This in in response to the Guardian’s September 11 article on Greece and Turkey. The article is seriously distorted and takes a stance that is much too favorable to the Turkish aggressors. Turkey is attempting to drill for oil in waters that are recognized as belonging to Greece under international law. The article cites the comments of a Turkish Admiral who favors the overthrow of the Treaty of Lausanne, but the Guardian fails to challenge or criticize him. For centuries the Ottoman Empire conquered and ruled over numerous Christian peoples who were horribly persecuted. Between 1914 and 1923, the decadent Ottomans perpetrated genocide against Armenians, Assyrians, and Greeks.
The article attempts to promote false understanding for Turkey by mentioning Prime Minister David Lloyd George. The Turks emerged triumphant in 1922 and escaped punishment for their aforementioned crimes against humanity. Today, Turkish leaders openly covet the Greek islands and demand the renunciation of the Lausanne Treaty. Turkey is led by a monstrous tyrant who has collaborated with monsters such as the Islamic State and is attempting to conquer Greece and Cyprus, in addition to supporting the genocidal threats made against Armenia by its allies in Azerbaijan.
Expressing a sympathetic view for Turkey today is not unlike expressing a sympathetic view for Germany in 1938 when Hitler was seeking to dismember the democratic government of Czeckoslovakia. Turkey is a country that has benefited from the western world’s blindness towards its genocidal history and expansionistic tendencies owing to the perception that Ankara had strategic value. That miscalculation has encouraged Turkish expansionism and convinced both the present Turkish leadership and its predecessors that it can bully and provoke neighboring countries such as Greece, Cyprus, and Armenia.
Turkish leaders are presently boasting that Syrian volunteers will fight on their side in the event of a war with Greece. What is to be said about a lunatic regime which openly welcomes the support of jihadists and terrorists? In addition to bragging about their support from international terrorists, Ankara never fails to remind Greece of its genocidal ambitions by praising the 1922 slaughter of Greek and Armenian Christians at Smyrna. The Guardian also fails to mention that the Turkish leadership is blackmailing Europe by threatening to unleash a wave of millions of refugees into Europe. The Turkish leadership sees these refugees as nothing more than a weapon upon which to threaten and intimidate the whole of European civilization. Threatening to unleash an army of refugees during the worldwide pandemic which could further spread covid-19 should be seen as further evidence of the evil and barbaric nature of the Turkish government.
I am not sure what reality Tom Ellis is living in by extending undeserved praise upon the late Richard Holbrooke, “The Absence of Richard Holbrooke” September 8). The settlement regarding the Imia islet in 1996 was not only completely unsatisfactory but compromised Greece’s territorial integrity by forcing Greece to withdraw from a portion of its own territory, no matter how small that territory is. That Mr. Ellis thinks a comparison of Mr. Holbrooke (or any person) to Henry Kissinger is a positive one indicates how completely out of touch with Greek realities that he really is. Outside of left wing and liberal cliques,there is not a single Greek who has anything positive to say about the infamous Henry Kissinger.
Kissinger bears moral responsibility for the Turkish invasions of Cyprus during the summer of 1974 and is responsible for the war crimes and crimes against humanity perpetrated by Turkish forces against the people of Cyprus. Holbrooke himself was responsible for supporting war crimes against 200,000 Orthodox Christian Serbs in the region of Krajinna during the fall of 1995 and supported the neo-Nazi Croatian government of Franjo Tudjman. In 1999, Holbrooke was the architect of the Ramboullet agreement that was presented to Serbia which would have required that country to give up its province in Kosovo and made war inevitable.
In addition, neither Joe Biden nor the Democratic Party should be considered friends of Greece or Hellenism. Biden served as Vice President in an administration which nearly turned Syria into a failed state and flooded the Greek islands with Syrian refugees. Turkey at the present time is threatening to unleash millions of refugees into Europe. This situation could not exist were it not for the wars that were unleashed by the Bush and Obama administrations against Iraq and Syria. Biden played a huge role in fomenting this refugee problem which has made modern Turkey the terror of Europe much like its Ottoman predecessors in previous centuries.
Actions toward Greece by the Trump administration are uncertain at this point. However, the Trump administration has not bullied Greece into capitulating to Turkey which is exactly what Richard Holbrooke did in 1996 when Greece was forced to withdraw from the islet of Imia. The Trump administration has in many ways formulated a more realistic and sophisticated foreign policy than its immediate predecessors in the Clinton, Bush, and Obama administrations. The Trump administration contributed to the defeat (in collaboration with the Russians) of the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq which came into existence because of the wars of the Bush and Obama administrations.
Finally, Joe Biden is an old man who appears to have mental health issues. The Clinton administration and Obama administration did nothing to help Greece or Cyprus. Certainly, the Trump administration must prove itself to win the support of Greek Americans. In any case, the Trump administration has made changes in American foreign policy and there is at least some hope on the horizon. The Democrats will in all likelihood pursue similar policies pursed by all previous administrations that will continue to support Turkey. The Trump administration has explicitly challenged Islamic extremism as in the case of Islamic state, the very same extremism that is now represented by the rise of the Caliphate of Erdogan’s Turkey.
Editorial writers at both the New York Times and Bloomberg lamented the end of an era when the United States pressured Greece to make major concessions to Turkey. In fairness, these editorials did not express their opinions this way and they probably never proceeded to look at the details of how the Greek standoff with Turkey ended on January 31, 1996 over the islet of Imia. The Treaty of Paris of 1947 which gave the then Italian ruled Dodecanese islands to Greece included the Imia and other islets.
The Clinton administration represented by Undersecretary of State Richard Holbrooke brokered an agreement that led to the removal of the Greek flag and the abandonment of the islet by Greece. It was a capitulation by the Simitis government in Athens to the pressure of the United States. Thus far, the Trump administration has not emulated the traditional American pressure on Greece.
Sunday was the sixty fifth anniversary of the anti Greek pogroms in Constantinople. It should not be forgotten that neither the United States, Great Britain, or NATO condemned the Turkish government. On the contrary, the State Department under Secretary of State John Foster Dulles threatened to cut off aid to Greece if Athens maintained a firm position on the Turkish atrocities.
In 1965, Greek Ambassador to Washington Alexander Matsas was crudely insulted by President Lyndon Johnson who expressed outrage when the Ambassador asserted that the Greek Constitution would not permit Athens to give away a part of Greece (the island of Castellorizo) as part of a “settlement”on Cyprus. Johnson angrily declared,
“Fuck your parliament and your constitution. America is an elephant. Cyprus is a flea. Greece is a flea. If these two fellows continue itching the elephant, they may just get whacked by the elephant’s trunk, whacked good….If your Prime Minister gives me talk about democracy, parliament, and constitution, he, his parliament, and his constitution may not last very long.”
The Trump administration has not committed itself to Greece as it should, but neither has it threatened or bullied Greece as previous administrations have. The Trump campaign was in my opinion preferable to Hillary Clinton in 2016 owing to its “America First” platform that would have committed itself to an isolationist policy away from waging foreign wars and conducting traditional foreign policy that has been so detrimental to Greece and Cyprus in the past. Events that are playing out in the world and in America are changing quickly and this means that the stances and attitudes of America’s political parties could evolve.
As of this writing, it appears that a continuation of the Trump administration is preferable for Greece and Cyprus than the advent of a Biden administration. Again, things could change depending on how the Trump administration reacts to Turkish aggression against Greece and Cyprus. It is certainly true that the Trump administration capitulated to Turkey when it abandoned the Syrian Kurds and permitted Turkey to invade parts of Syria.
However, previous to this the Trump administration had taken a touch stance on Turkey on two occasions. The Trump administration refused to extradite Turkish exile Fetullah Gulen to Ankara despite the Erdogan government’s insistence. During the fight against ISIS, the Trump administration continued to arm the Syrian Kurds despite Turkish demands.
The Trump administration has a mixed record regarding Turkey. Still, the Trump administration has made changes to the traditional foreign policy conducted by both parties. The possibility of coming out strong against Turkey still exists, especially since the Turkish President is becoming increasingly irrational.
A case against the Democrats remains. The performance of the Democrats during the Imia affair are a perfect example. The Clinton administration recognized Skopje at the time as “Macedonia” despite Clinton’s promises in 1992 not to recognize Skopje. The Turkish murders of Cypriots Tasos Isaak and Solomos Solomou went completely unpunished by the Clinton administration.
The Obama administration in which Joe Biden served as Vice President involved itself in Syria. The failed policies in Syria resulted in refugees flooding the Greek islands at the apogee of the economic crisis. The Democrats have never been friendly to Greek interests.
Ultimately, it may not make a difference which party is in power in Washington. If the foreign policy apparatus decides Turkey is a threat, this could be enough to influence either Trump or Biden. The behavior of President Erdogan may also turn off whoever the President turns out to be.
One thing is certain. Turkey is an international menace. However, for the time being Trump appears to be the preferential candidate on Greek and Cypriot security issues.
Mr. Shipley, The following is in response to the Bloomberg editorial that “Merkel can calm the conflict” between Greece and Turkey. The editorial advocates appeasement of Turkey by advocating membership for Turkey in the East Mediterranean Gas Forum. Greece happens to be entirely in the right in this conflict and is acting defensively to Turkish acts of aggression and provocation. The Erdogan government has for several years openly called for the eradication of the Treaty of Lausanne which defines the current boundaries between Greece and Turkey. President Erdogan and other Turkish officials and politicians have openly put forward claims to the Dodecanese islands that have been Hellenic since classical times and have belonged to present day Greece since 1947 through the signing of the Treaty of Paris.
Furthermore, the editorial makes reference to the January 31,1996 crisis between Greece and Turkey which was instigated by the Turkish Government. The islet called “Imia” is a part of Greece without question and is according to Treaty of Paris a part of Greece. Criticism is given to the Trump administration which is unfavorably compared to the Clinton administrations so called “mediation” of 1996. In fact, the Trump administrations policy is an improvement fromthe Clinton administrations. The Clinton administration in effect bullied and pressured Greece into surrendering its own islet and withdrawing the Greek flag from its own territory. Such an agreement may have been to the satisfaction ofthe officials of the Clinton administration but not to Greece which was forced to surrender its own territory to the Turkish aggressors.
Turkey is presently being ruled by a lunatic who used to purchase oil from the Islamic State and permitted Jihadists from Europe to go through Turkey to join the Islamic State when that criminal entity was engaging in genocide against the Yazidi, Shiite, and Christian populations. The Trump administration should be criticized for betraying the Syrian Kurds and appeasing the Turks in Syria. The Trump administrations non intervention in the crisis between Greece and Turkey is oneof its better moments. Unlike the Clinton administration, the Trump administration so far has not bullied Greece into appeasing the mad man of Ankara.
Your editorial also fails to note that Erdogan and his close allies in the neo fascist action Party are praising the the slaughter of Greeks and Armenians in the Christian City of Smyrna in September 1922. Erdogan and others are in effect threateninga resumption of the genocide of 1914 and 1923 that led to the extermination of millions of Armenians, Assyrians, and Greeks. Turkey is an international menace and has no business being invited to join any international organizations. Turkey should be considered an enemy of the civilized world and Greece should be fully backed and supported in defending its territorial integrity against the expansionist and jihadist regime in Ankara.
Dear Congressman, I am writing to express to you as an American of Greek descent that I believe the United States should give maximum support to our democratic allies Greece and Cyprus who are the victims of Turkish aggression and provocations. As is well known at the present time, Turkey is attempting to drill for oil in waters that are according to international law under the jurisdiction of Greece and Cyprus. The Turkish acts of aggression come in the aftermath of public statements made by the Turkish President himself that the Dodecanese islands that are off the coast of Asia Minor and belong to Greece under the Treaty of Paris of 1947 belong to Turkey. Such statements can only be construed as advocating ethnic cleansing and genocide as the population of these islands are overwhelmingly Greek and have not a single Turkish inhabitant residing on them.
Turkey has publicly condemned the Treaty of Lausanne which defines the present day borders between Greece and Turkey. The Turkish President is a jihadist and a fanatic intent on creating a greater Islamic Turkey at the expense of Greece. It is inconceivable to contemplate that the United States will not support Greece during this crisis. The Turkey of President Recep Teyyip Erdogan is gradually filling the vacuum left by the destruction of the Islamic State (IS). As thatJihadist entity was eradicated, Ankara is now emerging as its successor Jihadist state. The Turkish government has converted old Churches such as the famed Hagia Sophia into Mosques and has held public parades glorifying the Ottoman Empire and Islamic triumphalism.
Turkey continues to occupy thirty seven percent of the Republic of Cyprus. The greedy Jihadist Republic of Turkey seeks the oil that rightfully belongs to the people of the Republic of Cyprus. Having occupied the north of Cyprus and ethnically cleansed its territories of Greek Cypriots, Ankara is now seeking to seize the oil that belongs to the people of the internationally recognized and democratic Republic of Cyprus. The Turkish President has been adding fuel to the fire through his rhetoric by glorifying the racial extermination of Greek and Armenian Christians that occurred when Turkish forces seized that city from the Greek Army in September 1922. The Turkish President is a disturbed and dangerous individual that must be opposed by the civilized world.
I respectfully call on you to raise the matter of Turkish aggression against Greece with your colleagues in the House of Representatives and with the President himself. I respectfully ask that you make an appeal to the President to extend full support to the democratic Republics of Greece and Cyprus and to condemn and oppose Turkey. It is my opinion that the United States should terminate all military and other forms of assistance that are being given to the Turkish Jihadist government. The White House and the State Department should be called upon by the House of Representatives to condemn Turkish acts of aggression, to cut off all forms of assistance to Turkey, and to take further necessary diplomatic and political actions to stop Turkish aggression and maintain peace and stability in the region.
Turkish President Recep Teyyip Erdogan has followed the example of the leader of National Action Party ( the neo-fascist Grey Wolves) leader Devlet Bahceli and recalled the events at Smyrna which resulted in the mass slaughter of that city’s Greek and Armenian Christian inhabitants. Erdogan mentioned that Turkey would again drive the Greeks into the sea. For a country whose policies are heavily based on genocide denial, Turkey goes out of its way to actually remind the world not only of the genocide that its founders committed, but that it is willing to commit genocide again.
Turkey has lost the war that it spent many decades fighting by trying to impose its genocide denial on foreign countries and societies. That was has been lost as can be seen by the continued and unrelenting publication of books on the Armenian, Assyrian, and Greek genocides. Turkey had always been fighting a losing battle as its only real supporters in western governments and academic institutions were corrupt politicians and pseudo academics willing to come under Ankara’s influence for a price of some sort. Bernard Lewis is a perfect example.
In 2019, Israeli academics Benny Morris and Dror Ze’evi published “The Thirty Year Genocide” a five hundred page tome documenting the systematic planning and carrying out of the physical extermination of the Ottoman Empire’s Christian populations. This book followed on the publication of “The Great Fire” by Lou Ureneck just a couple of years earlier which was about the slaughter of the Greeks and Armenians and the burning of Smyrna. There has never been any question as to the historical truth of what transpired in Anatolia between 1914 and 1923. When Turkish leaders open their big mouths making threats they are verifying the fact that their country has been built over the corpses of Armenian, Assyrian, and Greek Christians.
The authors of “The Thirty Year Genocide” spent seven years researching and writing this book. Their outstanding efforts show as this is simply a historical masterpiece. The authors recount in the introduction that Turkish governments over the decades have purged their historical archives of incriminating evidence. Turkish efforts to hide the truth have ended in miserable failure.
The authors in great detail recount the origins of genocide which they claim began against the Armenians in 1894. Over time, the policies of mass extermination were extended to the Greeks and Assyrians. Three governments in the Ottoman Empire were responsible- the government of Sultan Abdul Hamid II, the Young Turks, and Mustafa Kemal Pasha. Each government continued pursuing genocide as an instrument of state policy.
There are times when this book is tough to read. The pages at times endlessly describe the slaughter of Greeks and Armenians in village after village after village. They describe them in great detail and with statistics. This is a product of great historical research as well as political significance.
Israel for many years used its influence in Washington to stop the recognition of the Armenian genocide by the United States Congress. One has to wonder whether this book could have been published by two prominent Israeli historians had relations between Israel and Turkey not been damaged by the present leadership in Ankara. This is a wonderful and powerful contribution to the history of the Christians in the late Ottoman and early Republican eras in Turkish history.
This book has great political significance because unlike Germany which was occupied by the allies in 1945 and forced to undergo a policy of denazification, Turkey has never been forced or compelled to account for the horrors it inflicted on the Christian populations. As a result Greece, Cyprus, and Armenia today face threats of genocide by the Erdogan regime. Armenia in particular has been threatened by the lunatic regime in Azerbaijan which has threatened to attack Armenia’s nuclear power plant.
In recent days, the Greek government appointed an Ambassador to Azerbaijan. The Ambassador was in fact insulted by his hosts who made it clear that they stand firmly with Turkey on the matter of Ankara’s aggressive designs against Greece. It is abundantly clear that Turkey and Azerbaijan are being led by lunatics who are capable of and willing to resume genocidal operations against the descendants of the communities they exterminated one century ago.
Favorable reviews of this book were published in various American and British newspapers. Most important may have been the article about this book that appeared in the Wall Street Journal. The Journal was once one of the most staunchly pro Turkish newspapers in America. Its editorial writers served as apologists for the denial of the Armenian genocide and for the Turkish invasions of Cyprus.
They published a review of this book entitled “When Turkey killed its Christians” and recounted the genocide of the Armenians and Greeks. This is one example where the rise of Erdogan has led to a change in attitude toward Turkey. This past summer, National Review, another formerly pro Turkish publication made mention of the Armenian and Greek genocides.
Serious historians have worked hard for decades to expose the truth of genocide that was committed by the Turkish government. Their work has not been in vain. New generations of historians and scholars have come to assist the effort in liberating history from politics.
The NATO alliance is now seeking to “mediate” the crisis caused by Turkish aggression against Greece in the Mediterranean sea. Athens should look upon NATO plans with great skepticism and suspicion. In contrast to the European Union, and in contrast to the support for Greece from individual countries such as France and Italy, NATO has expressed no hitherto support for Greece.
The Mitsotakis government has handled this crisis well. After Turkey signed an agreement with Libya in effect partitioning the Mediterranean between them, Athens signed the EEZ agreement with Egypt. In addition to France and Italy, it appears the United Arab Emirates and even Saudi Arabia are adopting stances favorable to the Greek position.
Athens knows full well that the Erdogan government has put forward a claim on the Greek islands and has openly demanded a revision of the Treaty of Lausanne. Turkish claims to the continental shelf located under these islands and drilling for oil near them is an act of blatant aggression. NATO’s refusal to intervene until now is proof that NATO cannot be trusted.
It should not be forgotten that on January 31, 1996 Turkey claimed the Greek islet of Imia. Through the mediation of Undersecretary of State Richard Holbrooke the Greek flag was removed from the islet although the Treaty of Paris of 1947 clearly showed that Imia belonged to Greece. A New York Times editorial last weekend lamented the failure of the United States to “resolve” the present “crisis” in accordance with past “mediation” efforts such as that of January 31, 1996.
Athens would be making a great mistake if it agreed to anything that would concede to Turkey any of its rights. In all likelihood, the General Secretary of NATO will probably attempt to impose on Greece another “Imia” type solution. Greece should be ready for this and should reject any agreement that would compromise Greece’s rights.
The German newspaper, “Die Welt” reported that Turkish President Erdogan ordered the military to either sink a Greek ship or to shoot down a Greek helicopter without causing the loss of life! The Turkish Generals reportedly refused to follow the President’s orders. If this happens to be true it indicates that many in Turkey are skeptical of the Erdogan governments pro war policies and that divisions may exist in the formulation of policy.
Unlike in the past when Turkish aggression was manifest against Greece, Turkey has many more problems to cope with. In the past, Turkey’s problems were limited to the Kurdish question. Today, Turkey has many more problems that have to with the Kurds of Syria as well as their own Kurds. In addition, they have tensions with Syria as a result of the victory of the Syrian government in that countries civil war.
Turkey’s allies in the effort to overthrow the Asaad regime included Saudi Arabia. Now it appears that tensions exist between Turkey and Saudi Arabia. Turkey’s effort to emerge as the leader of the Sunni Muslim world has failed spectacularly.
The Greek City Times has reported that Russia has protested Greek media coverage asserting that Moscow supports Turkey in the present crisis, an accusation Moscow rejects. While the Russian ties with Turkey at this point should be of serious concern, it is a dangerous mistake for Greece to join the western demonization of Russia. It should be remembered that alliances throughout the crisis in Syria and the Middle East have shifted.
The Turkish government ordered the downing of a Russian plane in 2015 which nearly provoked a war with Russia and Turkey. Greeks need to remember that Athens rejected overtures from the Russians during this time and obeyed the dictates of the west. A Greek alliance with America and Europe against Turkey is welcome, Athens has to be careful to avoid participating in any actions against Russia and Iran which American officials seem to be attempting to drag Greece into.
American Ambassador to Greece Geoffrey Pyatt has praised Greece for keeping Russian influence out. The Greeks need to be concerned only about the Russian support for Turkey, and not the non existent efforts of Russian to establish influence in Greece. It should be remembered that Patriarch Bartholomew with the full backing of Washington along with some compromised Bishops from the Church of Greece have supported the persecution of Moscow’s Orthodox Church in Ukraine at the request of the State Department.
In 2021, Greece will commemorate two anniversaries. Greeks will celebrate the two hundredth anniversary of the Greek War of Independence. Less likely to be highlighted next August will be the nine hundred and fifty year anniversary of the Battle of Manzikert where the Seljuk Turks defeated the Byzantine armies and seized a huge portion of Anatolia. The Greek world has been at the mercy of the Turk ever since.
Greek national ambitions should be aimed at eradicating the Turkish threat. The Mitsotakis government has presently put Turkey at the forefront of its foreign policy. For this, the Prime Minister and his foreign policy and defense advisors deserve praise. It has been decades since Greece had a government that was based on Greek nationalism rather than the internationalist agenda that was at the forefront of the agenda of the leftist Socialist Party.
Greece’s foreign policy must remained focused on Turkey. Its foreign relations with America, Europe, Russia, Israel, and the Arab world should depend on the status of their relationship with Turkey. Greece should strengthen its ties with those countries that are hostile to Turkey. Considering Russia’s ties with Turkey, it is reasonable for Athens to cool its relationship with Moscow.
But that relationship should be cooled on the basis only of Russian support for Turkey, and not because America and Europe do not like Russia. Greece needs to be careful and to select its fights very carefully and selectively. It should commit itself only to an alliance that is anti Turkish.
It is entirely possible that the Turkish government could succeed in following the example of the Young Turks during the First World War and succeed in alienating both the West and Russia. This would be the ideal. Turkey today is evolving into a Jihadist state that threatens everybody.
Before the Greek media joins in the demonization of Russia it should take into consideration the downing of the Russian plane in 2015, and the assassination of the Russian Ambassador by a Turkish Jihadist. In the past decade, Erdogan’s Turkey has nearly started a war with Israel (the flotilla incident), Russia, and the United States (in Syria). While it is disappointing that none of these three countries maintained a principled stance against Turkish aggression, precedents have been set for a future Turkish provocation against one or all of the above.
The present Turkish President has demonstrated an inability to engage rationally with other countries. Sooner or later, he is going to provoke a conflict with one of the above governments that will lead to serious repercussions for Ankara. In the meantime, Greece should maintain its principled policies and reject any attempt by NATO to force Athens to surrender its rights.
The Erdogan leadership survived coup attempts in 2004 and 2016. In all likelihood it can only be removed by power from without. As unlikely as it seems now, should Ankara continue to provoke and to meddle, the prospect of a foreign intervention in Turkey cannot be ruled out over the long term.
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.
