey insists on continuing with this provocative behavior,” which hasn’t happened yet.
“Turkey is expected to change its ways and it has been understood that Europe is moving, if at its own pace,” he said, noting that bloc is is united and “supports Greece and Cyprus, it is present,” he added.
That was also in reference to Turkish drilling off Cyprus, ignoring sanctions against two unnamed executives from Turkey’s state-run petroleum company, but Mitsotakis said Turkey got a stern warning to which Erdogan paid no attention after he said sanctions wouldn’t deter him at any rate.
Greece’s position was further compromised by the apparent reluctance of France to insist on tougher measures, while Austria, which also had talked tough before the meeting, took a milder tone, said Kathimerini.
The paper tried to explain that Mitsotakis was also hindered by other items on the agenda, such as discussions about about an EU Recovery fund, the COVID-19 pandemic and greenhouse gas emissions after he walked away empty-handed.
Macron was apparently convinced by German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s argument that the new US administration when Joe Biden becomes President on Jan. 20, 2021 will see Turkey back off its aggressions, the paper said.
Spain and Italy joined forces on this line, stressing again – after doing so agan and again to no avail – the importance of Turkey for the EU and the need to “give diplomacy another chance,” which has always failed with Erdogan.
Despite Erdogan essentially pushing the EU leaders around at will, threatening he would unleashed on the bloc through Greece and its islands more refugees and migrants who went to Turkey fleeing war, strife and economic hardships in their countries, there was no political will to confront him.
Macron was said to agree with Merkel that being hard on Erdogan would only push Turkey – which has been trying fruitlessly since 2005 to join the EU – into the camp of Russia and China, opening the door for Erdogan to do what he wants.
In the end, the EU was left to say only that instead of issuing sanctions now – Erdogan had withdrawn an energy research vessel and warships off the Greek island of Kastellorizo ahead of the meeting, which Greece said was a ruse – that Turkey might still face penalties someday.
The EU’s foreign policy chief Josep Borrell, who has waffled on how to handle Turkey, alternately talking tough and tender, was invited to take another shot at dealing with th dilemma and assess the possibility of “extending the scope” of sanction” at the March meeting, unless that results in pushing the problem back to another time as the EU has done repeatedly.
Israel Rejects Turkey Maritime Deal That Would Isolate Cyprus
Αssociated Press
(AP Photo/Petros Karadjias)12/7/2020 Αssociated Press
NICOSIA — In a plan that would effectively barricade Cyprus from exploring for energy in the seas, Turkey has proposed a maritime deal with Israel – which is already working with Cyprus and was said to have rejected the idea out of hand.
After years of diplomatic tension, Turkey reached out to Israel, said the national daily Hebrew paper Israel Hayom, with retired Rear Adm. Cihat Yayci, a close confidant of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, making the offer.
That would be for Israel and Turkey to share Exclusive Economic Ζοnes (EEZs) in the East Mediterranean cutting through Cypriot waters where foreign energy companies are licensed to drill, and where Turkish ships are doing so too.|
The Turkish proposal, the paper said, was to appear first Dec. 7 in the Israeli academic journal Turkeyscope—published by the Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies at Tel Aviv University.
Turkey in 2019 signed a maritime deal with Libya, unrecognized by any other country, dividing the seas between them and Turkey claiming waters around Greek islands, including Kastellorizo where it had an energy ship working previously.
Yayci, who designed Turkey’s Blue Homeland Doctrine claiming Greek waters and islands, wants to cut out Cyprus, which Turkey doesn’t recognize although the legitimate government of Cyprus is a member of the European Union that Turkey has been trying to join since 2005.
The EU already has soft sanctions on Turkey for its drilling off Cyprus and was due to decide in a meeting Dec. 10-11 whether to also impose penalties for Turkey’s provocations around Greek islands and in the Aegean.
The deal with Israel essentially expands Turkey’s claims to the Aegean and East Mediterranean that were part of the Libya deal and would further cut off Greece from Cyprus through the seas.
A senior Israeli official not named told the paper that while improving relations with Turkey was important that it wouldn’t come at the expense of Cyprus and that the plan was not acceptable.
“Cyprus is an ally of Israel and the maritime border between the countries is recognized by the United Nations and European Union,” the official explained.
Yayci suggested transferring four areas off Cyprus where companies are drilling to Israel, although one – Block 12 – is where the Israel company Delek is already operating, but with the US companies Shell and Noble Energy.
The gas field is estimated to contain between 7-10 billion cubic meters of gas on the Israeli side and about 100 billion cubic meters on the Cypriot side and worth some $9 billion.
The maritime border between Israel and Cyprus in the area of the Yishai-Aphrodite reservoir is still under dispute, despite all the other agreements the countries have signed.
Also of potential benefit to Israel, based on Yayci’s proposal, is connecting Israel’s intended gas pipeline to Europe to the already existing Turkish pipeline. According to Yayci, this option would be “significantly more practicable and Israeli agreement to the Turkish proposal would represent recognition of Turkey’s position on the EEZ near the Greek islands of Rhodes and Kastellorizo.
Turkeyscope Editor Hay Eytan Cohen Yanarocak said that proposal should be considered, however, to improve Israel’s relations with Turkey even though it would isolate Cyprus from the waters around the island, where Turkey has occupied the northern third since an unlawful 1974 invasion.
“For the two countries to upgrade relations to the point of real normalization, trust-building measures must be put in place, which before all else requires the return of ambassadors and consuls,” he said of Turkey and Israel.
But he said that Turkey must end its relationship with Hamas, the Palestinian nationalist group that Israel considers terrorists. “If Erdoğan does this, it’s reasonably safe to believe Jerusalem will strive to find ways to make the relationship prosper again, as has happened in the past,” he said.https://disqusservice.com/iframe/fallback/?position=top&shortname=ekirikas&position=top&anchorColor=%230000ee&colorScheme=light&sourceUrl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thenationalherald.com%2Fcyprus_politics%2Farthro%2Fisrael_rejects_turkey_maritime_deal_that_would_isolate_cyprus-1358990%2F&typeface=serif&canonicalUrl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thenationalherald.com%2Fcyprus_politics%2Farthro%2Fisrael_rejects_turkey_maritime_deal_that_would_isolate_cyprus-1358990%2F&disqus_version=363c4ce
The leader of the Turkish nationalists and government partner of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Devlet Bahçeli, openly challenges the status of the Dodecanese islands.
Moreover, he announced that a march would take place in Smyrna and demanded the “independence” of the Dodecanese which should be released from the… Greek yoke.
The partner of the Turkish President called for a protest march in Smyrna on the 9th of September at 9.00 am demanding the review of the Dodecanese legal status. It was something that he had firstly called for last Saturday. “First and foremost, our goal is to decisively march in protest in Smyrna on the 9th of the 9th month of the year at 9 o’clock, that is, on the 9th September, 2020. In Smyrna, we threw the enemy into the sea. We demand the independence of the Dodecanese,” the Turkish nationalist said.
“Taking into account the geographical, political and other specificities of the Dodecanese, it raises hopes for peace and stability in the Aegean Sea and, therefore, the injustice against our country will be re-established if the legal status of the island is re-examined,” he added.
The Vice President, Fuat Oktay, had challenged earlier the Treaty of Paris signed in 1947, under which the Dodecanese islands were ceded from Italy to Greece.
Devlet Bahçeli deemed the Dodecanese issue as “a bleeding wound” for the Turkish nation and said: “These islands were unjustly, shamelessly and illegally taken out of our hands. The status of the Dodecanese islands must be reviewed. Greece and its tyrannical rulers aim to surround us, but they have proved the lack of property rights regarding those islands. Turkey has rights in the region of the Dodecanese. We hold memories and there are traces that do not fade,” he added.Tags:Politics
The editorial board is a group of opinion journalists whose views are informed by expertise, research, debate and certain longstandingvalues. It is separate from the newsroom.
As if there wasn’t enough trouble around the world, two NATO allies, Greece and Turkey, have lit up a new and dangerous crisis, dragging in countries near and far. In this game of thrones, only Germany seems to have the sway to mediate a return to sanity.
At the core of the crisis, as in so many other dangerous squabbles around the globe, is energy — specifically the rich gas deposits discovered over the past decade under the eastern Mediterranean. Greece claims that its many islands in that region give it sole drilling rights in the waters around them, a stance broadly supported by international law. But Turkey, feeling hemmed in, says otherwise, and it has sent ships, accompanied by warships, to explore for gas off Cyprus.
Feuds between Greece and Turkey are hardly new. What complicates this one is that the gas reserves are also being eyed by many other countries. In principle, the vast reserves should bring those countries together to tap and share the riches off their shores. In fact, most of the countries — including Greece, Cyprus, Israel, Egypt, Italy, Jordan and even the Palestinians — have done just that.
Turkey, however, has found itself excluded, in part because of Greece’s territorial claims, and in part because Turkey’s authoritarian president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, has antagonized many of his allies and friends with his aggressive behavior in Syria, Libya and at home. Further complicating matters is that Turkey is a member of NATO but not of the European Union; Cyprus is a member of the European Union but not NATO; and Greece is a member of both, creating overlapping and conflicting loyalties. Then there’s the fact that Cyprus is divided into a Greek south and a Turkish north, although nobody except Turkey recognizes the Turkish part as a separate state.
An attempt by Germany to untie this Gordian knot foundered when Greece announced an energy deal with Egypt that effectively claimed rights to a broad area of the sea, which it did in response to a similar accord between Turkey and Libya. Turkey soon started exploring again, its operations monitored by a Greek naval frigate.
On Aug. 12, the Greek warship managed to collide with a Turkish warship, and things quickly heated up. France, already furious at Turkey over its support of the faction in Libya that France doesn’t support, briefly sent in a couple of fighter jets and warships, and it’s currently holding military exercises with Greece, Cyprus and Italy to deter further exploration by Turkey. Greece announced a demonstrative extension of its territorial waters off its western coast to 12 miles, in effect warning Turkey that it could do the same in the Aegean Sea on its eastern side, a move Turkey would not tolerate.
What is peculiar in this crisis is that competition for fossil fuels should have given way by now to competition over how to stop using them, especially among countries that have subscribed to the Paris climate agreement. Besides, with the slowdown in the global economy from the coronavirus pandemic and the resulting drop in energy prices, Europe has plenty of gas.
It also seems bizarre for Mediterranean and European countries to be plunged into extraneous tensions when there are so many serious crises to keep them busy, including the economy, the pandemic, the political suspense in the United States, the street clashes in Belarus and Russia’s threat to intervene in Belarus.
In an earlier era, the United States would have stepped in to separate feuding NATO partners, as it did when Greece and Turkey almost went to war in 1996. President Trump did make a call to Mr. Erdogan urging him to negotiate, but that had no effect — the United States under the Trump administration is not regarded as a viable go-between, especially with Mr. Trump in campaign mode. Britain, too, has retreated from European affairs now that it is out of the European Union. The union also lacks leverage over Turkey, since it has become evident that Turkey under Mr. Erdogan, despite its status as a candidate for membership, has no chance of joining the union.
So Germany, which currently holds the rotating chairmanship of the European Council, the policy-setting assembly of E.U. heads of government, has taken the lead in trying to get Turkey and Greece to the negotiating table, with Heiko Maas, the German foreign minister, shuttling between Ankara and Athens. The mediation is not entirely altruistic — a cornered Turkey could unleash another flood of Syrian refugees into Europe, most of them seeking to reach Germany. But with nearly three million Turks living in Germany, Mr. Erdogan has at least some assurance that his side of the argument will be heard.
That is important. Though international law is largely on the side of Greece in the maritime dispute, there is room for negotiation, and Turkey’s explorations in disputed waters have not yet crossed a legal red line. On Friday, E.U. foreign ministers met in Berlin and effectively endorsed Germany’s role, putting off any discussion of sanctions against Turkey until E.U. heads of state meet in late September.
War is in nobody’s interest, and a conflict between NATO members ought to be unthinkable. But when tensions reach the level they have in the eastern Mediterranean, as Mr. Maas has said, “Even the smallest spark can lead to a catastrophe.” Germany has called on all sides to immediately halt provocative military exercises, a step that should be followed by a moratorium on exploration in disputed waters. Then let diplomacy take over.
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email:letters@nytimes.com.
The Turkish government now requires all female visitors to Hagia Sophia to wear headscarves and to cover their legs. The government had given assurance that visitors could visit Hagia Sophia for free, but anyone who is not properly dressed must now pay to purchase coverings in order to enter Hagia Sophia. Throughout much of the Muslim world their continues to be praise for the Turkish government for its actions in converting Hagia Sophia.
The support of Palestinian groups for the conversion of Hagia Sophia and Turkey should be seen by Greeks as a signal that alliances are changing. Greece and Cyprus have been establishing better relations with Israel over the last decade or so, and this must continue. Greece must view any and all governments that support the conversion of Hagia Sophia in an unfriendly light.
The Greek Foreign Ministry should call diplomats from those countries to raise a formal protest over their public support for the conversion of Hagia Sophia. The Ministry of Culture should also begin putting pressure on UNESCO to take a more aggressive stance on the issue. UNESCO sent one letter of protest to the Turkish government and went silent again.
The further conversion of the the Church of the savior at Chora indicates that the conversion of Church-Museums in Turkey may not stop. The Greek world, the international media, and cultural institutions waited much too long to respond to these Turkish provocations. This is a process that began in 2013 with the conversion of the Church-Museum of Hagia Sophia in Trebizond.
As far as the international reaction is concerned, better late than never. However, the danger now is that the media and cultural organizations will simply accept what Turkey has done and will go back to sleep. There needs to be a continued reaction of protests and boycotts of Turkey at all levels.
Greece should also make it clear to any country that has praised the actions of the Erdogan government that this will lead to a deterioration of relations with that particular country. Hagia Sophia can never be considered a Mosque as its Christian origins are beyond dispute. The Erdogan government’s conversion of all Churches since 2013 constitute acts of aggression.
Those governments which supported these acts of provocation display an unfriendly attitude toward Greece. The Greek Foreign Ministry should convey this stance to the diplomats of those countries that are stationed in Athens.
The following is in response to the piece by Holger A. Klein in the Turkish conversion of the Savior Church of Chora. As a Greek Orthodox author of three books and various articles I can only say to academics such as Mr. Klein that present criticisms of the Turkish government are too little, too late. The Turkish government in 2013 converted the Church of Hagia Sophia in Trebizond into a Mosque. No one took any notice and no one protested the outrage.
The Turkish authorities proceeded to convert at least two more Church-Museums named Hagia Sophia in Nicea (Iznik) and Adrianople (Edirne) without any protests.As an Orthodox Greek, I made phone calls to the UNESCO offices in New York and sent them emails bringing to their attention the Turkish conversion of the above mentioned Church-Museums and their ultimate goal for the conversion of Hagia Sophia of Constantinople. During the summer of 2014 I visited a UNESCO office in Athens and in March 2015 I visited the UNESCO headquarters in Paris to raise attention to the Turkish plans for the conversion of Hagia Sophia. I was given repeated assurances that UNESCO authorities had been in touch with Turkish officials and had been “assured” by them that Hagia Sophia would be left unmolested.
One year later during the spring of 2016 Hagia Sophia of Constantinople was used for Muslim prayers. No protests from UNESCO, and certainly no protests from the academic community. Perhaps Mr. Klein can tell me where his voice was over the past seven years as the movement to convert Hagia Sophia was gaining steam? Where were the voices and protests from the academic community? There is no shortage of protests now that the evil deeds have been carried out but where were the protests and the outrages when they would have made a difference?
There are certain inaccuracies in the article by Mr. Klein. Mr. Klein refers to Hagia Sophia as a Mosque. Let us understand that Hagia Sophia of Constantinople and other Hagia Sophia Churches, along with the Church of the Savior at Chora are CHURCHES, not Mosques. Thomas Wittemore of the Byzantine Institute could have referred to them as Mosques because they were in use as such during the period of time he expressed concern about them. However, let it not be forgotten the Christian temples that are falling victim to the predatory government of Turkey are Churches, not Mosques. Mosques do not have images of the incarnate God and savior Jesus Christ, the most Holy Theotokos andMother of God, and the Holy Apostles and fathers of the Church within them.
Certainly, Christians recognize the importance of these Churches to secular history but the sacred and divine origins of these great Christian temples must not be dismissed or disrespected. Without the Holy Gospel there would be no Hagia Sophia. Hagia Sophia and the Church of Chora can never be Mosques or Museums. Their roots lie with the divinity of the God-Man Jesus Christ who became incarnate in the flesh. Hagia Sophia is a Church and it is highly offensive that the article by Mr. Klein minimized the Christian origins of the Byzantine Churches mentioned in his commentary.
Criticism of the Turkish government even at this late date is welcome. However, the academic community and UNESCO should recognize they made mistakes and waited too long to protest the Turkish aggression against Hagia Sophia.They should also make sure to be historically, culturally, and theologically accurate when discussing these Church-Museums as they were founded as Christian Cathedrals and Churches. Referring to them as Mosques in the context in which Mr. Klein writes does a disservice to Orthodox Christians who are the real guardians of Hagia Sophia and inadvertently strengthens the case of the Turkish government.
The case against the Erdogan government’s conversion of these Byzantine Churches lies not with the legacy of Mustafa Kemal (the so called “Ataturk) but with those of the Byzantine Emperors of Constantinople such as Saint Justinian who presided over the construction of these miraculous temples for the purpose of worshipping the Triune God. Saint Justinian the Great who presided over the construction of Hagia Sophia is not even mentioned in the article by Mr.Klein while the so called “Ataturk” who was the architect of the genocide of Armenian, Assyrian, and Greek Christians is given undue prominence.
Certainly, the appeal to stop the conversion of Church-Museums into Mosques can be made on the basis of cultural and historical sensitivities, but the theological and spiritual roots of these Churches are the greatest reasons why the Turkish government’s actions should be condemned.
The Greek Connection The Life of Elias Demetracopoulos And the Untold Story of Watergate by James H. Barron
Melville House 2020
Just as one has come to believe that the story of the Greek military dictatorship(s) from 1967 to 1974 has been fully told, a new account of that era has been put fourth that focuses on the heroic activities of journalist Elias Demetracopoulos. This is a very good book that tells a very important story and serves to remind Greeks of the way in which Greece has been mistreated by the great powers. This book is not only a fine work of history but an important contribution to the historical understanding of the nature of Greek politics and the politics and diplomacy of the American foreign policy establishment.
The release of this book comes at a time when political extremism veers toward the left wing of the political spectrum. This book is an important reminder of the time in both Greece and America when extremism veered toward the right wing. The story of Mr. Demetracopoulos is told and it is a very heroic one.
Elias Demetracopoulos was a boy in Nazi occupied Greece who resisted the Germans and was imprisoned. He became a very successful and prominent journalist in Greece who clashed with several American ambassadors. This was the period in history when the American government interfered in Greek internal affairs (and still does to a certain extent).
Elias Demetracopoulos established contacts not only in Greece but in the United States in which he took refuge following the imposition of the military dictatorship on Greece in April 1967. What is truly amazing is the slander that was directed against this moderate opponent of the Papadopoulos dictatorship. This journalist was moderate in his politics and was opposed to communism as well as the neo-fascism of the Colonels.
In America he established contacts with many prominent journalists, politicians, and military officials. Many of these individuals were staunch conservatives. This included the late Robert Novak and the late Rowland Evans. This biography of Elias Dematracopoulos is an affirmation that the Coup of 1967 was not about preventing the imposition of communist totalitarianism on Greece, but on eradicating the sovereignty and independence of Greece and eradicating Greek democracy.
This book recounts what has been previously documented regarding dictator George Papadopoulos. Papadopoulos was a Nazi collaborator during the Second World War who served in the security battalions under the collaborationist government. Furthermore, as a working journalist in Athens Dematracopoulos infuriated Greek Prime Minister Constantine Karamanlis for revealing that America had installed nuclear weapons in Greece.
Dematracopoulos informed the Greek people about nuclear weapons in their country and the prospective consequences in the event of a confrontation with the Soviet Union in which Greece would have played a prominent offensive role and would have served as a prime target for Moscow. This revelation was a serious wake up call considering present day efforts of American officials in Athens such as Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt to promote conflict between Greece and present day Russia. Many things in the relationship between Greece and the United States have changed for the better and some things have not changed.
The most significant change from the era recounted in the book is that democracy in Greece has been for most part irreversible. There are two events in the past decade or so in which Greek democracy has been challenged. The first incident occurred in 2008 when the Government of Prime Minister Constantine Karamanlis (the nephew and namesake of the aforementioned Prime Minister) came under pressure to resign in the aftermath of an effort to establish an oil pipeline agreement with Russia and Bulgaria. Incidents such as these along with the collusion of the Simitis government in 1999 which surrendered Kurdish leader Abdullah Ocalan to the Turks indicate that the restoration of Greek sovereignty in the post dictatorship era has not been one hundred percent successful.
A second challenge to Greek democracy came from the rise of Golden Dawn in the elections of 2012. The legacy of the Greek dictatorship can be judged by its present day sympathizers. Only Golden Dawn expresses admiration for the Papadopoulos regime. Golden Dawn is a Neo-Nazi organization that promotes holocaust denial, anti semitism and other forms of racism, and neo paganism.
In the past two years, Greece has overcome both right wing extremism (Golden Dawn) and left wing extremism (the Marxist Syriza Party). The downfall of Syriza and the complete collapse of Golden Dawn bode well for the future of Greece. Liberal democracy appears to have recovered nicely under the leadership of Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis.
The book recounts many troubling facts regarding the Greek dictatorship. For example, many Greek Americans supported the regime. The Nixon administration comes off as as especially vile in its disregard for the sadistic torture and brutality against political dissidents in Greece. There was a prominent Greek American who served as a supporter of both the dictatorship and the Nixon administration who comes off very poorly.
Theories abound that there was a Greek connection to Watergate. The Watergate break in may have been because the Colonels contributed $500,000 dollars to the Nixon campaign in 1968. Elias Demetracopoulos had sent evidence of this to the chairman of the Democratic Party and it is speculated this is what the Watergate burglars were looking for. The cash that the Colonels contributed to the Nixon campaign may very well have been from American aid from taxpayers which would have consisted of American taxpayers cash being used for partisan political purposes in funding the campaign of Richard Nixon.
Elias Demetracopoulos worked tirelessly against the Colonels as well as against the Central Intelligence Agency and the State Department which not only slandered him but threatened to have him deported back to Athens. When the Greek journalist’s father was on his death bed, Demetracopoulos reached out to his political friends in Washington for help in obtaining safe passage for him to visit his father. He was warned by Senator Edward Kennedy to reject any offers of safe passage as such an offer would be a trick by the Colonels to lure him to Athens.
Mention is made of Henry Kissinger. This book very effectively conveys to the reader why Greeks absolutely loathe this former Secretary of State. Kissinger is a horrible human being and every new revelation regarding Greece and Cyprus at this time only reaffirms what a monster this man really is. Elias Dematracopoulos was friends with the late Christopher Hitchens. No one has ever done as much to expose Kissinger as Hitchens who publicly denounced him as a “war criminal” and called for him to be put on trial.
Mention is made of the events in Cyprus during the summer of 1974 and the role of Kissinger in the attempted ouster of President Makarios of Cyprus and the subsequent Turkish invasions. There is interesting information on how the Greek American community came together in 1974 to demand that Congress impose an arms embargo on Turkey. That achievement was one of the finest accomplishments of the Greek American community.
The book accurately describes the pro Turkish tilt of American administrations. It is recounted that the Greek American community supported the election of Jimmy Carter only to be disappointed by that administration which maintained support for Turkey over Greece. The support for the military dictatorship in Greece was never pro Greek but an effort to impose western dictates on Greece.
The real disregard that Washington had for Greece came to be seen after the overthrow of George Papadopoulos by another dictator Dimitrios Ioannides and following the restoration of Greek democracy when the elder Karamanlis returned to Greece. Kissinger made it very clear to the Ford administration that replaced the Nixon administration that Turkey was more important than Greece.
In the year 2020, things have changed. Most changes have been relatively positive. Some negatives remain such as the aforementioned strangle hold that Washington has over Greek foreign policy. The most important difference in relations between Athens and Washington today is that Turkey has lost its strategic value.
Turkey has defected from the western alliance and in its provocations of Greece, Athens seems to have American support. The challenge for Greeks is to win over the United States as a real and genuine ally in point of fact and not just on paper. If the United States commits itself fully to the isolation of Turkey and the territorial, legal, and moral rights of Greece and Cyprus all the negative connotations of past relations between Washington and Athens may disappear.
The late Elias Demetracopoulos is a very heroic figure who fought valiantly for the liberation of Greece from dictatorship and lobbied hard after the anti Makarios Coup in Cyprus to prevent the Turkish invasions. He established friendships with American conservatives and liberal alike. It is not likely that prominent Republican conservatives and military officials would have remained friends with someone who was a “communist”.
The end of the economic crisis in Greece and the rapid disappearance of Golden Dawn indicates that Greek politics have been stabilized. Greece does not need the likes of Golden Dawn or the Colonels which that party has repeatedly praised. In terms of national interest, the Colonels not only left Greece in a pathetically weakened state, they abandoned Cyprus to the Turks.
A previous work on the Colonels regime entitled, “The Rape of Greece” by Peter Murtagh published in 1994 recounted that the Colonels promoted “double enosis” for Cyprus. In other words, what the Turks called “taksim”meaning partition. It should not be forgotten that the Colonels betrayed both Greece and Cyprus.
This biography of Elias Demetracopoulos by James H. Barron has a great deal to commend it. The ongoing activities of Congress, the Central Intelligence Agency, the State Department, and the media are all recounted here. Vivid examples are also given with regard to the collaboration between the foreign policy apparatus in Washington and various newspapers and media outlets. Many journalists acted in ways that were not in accordance with the objective aims of their profession.
In conclusion, this is a fine book on modern Greek history as well as on American foreign policy. Elias Demetracopoulos is an example of a Greek success story who was able to make a difference and to contribute greatly to the demise of the Colonels. He was not only a superb journalist but demonstrated great diplomatic prowess by alliances he established with many on both sides of the political spectrum.
His example should serve to inspire Greek Americans in their struggles to build support for Greece and Cyprus.
The Orthodox Times has criticized the Moscow Patriarchate by accusing the Russian Church of “attacking” the Ecumenical Patriarchate. This is in fact untrue. The Russian Church has criticized the Turkish government for the most recent outrage of the Erdogan government which has converted the historic Church of the Savior at Chora.
The Russian Church stated that the Ecumenical Patriarchate was not content with being “first among equals” and created division. This is true considering the destruction and chaos that has ensued in Ukraine. The canonical Ukrainian Church is facing persecution from schismatics linked to extremist groups.
All this is true, and it is to the credit of the Russian Church that it has condemned the conversion of the Chora Church as it has the conversion of Hagia Sophia. This latest outrage on the part of the Turkish authorities is further evidence that the schism in Orthodoxy over the Ecumenical Patriarchate’s intervention in Ukraine must come to an end. The Greek world faces serious threats from Turkey, including Ankara’s territorial claims on the Greek islands and the continental shelf.
The Greek world does not need the schism and its aftereffects. The Ecumenical Patriarch needs to settle this schism by convening a Pan Orthodox Council that would rule on the Ukrainian situation. It should be remembered that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo encouraged Patriarch Bartholomew to invade the Russian Church’s territory in Ukraine.
What exactly has the State Department done to save Hagia Sophia or the Christ the Savior Church in Chora? It should be remembered that the State Department under John Foster Dulles in 1955 failed to even condemn the anti Greek pogroms in Constantinople that set the stage for the destruction of the Patriarchate’s flock. The State Department has done nothing for the theological school of Halki either.
The Greek world is suffering the loss of important shrines in Constantinople. Both Greece and Cyprus are are the targets of Turkish aggression. The Greek world needs to remain on friendly terms with America, Russia, Europe, and other parties in order to resist Turkey.
Resolving the Ukrainian Church dispute according to the ruling of a pan Orthodox synod will remove a spiritual crisis from the Greek Churches and restore their relations with the Russian Church and the other local Churches. It is time to end this Ukrainian Church crisis and for Constantinople’s “supporters” to stop with the cheap shots at the Russian Church.
The Greek Orthodox Archbishop of America appeared at the Democratic National Convention and offered a prayer for Presidential nominee Joe Biden. On the one hand, we are taught by the Church to pray for our leaders irrespective of ideology or party affiliation. During the divine liturgy bishops and priests always pray for the head of state irrespective of political affiliation.
It is one thing to pray for our President whoever it may be in Church services. It is quite another to pray for a Presidential candidate who represents a political party that is fervently anti Christian. One could argue he is simply offering up a blessing to a man who may be elected to the Presidency. We will see if the Archbishop will be at the Republican National Convention to offer up prayers for the current President.
Greek Orthodox faithful in America should be concerned about the Democratic Party. The Democrats are rabidly anti Christian. Groups such as “antifa” and “black lives matter” make up a huge part of the base of the Democratic Party. The burning of Bibles by these groups should be condemned by all Orthodox faithful. The Archbishop could have inspired confidence had he taken a brief moment to condemn the burning of Bibles.
In addition to the sacrilege against the holy scriptures, the Democratic Party supports infanticide, sex changes for children, and many of its officials who serve as Mayors throughout America ordered the Police to stand down as rioters destroyed public and private property. The base of the Democratic Party incited hatred of the Police and demands the “defunding” or outright abolition of the Police.
Such a disturbing agenda should be a cause for protests by the Greek Orthodox hierarchy. There are other reasons to be concerned about a Biden administration. As Senator, Joe Biden supported the bombing of Serbia and the seizure of Kosovo from Orthodox Serbia. Serbs became the victims of ethnic cleansing following the withdrawal of Serbian troops from Kosovo and it should not be forgotten that NATO bombed Serbia on Orthodox Easter.
As Vice President, Joe Biden supported the destruction of Syria which led to the near genocide of the Orthodox (and other) Christians of Syria. Joe Biden was part of an administration that included neoconservatives such as Victoria Nuland and Geoffrey Pyatt who instigated the conflict in Ukraine in 2014. In addition, Joe Biden has made statements supporting the “autocephaly” of the pseudo “church” in Ukraine, a matter he has no business commenting on.
On Greek matters, Joe Biden has done nothing for Greece. His advocacy as Vice President in the Obama administration led to the refugee crisis from Syria which flooded the Greek islands with refugees. At no point, did the Obama administration reverse Washington’s traditional pro Turkish policies. There is no shortage of reasons why Greek Orthodox should be distrustful of the Democratic Party.
Perhaps his Eminence was just bestowing a friendly blessing. In that case it will be well and good if his Eminence is present at the Republican National Convention to ensure that the Archdiocese is not becoming involved in partisan politics.
Turkish President Erdogan has criticized the Republican People’s Party for “losing” the Greek islands that are off the Turkish coast. The Republican People’s Party was the party that was founded by the murderous dictator and general Mustafa Kemal Pasha. Kemal was responsible for conquering territories that had been lost to the Ottoman Empire in 1918 including Constantinople (occupied by the western powers), Smyrna and other lands liberated by Greece, and independent Armenia.
The forcible reconquest of all these territories was carried out through genocide and ethnic cleansing. Only with the deliberate murder and forcible expulsions of the native Christian populations was it possible for Kemal to reclaim these lands for the successor state to the Ottoman Empire that he subsequently created. At the Lausanne Conference of 1923, Kemal practically dictated the terms of “peace” between his own movement and Greece.
Despite Kemal’s conquests of all these territories, Turks like Erdogan remain unsatisfied. Erdogan openly covets the Greek islands that are near the Asia minor coast despite the fact that the populations of these islands are overwhelmingly Greek and have been Hellenic for many centuries before the Turks ever showed up. Turkey today could only take these islands through genocide and ethnic cleansing.
Erdogan would not be the only Turkish leader to advocate genocide and territorial expansionism at the expense of Greece. Kemal of course is the most notorious practitioner of genocide (along with the Young Turks who preceded him). Another leader of the Republican People’s Party, Bulent Ecevit ordered the invasion and occupation of Cyprus in 1974 which led to the ethnic cleansing of 200,000 Greek Cypriots. For Erdogan, Kemal and Ecevit were much too soft on the Greeks.
It is very clear that Erdogan is a psychopath and an extreme narcissist. Greece and Cyprus need to be fully prepared to defend themselves and their native populations from Turkish aggression. Fortunately, Prime Minister Mitsotakis seems to be prepared for the difficult road ahead. For the first time in decades, Greece has a government that is competent in both foreign affairs and in domestic affairs.
The successful handing of the coronavirus epidemic in Greece has won Greece good will and the Prime Minister has a good reputation with a good deal of political and diplomatic sophistication (in contrast to his predecessor). Mitsotakis has been standing up to Turkey over the matter of the continental shelf and has won the backing of Egypt, Israel, the European Union, and the United States (although it is unclear how far American support will go). Mitsotakis could become another Venizelos if he continues to succeed in building up international support against Erdogan’s genocidal ambitions.
Stalin Waiting for Hitler 1929-1941 by Stephen Kotkin. Penguin Press. 2017
Hitler by Peter Longerich. Oxford University Press. 2019.
The Stalin book is the second volume of a three volume set published by scholar Stephen Kotkin. Both the Kotkin book and the Hitler biography by Peter Longerich are the products of superb research. Both texts are over nine hundred pages and the footnotes and bibliography are very lengthy and impressive.
We live in an age where academic institutions have been corrupted by ideology. It is refreshing to see that there are real historians and scholars at work spending years compiling information and research to publish biographies of the two most notorious dictators of the twentieth century. Reexamining the totalitarian states of the twentieth century is of extreme importance in our day as free speech and independent thought have been challenged in both academia and much of the news media.
The Stalin book is a detailed recollection of the political rule and foreign and domestic policies of Joseph Stalin. There is a good deal of material on the great terror of the 1930’s. Stalin was the practitioner of a true totalitarian regime in which the control of the government over its citizenry was total. Under Stalin, no citizen was safe. Even ideological allies of the dictator were not safe and the leadership of the communist party, the red army, the NKVD (secret police) and the foreign ministry were subjected to purges which resulted in the mass murders of its leaders for no logical reason.
Stalin murdered most of his army officers. This would have serious consequences. Unbelievably, Stalin ignored warnings not only from the British and Americans that Hitler was planning an invasion of Russia, but he ignored warnings from his own spies that were working in Germany. Spies and Soviet diplomats in Germany warned the dictator that Germany would invade.
Even the gathering German troops near the Soviet border was not enough to convince Stalin that Hitler was planning an invasion. Military leaders and others thoroughly convinced the Nazis planned to invade had to choose their words carefully in trying to persuade Stalin that Germany was going to invade. Any wrong words could lead to that individuals death.
The Longerich biography of Hitler is one of the best. Not quite as good as the two volume biography by Ian Kershaw (which is still the best biography of Hitler) but it is excellent and thoroughly details Hitlers rise to power and the evolution of German domestic and foreign policies under Hitler. A superb piece of work.
Recent events have demonstrated the totalitarian mindset of political extremists within the United States. Academic institutions need to get out of the business of promoting “social change” and “diversity” and return to the business of educating students. The two aforementioned biographies are necessary reading for students in the social sciences.
These books are crucial to the study of history and how the ideologies which their subjects adhered to corrupted politics and destroyed their societies. These biographies are a reminder of the importance of moderation in politics and the need to reject all extremisms from the far left to the far right.
