Rising Tensions Between Turkey and Greece Divide E.U. Leaders

Blackeyes90

Contributor
Moderator
Messages
952
Reactions
20 3,262
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey
merlin_175575501_f65d4a36-34be-41f3-8bdb-8f43d9056ea0-jumbo.jpg


Conflict over drilling rights to massive natural-gas deposits in the eastern Mediterranean is becoming increasingly militarized, risking a conflict between two NATO members.
An escalating dispute between Greece and Turkey over energy resources in the eastern Mediterranean is fast becoming militarized, raising the risks of a clash among NATO allies.
Foreign Minister Heiko Maas of Germany, who visited Greece and Turkey this week urging dialogue, warned both governments against further military escalation. “Fire is being played with and any small spark could lead to catastrophe,” he said on Tuesday.
As Germany tries to mediate, four of its fellow E.U. members, France, Greece, Cyprus and Italy, are engaged in military exercises involving ships and planes off the Cypriot coast. Their purpose, they say, is to deter Turkey from further energy exploration in disputed waters, something it has been doing for several weeks with vessels guarded by warships and jet fighters.
France has sided with Greece, sending ships and planes to the region last week. French officials have also criticized Turkey, a member of NATO but not of the European Union, for its support of the United Nations-backed government in Libya, which it has provided with troops in return for a controversial maritime energy deal that would extend Turkish drilling rights in the eastern Mediterranean.
The French defense minister, Florence Parly, while insisting that dialogue was her priority, announced the two-day military exercises Wednesday, insisting that “respect for international law must be the rule and not the exception.”
But the European Union is split on how to tackle the crisis. France, Greece and Cyprus want a tough line, while Germany, Spain and Italy favor a more conciliatory approach.

Those tensions will be discussed as European Union defense and foreign ministers meet this week in Berlin. The bloc has already objected to most of Turkey’s claims, including its Libya deal, which Washington also refuses to recognize.

Led by Greece, Cyprus and France, some E.U. members want sweeping new sanctions, and the bloc’s foreign-policy chief, Josep Borrell Fontelles, will present options for discussion in Berlin. But Germany, which holds the European Union’s rotating presidency, is eager to present some incentive to Turkey in return for de-escalation.

Josep Borrell Fontelles, the E.U. foreign-policy chief, is to present options for discussion on the crisis at a meeting of ministers this week.

Josep Borrell Fontelles, the E.U. foreign-policy chief, is to present options for discussion on the crisis at a meeting of ministers this week.Credit...Pool photo by Sean Gallup
While Greece and Turkey have agreed to exploratory talks, Mr. Maas said, “it is clear that such talks can only take place and be successful in a constructive environment, and for that, all destructive activities must be ended.”
Turkey’s foreign minister, Mevlut Cavusoglu, said Tuesday that Ankara was “open to talks without preconditions, but when one side starts imposing preconditions, then there are many things we will put forth, too.” He warned Greece to “stop being bratty” and drawing red lines that could lead to conflict.
But Greece wants to limit talks to delineating the continental shelf and consequent energy rights in the eastern Mediterranean, and not to provide a blank slate for other Turkish grievances, like the status of Greek-inhabited islands in the Aegean.
The foreign ministers are not expected to make decisions on sanctions or incentives in Berlin, with the European Council president, Charles Michel, saying that the issues would be discussed at a summit of leaders on Sept. 24.
Tensions between Greece and Turkey go back, at least recently, to the Turkish invasion of Cyprus in 1974 and the island’s division. The two countries nearly went to war in 1996 over an uninhabited island, a crisis defused by U.S. diplomacy.
Although Washington has backed Greece and Cyprus with quiet diplomacy and some military support, including sending an aircraft carrier into the eastern Mediterranean, it is now letting Germany take the lead in managing the crisis.


Security outposts in Nicosia, the divided capital of Cyprus. Tensions between Greece and Turkey go back, at least recently, to the Turkish invasion of Cyprus in 1974 and the division of the island.

Security outposts in Nicosia, the divided capital of Cyprus. Tensions between Greece and Turkey go back, at least recently, to the Turkish invasion of Cyprus in 1974 and the division of the island.

Turkey has become more nationalist and assertive since the failed 2016 coup against the government of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who has pressed Turkish interests as far afield as Syria and Libya. Germany is also cognizant that Turkey houses up to four million refugees and migrants who might otherwise try to come to Europe.
Turkey appears to be pursuing what it calls “Blue Homeland,” an expansionist strategy to claim waters and resources in the eastern Mediterranean and Aegean controlled by Greece and other countries. The plan envisions Turkey taking over several Greek islands where hundreds of thousands of Greek citizens live.
While Greece may agree to take disputes regarding claims in the southeastern Mediterranean to international arbitration in The Hague, it will not negotiate about the Aegean.
The root of the current crisis was the discovery 10 years ago of massive natural-gas fields in the eastern Mediterranean. As more gas has been discovered and exploited, countries have asserted their rights to often-overlapping offshore areas known as exclusive economic zones. Some countries normally at odds — like Israel, Greece, Cyprus and Egypt — have cooperated on gas projects.
But the various consortiums have excluded Turkey, and Greece’s ownership of islands close to the Turkish coast gives Athens claims of exclusivity that rankle Ankara.
“Their aim was to imprison our country, which has the longest coastline in the Mediterranean, into a coastal strip from which you can only catch fish with a rod,” Mr. Erdogan has complained.
For example, Israel, Cyprus, Greece and Italy are planning a pipeline called EastMed to carry gas to European consumers, but Turkey’s more recent maritime claims cross its route, and Mr. Erdogan has vowed to block it.
merlin_166575534_1a2f3ccb-eca8-40d5-8c05-ca6da5ad7135-articleLarge.jpg



Ankara argues that Cyprus has no right to exploit its gas resources until it reaches a deal to share them with Turkish Cypriots in the island’s north. Turkey, which is not a signatory to the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea, under which exclusive economic zones are set, contests those claimed by Greece and Cyprus and wants a larger one for itself.
Mr. Erdogan sent survey and drilling ships to explore off Cyprus this year, prompting mild European sanctions in February, and has done the same near the island of Rhodes. Greece said it would defend its territory, and Turkey overflew Greek islands with fighter jets and put naval vessels into the area. This month, a Greek frigate collided with a Turkish one protecting the survey ship, prompting the French decision to aid Greece.
The standoff has been the most serious confrontation between NATO allies since Turkey and Greece faced off in 1996.
Germany wants both sides to stop the chest-beating and talk. But shortly after Mr. Erdogan agreed to remove his research vessel in late July, the Greek prime minister, Kyriakos Mitsotakis, signed an energy deal with Egypt that would demarcate their exclusive economic zones. Mr. Erdogan responded angrily, saying that the countries had no mutual sea border and that the deal infringed on Libya’s zone. As Greece moved to ratify the deal, he sent his ships back again.
Mr. Mitsotakis wants to show firmness at home without unduly provoking Ankara, Greek officials say. But on Wednesday he announced that Greece would extend its territorial waters in the Ionian Sea to the west from six to 12 nautical miles, an entitlement under the U.N. convention, and that it reserved the right to do so elsewhere.
But he is unlikely to try in the Aegean, since Turkey has said that such a move would be grounds for war.
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story




Greek and French vessels taking part in a military exercise in the eastern Mediterranean this month. Exercises near Cyprus have aimed to deter further Turkish survey activity.

Greek and French vessels taking part in a military exercise in the eastern Mediterranean this month. Exercises near Cyprus have aimed to deter further Turkish survey activity. Credit...French Defense Ministry, via Associated Press
Mr. Erdogan said that Turkey “will take whatever it is entitled to” in the region, vowing that “we will never make concessions on what belongs to us.”
Given Turkey’s more aggressive and nationalist posture, many believe that the European Union must think through a different relationship with a country that remains a crucial NATO ally, trading partner and bridge to the Muslim world.
Stefano Stefanini, a former Italian ambassador to NATO, says Europe should stop “going through the motions” on the prospect that Turkey could become a member, a 21-year saga with negotiations stalled since 2016, and “discuss what could be a forward-looking, inclusive relationship with the E.U.”
That might include visa-free travel and a reform of the existing customs union, he said, “a generous relationship but short of membership.”
But that would presume a negotiated solution or acceptable arbitration to share the resources of the eastern Mediterranean.
Niki Kitsantonis contributed reporting from Athens, and Matina Stevis-Gridneff from Brussels.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/27/world/europe/greece-turkey-eu.html?searchResultPosition=2
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Costin84

Well-known member
Messages
438
Reactions
559
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Romania
If Cyprus has no right to exploit its resources until it reaches an agreement with Northern Cyprus why does Azerbaijan exploits its resources without sharing with Nagorno Karabach?
 

Captain_Azeri_76

Contributor
Messages
505
Reactions
1,649
Nation of residence
Germany
Nation of origin
Azerbaijan
If Cyprus has no right to exploit its resources until it reaches an agreement with Northern Cyprus why does Azerbaijan exploits its resources without sharing with Nagorno Karabach?

For this you have to look at the whole history of the last 500 years - (not 4000 years, as some people like to do, it has to remain in the realistic frame)... Karabagh had only a majority Armenian population after the invasion of the Soviets, the Russians, and before the Middle Ages... in between, it looked different for several centuries -

"Due to the Arab occupation in the 8th century Karabakh was under the control of various predominantly Muslim peoples, from Kurds, Arabs, Lezgians, Persians and Turkic tribes who had migrated to Lower Karabakh. At the latest with the land grab of the Seljuks in the 14th century. In the 19th century, the ethnic groups belonging to the Islamic cultural area represented the majority of the population in the Greater Region."

Karabagh was occupied by Armenia in violation of international law, so it has no share in the wealth of AZ and Armenia still has to live from Hollywood donations...
The same with Cyprus - people here like to talk about 4000 years of history, but the fact is that Cyprus has belonged to Turkey for the last 500 years - so, the logical conclusion: it is a fact that KKTC is legally autonomous and self-sufficient and turkey is only a guarantor... there is a difference
- at the beginning of the conflict, turkey only demanded that KKTC not be excluded from the trials and agreements, but the greeks forced this...
 

Costin84

Well-known member
Messages
438
Reactions
559
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Romania
For this you have to look at the whole history of the last 500 years - (not 4000 years, as some people like to do, it has to remain in the realistic frame)... Karabagh had only a majority Armenian population after the invasion of the Soviets, the Russians, and before the Middle Ages... in between, it looked different for several centuries -

"Due to the Arab occupation in the 8th century Karabakh was under the control of various predominantly Muslim peoples, from Kurds, Arabs, Lezgians, Persians and Turkic tribes who had migrated to Lower Karabakh. At the latest with the land grab of the Seljuks in the 14th century. In the 19th century, the ethnic groups belonging to the Islamic cultural area represented the majority of the population in the Greater Region."

Karabagh was occupied by Armenia in violation of international law, so it has no share in the wealth of AZ and Armenia still has to live from Hollywood donations...
The same with Cyprus - people here like to talk about 4000 years of history, but the fact is that Cyprus has belonged to Turkey for the last 500 years - so, the logical conclusion: it is a fact that KKTC is legally autonomous and self-sufficient and turkey is only a guarantor... there is a difference
- at the beginning of the conflict, turkey only demanded that KKTC not be excluded from the trials and agreements, but the greeks forced this...
There's nothing legal about Northern Cyprus as its international standing is the same as Nagorno Karabach....an unrecognised occupied territory. My previous question stands
 

Captain_Azeri_76

Contributor
Messages
505
Reactions
1,649
Nation of residence
Germany
Nation of origin
Azerbaijan
There's nothing legal about Northern Cyprus as its international standing is the same as Nagorno Karabach....an unrecognised occupied territory. My previous question stands
That is wrong, even if you wish otherwise - Turkey was (and is), in the course of the political and social developments in Cyprus, a guarantee for Cyprus even before the invasion - and acted exclusively within the framework of the contracts -
Even if you don't want to hear that, because it doesn't serve your reasoning, that's a fact - of course, Greece and the west didn't stick to the agreements from the 50s and 60s, after all, Turkey was said at the time, "Oh, don't be like that, come on, it's not that bad, then Cyprus is greek after all, that's not your problem"...

BTW - Consciously using the Armenian term for a predominantly Muslim region, Turkish region Karabagh, is a deliberate provocation .

Watch that -

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Costin84

Well-known member
Messages
438
Reactions
559
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Romania
That is wrong, even if you wish otherwise - Turkey was (and is), in the course of the political and social developments in Cyprus, a guarantee for Cyprus even before the invasion - and acted exclusively within the framework of the contracts -
Even if you don't want to hear that, because it doesn't serve your reasoning, that's a fact - of course, Greece and the west didn't stick to the agreements from the 50s and 60s, after all, Turkey was said at the time, "Oh, don't be like that, come on, it's not that bad, then Cyprus is greek after all, that's not your problem"...

BTW - Consciously using the Armenian term for a predominantly Muslim region, Turkish region Karabagh, is a deliberate provocation - behave like an adult and stop sweating desperately in front of the PC - we are not at the PDF anymore - you are free to participate - but we don't want your loved PDF WAFF scam in here... thanks in advance

Watch that -

I am talking about international law and my sentences are supported by international law. You are the one getting personal and trying to sell the whole thing from an emotional Turkish point of view. "Everyone betrayed Turkey " doesn't cut it....Again, I've said nothing wrong, Nagorno has the same legal status as Northern Cyprus when in comes to the law and international recognition.
These issues will only be solved if everyone renounced their hypocritical and emotional approach.
If you created this forum only to have people agreeing with you, let me know and I'll be on my way.
 

Captain_Azeri_76

Contributor
Messages
505
Reactions
1,649
Nation of residence
Germany
Nation of origin
Azerbaijan
I am talking about international law and my sentences are supported by international law. You are the one getting personal and trying to sell the whole thing from an emotional Turkish point of view. "Everyone betrayed Turkey " doesn't cut it....Again, I've said nothing wrong, Nagorno has the same legal status as Northern Cyprus when in comes to the law and international recognition.
These issues will only be solved if everyone renounced their hypocritical and emotional approach.
If you created this forum only to have people agreeing with you, let me know and I'll be on my way.
Rejecting a term that can be associated with a war of aggression, that was contrary to international law, is not "forcing the same opinion" but common sense - and what you do is just conscious provocation -
Just like twisting facts...
Armenia has never been a guaranteed power by treaty for an Azerbaijani region, such as Turkey for the Turkish parts of Cyprus - do you notice the difference?
So this is not about emotions and being betrayed, but about facts...
The video explains it quite well.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Costin84

Well-known member
Messages
438
Reactions
559
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Romania
Are you ok?
What right has Nagorno Karabag over Azerbaijans resources?
Cyprus has two parts one country,the Turkish part didnt claim indepence,did it?
Nagorno Karabag claimed independence,how can you even try to compare them?
Northern Cyprus unilaterally declared independence in 1983 being only recognised by Turkey and rejected by the international community.
 

Captain_Azeri_76

Contributor
Messages
505
Reactions
1,649
Nation of residence
Germany
Nation of origin
Azerbaijan
Hmm,good one.

There is a difference
-> when a region, previously Turkish, afterward Turkish, is protected by a guarantor power (by treaty) under the law and declares itself independent because the political system that was sought would again have promoted discrimination against the Turkish part..., or
-> whether a part of a sovereign state, is settled and militarized with foreign aid, over just 70 years - (compared to Cypriotic Turks 500 years) later isolates itself with foreign aid and commits massacres that have been internationally recorded and then declares itself independent - but de facto belongs to another country instead of independent...

hence a weak argument and not a "good point" brother
 

TR_123456

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
5,194
Reactions
2 12,965
Nation of residence
Nethelands
Nation of origin
Turkey
There is a difference
-> when a region, previously Turkish, afterward Turkish, is protected by a guarantor power (by treaty) under the law and declares itself independent because the political system that was sought would again have promoted discrimination against the Turkish part..., or
-> whether a part of a sovereign state, is settled and militarized with foreign aid, over just 70 years - (compared to Cypriotic Turks 500 years) later isolates itself with foreign aid and commits massacres that have been internationally recorded and then declares itself independent - but de facto belongs to another country instead of independent...

hence a weak argument and not a "good point" brother
With ''good one'' i meant the find(KKTC declaring independence).
No matter what,Karabag will be returned to Azerbeycan,be it peacefully or by force,that is what we care about.
And again,no matter what,KKTC willbe recognized by the UN eventually,then they can have their southern oil/gas fields.
 

Follow us on social media

Top Bottom