Greece Analysis Greek - Turkish Relations

[Huelague]

But again, take a fair share of Aegean (50%-50%), respect Turkish minorities in West Thracian and recognize North Cyprus. Than we are fine.

 

[HTurk]

But again, take a fair share of Aegean (50%-50%), respect Turkish minorities in West Thracian and recognize North Cyprus. Than we are fine.

One should claim Cyprus, the other one should get the Aegean Sea. ;-)

 

[Akritas]

But again, take a fair share of Aegean (50%-50%), respect Turkish minorities in West Thracian and recognize North Cyprus. Than we are fine.

Anything else?
Anyway, we are not fine as long as Turkey continues to raise territorial claims and invade Greek territories

Nothing is more worse than Status Quo. It will be changed in near future. Than all empty talks will have an end.

Si vis pacem, para bellum
or
"If you want peace, prepare for war"
As Greeks we know who you are and what you want, we know your historical record.
Actually we are under hybrid war that started from Turkey.

 

[Ryder]

Anything else?
Anyway, we are not fine as long as Turkey continues to raise territorial claims and invade Greek territories



Si vis pacem, para bellum
or
"If you want peace, prepare for war"
As Greeks we know who you are and what you want, we know your historical record.
Actually we are under hybrid war that started from Turkey.

We guys know who you are very well.

You can fool a lot of naive Turks. But you cant fool us here.

Remember this us Turks are always ready for war.

 

[Akritas]

Borders Issue

Towards the end of February 2020, thousands of living in Turkey migrants moved towards the Greek-Turkish borders of Evros. The authoritarian Erdogan regime creates a weaponized human zone close to the Evros border that no journalists and cameras are allowed to enter. The aim is no one will have a true picture of what the refugees/immigrants do, their living conditions, how do they move across the river, how turkish police guiding them.

Remind:

1. Turks used aggressive tactics of their own.
2. Turkish security forces standed aside to allow migrants to tear down part of a fence dividing Turkey and Greece.
3. Turkish vessel pursued a Greek coast guard vessel in the Aegean.
4. Turkish armored vehicle rammed a border fence between the two countries.
5. Turks sent more guards to the border — not to prevent people from leaving without documents, but to stop Greece from returning them by force, according to the Turkish interior minister, Suleyman Soylu.

Also in the Aegean , Turkish Coast Guard with the cooperation of turkish smugglers, pushing forward migrants at the Greek islands.
The criminal networks serving specific hubs in Turkey (Izmir, Bodrum and Istanbul) are very efficiently organised. They recruit the migrants and organise transportation to the departure points on the coast. The networks also tend to serve specific nationalities (Syrians, Afghans, Pakistanis, Bangladeshis and Somali)

One may wonder why people from Africa, whether northern or sub-Sahara, take the route to Europe through Greece, rather than the intuitively more direct route to Italy or Spain. A look at flight routes and visa regimes provides the answer. One may reach the Greek islands from as far away as central Africa, using Turkish Airlines, a Turkish visa and a smuggler picked at Istanbul airport or the Aegean coast, for less than 1,500 dollars total and at considreably less ris than the Libyan route.
Turkish Airlines has 200 destinations worldwide and at reasonable prices. For example, one way flight from Kinshasa to Istanbul costs 833 dollars, Abidjan to Istanbul, 709 dollars and Casablanca to Istanbul 458 dollars. Turkish Airlines is close to President Erdogan in more ways than on.

Turkey and the Weaponization of Syrian Refugees

Coercive Engineered Migration corresponds to an attempt from a challenger to obtain political, economic or military concessions from a target through the instrumentalization of a migration “crisis”. It generally appears as an asymmetric weapon by a weak actor against a stronger one and may, in...

www.bic-rhr.com

Profiting from misery – how smugglers bring people to Europe

Punish the smuggler or reward the smuggler? Recent refugee arrivals in Greece

As its northern and western neighbours close their doors to asylum seekers through policies, borders and distance, Greece continues to welcome them to the best of its ability.

www.opendemocracy.net

 

[Xenon54]

Turkey over the past three decades, has maintained a significant number of military units, aircraft and landing craft at points on the coast of Asia Minor just across from the Greek islands, which is a serious threat against Greece.
Greece reiterates its position that it is fully justified in taking all elementary precautionary measures to ensure that it will be able to exercise its inalienable right to self-defence on the basis of Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, in particular given the above-mentioned conduct of Turkey since 1974.
So we are not talk only for....papers, but Greece faces the reality, that is the Turkish intentions and military forces .
More in......

Turkish claims regarding the demilitarization of Greek islands in the Aegean Sea

Turkey is the only country that refers to and demands the demilitarization of the “islands in the Eastern Aegean”. With regard to the militarization of the islands in the Eastern Aegean, various international agreements apply. In particular : • the status of the islands of Limnos and...

defencehub.live

Lol funny how you take 1974 as an exsample when the invasion happened only after decades of violent assaults on Turkish minority and attempted annexation of Cyprus by Greek military
But its always Turkey thats the agressor for you guys, you are always the victims, just like the Armenians...

Are you only here to post official propaganda from Greek state or will you also add your own argumentations?

Btw look, i can also bolden certain points, i guess it makes the arguments more valid.

 

[Manomed]

Turks bad - Average greek argument

Cope and seeth @Akritas

 

[Akritas]

Lol funny how you take 1974 as an exsample when the invasion happened only after decades of violent assaults on Turkish minority and attempted annexation of Cyprus by Greek military
But its always Turkey thats the agressor for you guys, you are always the victims, just like the Armenians...

Are you only here to post official propaganda from Greek state or will you also add your own argumentations?

Btw look, i can also bolden certain points, i guess it makes the arguments more valid.

You Turks, always forget the period before the so called "violent assaults" part of the Cyprus Issue......
Let me remind you the whole story, answering laso and to the argument that I allegedly use only what the Greek government says.

After the September 1955 Constantinople Pogrom, EOKA started its activity against Turkish Cypriots.
At 1956, a year later EOKA revived its attempts to achieve the union of Cyprus with Greece. Turkish Cypriots were recruited into the police by the British forces to fight against Greek Cypriots, but EOKA initially did not want to open up a second front against Turkish Cypriots.

Menderes is one that ignited the Cyprus conflict, like in 1956 when Nithat Erim submitted a report to him and since that day the strategy never wavered.
The Erim report clearly states that the only solution for Cyprus consists of partition under Turkish control and mentions population exchange and settlement by mainland Turks.
In 1957 Dr. Kutsiuk (the leader of Turkish Cypriots), proposed to Menderes the division of the island. That proposal is the exact Turkish line of today or 1974 invasion( with the exception of the enclosed Famagusta).
So, the leaders of the Tukish Cypriots wanted the division of the Cyprus since 1957.

But, in January 1957, EOKA forces began targeting and killing Turkish Cypriot police deliberately to provoke Turkish Cypriot riots in Nicosia, which diverted the British army's attention away from their positions in the mountains. In the riots, at least one Greek Cypriot was killed and this was presented by the Greek Cypriot leadership as an act of Turkish aggression.

The response of the Turkish Cyprion side was the foundation of the so called "Turkish Resistance Organisation (TMT, Türk Mukavemet Teşkilatı) " that was formed initially as a local initiative to prevent the union with Greece, which was seen by the Turkish Cypriots as an existential threat due to the exodus of Cretan Turks from Crete once the union with Greece was achieved. It was later supported and organised directly by the Turkish government, and the TMT declared war on the Greek Cypriot rebels as well.
On 12 June 1958, eight Greek Cypriot men from Kondemenos village, who were arrested by the British police as part of an armed group suspected of preparing an attack against the Turkish Cypriot quarter of Skylloura, were killed by the TMT near the Turkish Cypriot populated village of Gönyeli, after being dropped off there by the British authorities.

TMT also blew up the offices of the Turkish press office in Nicosia to falsely put the blame onto the Greek Cypriots. It also began a string of assassinations of prominent Turkish Cypriot supporters of independence.
The following year, after the conclusion of the independence agreements on Cyprus, the Turkish Navy sent a ship to Cyprus fully loaded with arms for the TMT. The ship was stopped and the crew were caught red-handed in the infamous "Deniz" incident.

 

[Manomed]

You Turks, always forget the period before the so called "violent assaults" part of the Cyprus Issue......
Let me remind you the whole story, answering laso and to the argument that I allegedly use only what the Greek government says.

After the September 1955 Constantinople Pogrom, EOKA started its activity against Turkish Cypriots.
At 1956, a year later EOKA revived its attempts to achieve the union of Cyprus with Greece. Turkish Cypriots were recruited into the police by the British forces to fight against Greek Cypriots, but EOKA initially did not want to open up a second front against Turkish Cypriots.

Menderes is one that ignited the Cyprus conflict, like in 1956 when Nithat Erim submitted a report to him and since that day the strategy never wavered.
The Erim report clearly states that the only solution for Cyprus consists of partition under Turkish control and mentions population exchange and settlement by mainland Turks.
In 1957 Dr. Kutsiuk (the leader of Turkish Cypriots), proposed to Menderes the division of the island. That proposal is the exact Turkish line of today or 1974 invasion( with the exception of the enclosed Famagusta).
So, the leaders of the Tukish Cypriots wanted the division of the Cyprus since 1957.

But, in January 1957, EOKA forces began targeting and killing Turkish Cypriot police deliberately to provoke Turkish Cypriot riots in Nicosia, which diverted the British army's attention away from their positions in the mountains. In the riots, at least one Greek Cypriot was killed and this was presented by the Greek Cypriot leadership as an act of Turkish aggression.

The response of the Turkish Cyprion side was the foundation of the so called "Turkish Resistance Organisation (TMT, Türk Mukavemet Teşkilatı) " that was formed initially as a local initiative to prevent the union with Greece, which was seen by the Turkish Cypriots as an existential threat due to the exodus of Cretan Turks from Crete once the union with Greece was achieved. It was later supported and organised directly by the Turkish government, and the TMT declared war on the Greek Cypriot rebels as well.
On 12 June 1958, eight Greek Cypriot men from Kondemenos village, who were arrested by the British police as part of an armed group suspected of preparing an attack against the Turkish Cypriot quarter of Skylloura, were killed by the TMT near the Turkish Cypriot populated village of Gönyeli, after being dropped off there by the British authorities.

TMT also blew up the offices of the Turkish press office in Nicosia to falsely put the blame onto the Greek Cypriots. It also began a string of assassinations of prominent Turkish Cypriot supporters of independence.
The following year, after the conclusion of the independence agreements on Cyprus, the Turkish Navy sent a ship to Cyprus fully loaded with arms for the TMT. The ship was stopped and the crew were caught red-handed in the infamous "Deniz" incident.

 

[Huelague]

Anything else?
Anyway, we are not fine as long as Turkey continues to raise territorial claims and invade Greek territories



Si vis pacem, para bellum
or
"If you want peace, prepare for war"
As Greeks we know who you are and what you want, we know your historical record.
Actually we are under hybrid war that started from Turkey.

We talked that over and over again. No matter who is right or has morality on his own. Let the weapons talk. The winner get everything.

 

[Huelague]

Dont forget who is the biggest supporter of pkk terror organisation.

 

[Xenon54]

You Turks, always forget the period before the so called "violent assaults" part of the Cyprus Issue......
Let me remind you the whole story, answering laso and to the argument that I allegedly use only what the Greek government says.

After the September 1955 Constantinople Pogrom, EOKA started its activity against Turkish Cypriots.
At 1956, a year later EOKA revived its attempts to achieve the union of Cyprus with Greece. Turkish Cypriots were recruited into the police by the British forces to fight against Greek Cypriots, but EOKA initially did not want to open up a second front against Turkish Cypriots.

Menderes is one that ignited the Cyprus conflict, like in 1956 when Nithat Erim submitted a report to him and since that day the strategy never wavered.
The Erim report clearly states that the only solution for Cyprus consists of partition under Turkish control and mentions population exchange and settlement by mainland Turks.
In 1957 Dr. Kutsiuk (the leader of Turkish Cypriots), proposed to Menderes the division of the island. That proposal is the exact Turkish line of today or 1974 invasion( with the exception of the enclosed Famagusta).
So, the leaders of the Tukish Cypriots wanted the division of the Cyprus since 1957.

But, in January 1957, EOKA forces began targeting and killing Turkish Cypriot police deliberately to provoke Turkish Cypriot riots in Nicosia, which diverted the British army's attention away from their positions in the mountains. In the riots, at least one Greek Cypriot was killed and this was presented by the Greek Cypriot leadership as an act of Turkish aggression.

The response of the Turkish Cyprion side was the foundation of the so called "Turkish Resistance Organisation (TMT, Türk Mukavemet Teşkilatı) " that was formed initially as a local initiative to prevent the union with Greece, which was seen by the Turkish Cypriots as an existential threat due to the exodus of Cretan Turks from Crete once the union with Greece was achieved. It was later supported and organised directly by the Turkish government, and the TMT declared war on the Greek Cypriot rebels as well.
On 12 June 1958, eight Greek Cypriot men from Kondemenos village, who were arrested by the British police as part of an armed group suspected of preparing an attack against the Turkish Cypriot quarter of Skylloura, were killed by the TMT near the Turkish Cypriot populated village of Gönyeli, after being dropped off there by the British authorities.

TMT also blew up the offices of the Turkish press office in Nicosia to falsely put the blame onto the Greek Cypriots. It also began a string of assassinations of prominent Turkish Cypriot supporters of independence.
The following year, after the conclusion of the independence agreements on Cyprus, the Turkish Navy sent a ship to Cyprus fully loaded with arms for the TMT. The ship was stopped and the crew were caught red-handed in the infamous "Deniz" incident.

I stopped reading after first paragraph, your arguments are always based on ''we did this because of this and that'' yeah, sry but there is no justification for attrocities.
And you are not the innocents that you are trying to make of yourself here, the west might sympathise with Greek narrative for cultural and religious reasons but that does neither undo attrocities from your side nor does it justify them.

You say you want to solve things diplomatically, then start by trying to understand the opposite site instead of your current self righteous attitude because putting all of the blame to the other side is not the diplomatic way.

 

[Kansei]

Which islands are you reffering to ; you have to be specific since some islands have to obey certain papers and rules and others have to obey different ones

@xenon5434 ?

 

[Akritas]

You say you want to solve things diplomatically, then start by trying to understand the opposite site instead of your current self righteous attitude because putting all of the blame to the other side is not the diplomatic way.

When two parties do not find them, then they go to Court. Turkey does not want that either.
Turkey as the bully state of the East Med, promotes the aforementioned contentions in practice through methods that contravene the fundamental principles of the UN Charter (threat of war, violations carried out with armed fighter aircraft over inhabited islands, violations of Greek territorial sea, etc.).

 

[Xenon54]

@xenon5434 ?

Militarization of Eastern Aegean Islands Contrary to the Provisions of International Agreements​

One of the basic issues between Turkey and Greece in the Aegean Sea is the demilitarized status of the Eastern Aegean Islands. The Eastern Aegean Islands are demilitarized by several international agreements which impose legal obligations binding upon Greece. The legal instruments setting up a demilitarized status for the Eastern Aegean Islands can be summarized from an historical perspective as follows :
a) 1913 Treaty of London : The future of the Eastern Aegean Islands have been left to the decision of Six Powers in Article 5 of the Treaty of London.
b) 1914 Decision of Six Powers: The islands of Lemnos, Samothrace, Lesvos, Chios, Samos, and Ikaria and others under Greek occupation as of 1914 were ceded to Greece by the 1914 Decision of Six Powers (Great Britain, France, Russia, Germany, Italy and Austria-Hungary) on the condition that they should be kept demilitarized.
c) 1923 Lausanne Peace Treaty: In Article 12 of the Lausanne Peace Treaty the 1914 Decision of Six Powers was confirmed.
Article 13 of the Laussane Treaty stipulated the modalities of the demilitarization for the islands of Lesvos, Chios, Samos, and Ikaria. It imposed certain restrictions related to the presence of military forces and establishment of fortifications which Greece undertook as a contractual obligation to observe stemming from this Treaty.
The Convention of the Turkish Straits annexed to the Laussanne Treaty further defined the demilitarized status of the islands of Lemnos and Samothrace. It stipulated a stricter regime for these islands, due to their vital importance to the security of Turkey by virtue of their close proximity to the Turkish Straits.
d) 1936 Montreux Convention: The Montreux Convention did not bring any change to the demilitarized status of these Islands. With the Protocol annexed to the said Convention, the demilitarized status of the Turkish Straits has been lifted to ensure the security of Turkey. In the Montreux Convention there is no clause regarding the militarization of the islands of Lemnos and Samothrace.
e) 1947 Paris Peace Treaty: The demilitarized status of Eastern Aegean Islands was once again confirmed in 1947 long after the Lausanne Treaty. The "Dodecanese Islands" namely Stampalia, Rhodes, Calki, Scarpanto, Casos, Piscopis, Nisiros, Calimnos, Leros, Patmos, Lipsos, Symi, Cos and Castellorizo were ceded to Greece on the explicit condition that they must remain demilitarized (Annex 6).
The demilitarization of the Eastern Aegean Islands was due to the overriding importance of these islands for Turkey's security. In fact, there is a direct linkage between the possession of sovereignty over those islands and their demilitarized status. Greece, in this respect, cannot unilaterally reverse this status under any pretext.
The above mentioned international treaties which are in force and thus binding upon Greece strictly forbid the militarization of Eastern Aegean Islands and bring legal obligations and responsibilities to Greece.
However, despite the protests of Turkey, Greece has been violating the status of the Eastern Aegean Islands by militarizing them since the 1960's in contravention of her contractual obligations. These illegal acts of Greece have increased considerably over the last years and became a vital dispute between the two countries. It is worthwhile to recall that Turkey's several appeals to Greece to respect the demilitarized status of these Islands have been disregarded so far.
From a mere point of view to respect international law, it should be underlined that Greece also introduced a reservation to the compulsory jurisdiction of International Court of Justice on the matters deriving from military measures concerning her "national security interests" when she accepted the Court’s jurisdiction in 1993. In so doing, Greece aims to prevent a dispute concerning the militarization of the islands to be referred to the International Court of Justice.

https://www.mfa.gov.tr/militarization-of-eastern-aegean-islands-contrary-tp-the-provisions-of-international-agreements.en.mfa#:~:text=The " Dodecanese Islands " namely Stampalia,remain demilitarized (Annex 6).

When two parties do not find them, then they go to Court. Turkey does not want that either.
Turkey as the bully state of the East Med, promotes the aforementioned contentions in practice through methods that contravene the fundamental principles of the UN Charter (threat of war, violations carried out with armed fighter aircraft over inhabited islands, violations of Greek territorial sea, etc.).

No country in the world will accept this ridiculous maximalist attitude, even tiny cyprus has a much bigger eez, thats not a fair share of eez, if you guys think anyone would accept this then you are out of your mind, international law is the law of the stronger one, thats what Turkey is doing, protecting its interests, nothing more nothing less.

 

[Akritas]

The delimitation between Turkey and Libya

On the 27th of November 2019, a “Memorandum of Understanding” was signed between the Turkish president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan and the head of the Libyan “Government of National Accord”, Fayez al-Sarraj, which concerned the delimitation of maritime areas.

To date, there has never been a maritime delimitation agreement which has been called a “Memorandum of Understanding”, because it gives it the appearance of having no binding authority. In international law, however, what is significant about the agreement is its content and not the terminology used to describe it., the agreement in question grossly violates the international law of the sea.

Turkey and Libya together delimited the sea region south of Crete. Geographically Turkey does not neighbor this region. The reason why Libya signed an agreement which contravened international law is simple: Libya finds itself in the throes of a civil war. In eastern Libya there is the Libyan House of Representatives based in Tobruk, which supports Field Marshal Khalifa Haftar. He is supported, in various ways, by Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Russia, as well as France. In western Libya, based in Tripoli, there is the “Government of National Accord” under Fayez al-Sarraj, which is recognized by the UN.

Turkey is the most important supporter of the al-Sarraj government. It has provided the Tripoli government with jihadist mercenaries from Syria and military equipment. In November 2019, the al-Sarraj government was on the brink of collapse. Haftar had reached the outskirts of Tripoli. Turkey offered to lend alSarraj its support. In exchange for military aid, Libya signed an agreement that is an affront to international law.

This Memorandum was never endorsed by the Libyan Parliament as required by article 8, paragraph 2 (f) of the Skhirat Agreement of 2015, and was concluded despite the fact that the two countries have no common maritime boundaries. Furthermore, it completely ignores the presence of the Greek islands in the region.
Likewise, this agreement was unequivocally rejected by the President of the House of Representatives of Libya, Aguila Saleh Issa, in a letter sent to the United Nations Secretary-General. Consequently, this agreement should not be registered under Article 102 of the Charter of the United Nations nor published by the Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea in any way.

After examining the document diplomatic sources in Egypt, Cyprus, France, EU, USA and other affected countries have said that the the memorandum of understanding on maritime borders signed between Turkey and the Tripoli-based Government of National Accord has no legal standing, is unhelpful and provocative. The content of the document contravenes the provisions of the international Law of the Sea.

EU leaders to reject Turkey-Libya deal - draft statement

An accord between Libya and Turkey mapping out maritime boundaries is a violation of international law, European Union leaders will say on Thursday in support of Greece, which objects to the deal, according to a draft statement seen by Reuters.

www.reuters.com

US State Dept: Turkey-Libya maritime zones agreement 'unhelpful and provocative'

www.amna.gr

Libya (GNA)–Turkey maritime deal - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Akritas]

No country in the world will accept this ridiculous maximalist attitude, even tiny cyprus has a much bigger eez, thats not a fair share of eez, if you guys think anyone would accept this then you are out of your mind, international law is the law of the stronger one, thats what Turkey is doing, protecting its interests, nothing more nothing less.

In simpler words: Turkey fears International Law, knows that it will lose in International Court of Justice, tries to gain by intimidation and threats of war what it can not do in the diplomatic field.

 

[Xenon54]

In simpler words: Turkey fears International Law, knows that it will lose in International Court of Justice, tries to gain by intimidation and threats of war what it can not do in the diplomatic field.

Why should Turkey go to court over something that it never signed for? Explain me that first.

 

[Akritas]

Why should Turkey go to court over something that it never signed for? Explain me that first.

Is Turkey demands or not the implementation of the rules of International Law ?

 

[Huelague]

When two parties do not find them, then they go to Court. Turkey does not want that either.
Turkey as the bully state of the East Med, promotes the aforementioned contentions in practice through methods that contravene the fundamental principles of the UN Charter (threat of war, violations carried out with armed fighter aircraft over inhabited islands, violations of Greek territorial sea, etc.).

To courts? Why Ukraine was not going to court? Or Georgia? Or Iraq? Or Palestine? Or?...The world (courts) are not that righteous as they should to be. As we can see everywhere in the world, the right doesn’t count anymore. Or has never count in the past.