The islands above all

In international politics, it is a fundamental principle that positive relations between states do not stem from threats. While fear may deter unpleasant situations, it does not herald anything constructive. A strong relationship is built upon mutual understanding and the acknowledgment that coexistence and collaboration are possible despite differences. Ideally, resolving disparities is preferable, but advanced states thrive by surmounting such challenges.

Greece’s differences with Turkey are not insignificant; they are well-known and have persisted for nearly 70 years. Multiple generations have come of age in both countries during periods of heightened crises that, on three occasions, brought Greece and Turkey to the brink of war. While the majority of Greeks and Turks advocate for peaceful coexistence, there are contentious issues where neither side can easily compromise, particularly concerning security. Turkey contends that the defense systems on the islands in the eastern Aegean threaten its security, whereas Greece maintains that fortifying these islands is crucial for national survival.

When facing the potential loss of national territory due to military vulnerability in a crisis, one is compelled to adopt a conciliatory stance to avert the worst

The militarization of certain Aegean islands, possibly in violation of international treaties, came as a consequence of the Turkish invasion of Cyprus. At that time, the Greek political and military leadership, in the wake of Attila II, recognized that a conflict between Turkey and Greece would leave the islands in the eastern Aegean entirely vulnerable. If this issue remained unresolved, Greece would be held hostage to Turkey, severely limiting its options in dealing with its Aegean neighbor across all levels. When facing the potential loss of national territory due to military vulnerability in a crisis, one is compelled to adopt a conciliatory stance to avert the worst – a situation precisely defined as “Finlandization.” In this scenario, a weaker party ensures that its policies not only avoid disturbing the powerful neighbor but also refrain from crossing the lines drawn by the latter.

Conversely, Turkey comprehends well that the fortified Greek islands present obstacles to its “Blue Homeland” strategy. Employing threats rather than the use of actual force is a common tactic among Greece’s Aegean neighbors to achieve their goals. Threats in the form of “We will come suddenly one night” carry weight when the threatened side is weak. In contrast, when that side feels strong, it responds assertively with a resolute “We will be waiting for you.” Presently, Greece perceives itself as robust due to the fortification of its islands, vulnerable areas that are well-defended. However, this strength prompts Turkey, invoking international treaties, to pursue their demilitarization. However, Turkey’s Aegean Army looms as a threat across the Greek islands, and so does the fleet of hundreds of amphibious vessels. Hence, “what is under threat will not be demilitarized.”