The necessity of contacts between Greece and Turkey
Thursday’s meeting of the European Political Community (EPC) in Prague offered an opportunity for direct communication between the Greek prime minister and the Turkish president. It appears that Ankara chose not to use it.
No one gains from the current confrontational environment between the two countries. Certainly not Turkey, which must at some point realize that its aggressive behavior does not reap any benefits. It is not improving its image, while its military power is suffering due to the reluctance of major allies, mainly the US, to sell it new, advanced F-16 fighters and to upgrade its older ones.
In Washington, these days they approach Greece and Turkey very differently than in the past. No one disputes the importance of Turkey, due to its geographical location and more. However, Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s reactive and unpredictable behavior has resulted in him being viewed as a “very difficult partner.”
At the same time, the cross-party seriousness, consistency and continuity demonstrated by Greece in recent years has upgraded its strategic importance in the eyes of US policy makers of both parties. This can be seen not only from public statements by officials and legislative initiatives, but also from the analyses of Greek-Turkish relations and the Eastern Mediterranean done by various think tanks.
In this light, the recent illegal Turkish-Libyan memorandum confirms the image of Turkey as a country that is part of problems and not solutions.
Athens was and remains open to dialogue. As the Greek prime minister noted at the UN, disputes are not resolved with aggressive behavior, imperial fantasies and inflammatory rhetoric, but with dispute settlement rules and international law.
Erdogan’s statement that he will not talk to Kyriakos Mitsotakis is just an immature overreaction. The same is true for the continuous rhetorical excesses of Erdogan, his coalition partner Devlet Bahceli, Defense Minister Hulusi Akar, Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu and others.
Introversion, arrogance and nationalism are bad and dangerous advisers.
A well-prepared meeting between the two leaders in Prague might have led to a path of de-escalation, which in today’s pre-election environment Erdogan does not seem to want.
There could, however, be contacts between the defense ministers of the two countries, which would have their own symbolism and substance. At the same time, a reliable channel of communication between Athens and Ankara that operates away from the public eye must be created immediately.
