ALLIES YET OPPONENTS

Europe is boiling. In fact, the growing confrontation between Turkey and Greece has become a new hotbed of tension. It reflects both the parties' long-standing territorial dispute in the Aegean Sea and the interests of other international players pursuing their geopolitical plans in Europe, the Mediterranean and the strategically important Eurasian crossroads.

The Aegean apple of discord

Turkey and Greece have been at odds for decades. But they have never reached the current level of tension that could lead to the outbreak of full-scale hostilities.

A key factor in the standoff is the dispute over the status of several islands, the boundaries of territorial waters and airspace in the Aegean Sea. Under international maritime law, the territorial waters of any state shall not exceed 12 nautical miles. In the Aegean Sea, because of the proximity of the disputed islands to the mainland coast, the distance often does not exceed 6 nautical miles. Athens has established a zone in the Aegean Sea covering as much as 18 nautical miles, which includes airspace, by claiming its right to expand the borders. However, Greece has drawn closer to Turkey's borders and this has led to disapproval of Athens' policy. The rejection is expressed in the constant and demonstrative violation of the ‘zone’ in the Aegean Sea that Greece has unilaterally established.

A new round of confrontation unfolded on August 23, when Greece intercepted and escorted Turkish F-16s to the west of Rhodes Island in the border zone over the Aegean Sea using S-300 anti-aircraft missile systems. Overall, since the beginning of the year, according to the Turkish Ministry of Defence, the Greek Air Force has chased the Turkish fighters 158 times over the Aegean Sea and violated the Turkish airspace 256 times.

Turkey clearly explained its position on the issue in a letter to 25 EU member states, EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Josep Borrell, permanent UN Security Council member states, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg and UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres. The document states that there are islands, islets and rocks in the Aegean Sea waters that are not affected by existing international treaties and do not fall under Greek sovereignty. Turkey believes that the Aegean Sea issues can be resolved within the framework of international law with mutual recognition of the basic rights and legitimate interests of both countries.

However, as a result of concrete manifestations of the military escalation, Ankara and Athens are regularly exchanging statements, which once again show the real threat of the situation escalating beyond peaceful developments.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Ankara's patience ‘is coming to an end’ and the Turks would take drastic measures, including ‘striking at any time without warning’ if Greece continued its aggressive moves. He pointed out one important fact: "Greece is no match for Turkey in economic or military power.”

Athens, in turn, accuses Turkey of "trying to revive the Ottoman Empire", considering Ankara's actions and statements "unacceptable, unheard of and to be condemned. "[These threats] cannot stop us, we are not afraid of Turkey,” Greek Foreign Minister Nikos Dendias said.

Meanwhile, there is an external factor as an indispensable attribute of the Turkish-Greek confrontation, which has been one of the triggers of the current escalation.

In the focus of world centres

In fact, the reactions of global power centres to the geopolitical situation unfolding between Turkey and Greece reveal the background of tensions.

The US State Department issued a statement that "Greece's sovereignty over its islands is indisputable". The EU called on Turkey to stop threatening Greece. A statement from Brussels said: "the continuing hostile statements by Turkey's political leadership against Greece are of serious concern to the EU." The EU called on Turkey to "seriously work towards a sustainable de-escalation of tensions in the interests of regional stability in the Eastern Mediterranean and fully respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all EU member states.”

The position of France, which has traditionally been particularly active in the Mediterranean region, deserves special mention. French Foreign Minister Catherine Colonna visited both conflicting countries, expressing Paris's full support for Athens' position. "France is ready to support Greece in the event of possible aggression by Turkey on its territory," Colonna said.

Russia's position clearly stands out amid Western reactions to the Turkish-Greek escalation. Senator Andrey Klimov, a member of the bureau of the Supreme Council of the ruling United Russia party, made a remarkable statement at the Russian embassy in Ankara. He expressed his ‘misunderstanding’ of the Greek actions, pointing directly to the negative role of the US involvement. He believes that "the US is trying to impose its policy on Greece and many other countries, including Turkey, by deliberately provoking different countries to enter into conflicts".

Thus, the West led by the US criticises Turkey's policy towards Greece following the trend that has characterised its relations with Ankara in recent years. Turkey, while remaining an ally of the US and European powers within NATO, is nonetheless pursuing a sovereign policy that is often at odds with the Euro-Atlantic strategy. This can also be seen in Turkey's growing partnership with Russia, especially in the area of military-technical cooperation, which is most resented by the US and NATO. At the same time, Moscow's indirect support for Ankara's position in the Aegean conflict is another indicator of Russian-Turkish rapprochement, which, to all appearances, has not been shaken even by the war in Ukraine.

By the way, the nuances of contradictions between Turkey and the West have been particularly emphasized by Greece. In a bid to push NATO think tanks against Turkey, Athens argues that Ankara is not implementing sanctions against Russia. Anticipating even more support from the European Union, Greece calls for using "the case of Ukraine, which proved that threats and incursions that go beyond international law create unprecedented unity and the most direct response.”

Meanwhile, US support for Greece has manifested itself in the militarisation of a number of Greek islands in the Aegean Sea. Ankara is demonstrating protests because the 1923 Lausanne Treaty and the 1947 Paris Agreement, which require Greece's eastern islands in the Aegean Sea to remain demilitarised. And the West is trying to convince Ankara that the militarisation of the islands and increased military cooperation between the US and Greece is purely to contain Russia amid its military operation in Ukraine.

It would be interesting to observe the impact of the growing confrontation between the two NATO allies, Turkey and Greece, on the Alliance itself and its position on the international stage. What will be NATO’s attitude towards the parties in the event of an armed conflict?

Remarkably, Greece deployed Russian S-300 anti-missile systems while Turkish F-16 fighters were performing NATO missions in Aegean Sea airspace. This is why Turkish President Erdogan stated that Greece challenged NATO and its allies, not Turkey.

But the reality is that NATO will be guided not by the arguments of the parties, but by the immediate interests of the Alliance. These include the strengthening of the strategic role of the politico-military organisation of Euro-Atlanticism in all regions that constitute NATO's area of priority influence. Including the Eastern Mediterranean, which is directly related to Turkey and Greece.

In this context, Greece's hopes that the Western bloc would resort to armed deterrence against NATO member Turkey in the interests of Athens' local objectives are unjustified. If, of course, Turkey decides to follow its promise to "strike at any time" if Greece continues its aggressive acts. Therefore, it is likely that Athens' awareness of this fact will not make a force-majeure happen at all. At least not in the near future.