Stavros Lygeros: Submission or resistance? – The strategic stake in Greek-Turkish relations

From the very first moment, we have been warning that the upcoming Greek-Turkish dialogue, in reality the upcoming negotiations, will be an extremely slippery process for Greek national interests. Athens might be talking of just a delineation of the continental shelf/EEZ, but Ankara has made clear in the most categorical and official manner that it will lay out everything on the table. Ankara will put on the table “gray zones”. It will put on the table the issue of demilitarization of the Aegean islands.

In fact, the issue between Greece and Turkey is not whether a little more EEZ, than that foreseen by the Law of the Sea, will be given to Turkey. In reality, the issue that is being tabled has to do with the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Greece, not even just some sovereign rights. This is the strategic dimension of the Greek-Turkish conflict, and only if we can deal with it as such, will we be able to escape the vicious cycle in which we have been trapped for decades.

One of the choices we are faced with is to submit to Turkey and hand over what it is asking for, or at least to negotiate and give her as little as possible from what it is demanding. In essence, though, to give Turkey sovereignty and sovereign rights so as to guarantee peace. In this way, however, we will be voiding, to a great degree, what we achieved through the Revolution of 1821. Greece will be transformed into a sovereign state, in name only, but essentially we will become Ankara’s satellite. Whosoever believes that this is the proposition of choice let him say so clearly.

The orther path is that of resistance. Resistance to Turkish expansionist pressure does not necessarily mean war. It means that Greece is organizing to check this pressure, organizing on all levels. It does so by reinforcing its armed forces, by constituting alliances on the basis of common interests (and for the first time in decades conditions are favorable to this), by butresing its economy, and shoring up its political willingness to resist. The latter is where the most deficiencies are to be found.

The choice to resist, does not merely entail words, but necessitates actions. It entails the adjustment, not just of the state, but of society as a whole. Therefore, we must make our choices in earnest. Our words must be crystal clear.

Unfortunately, within our political system, as well as mass media landscape, there is no such debate. A lot is heard about tactical moves, but of the strategic dilemma I mentioned not a word is heard. Sadly shows that we have the tendency to remain bound to this impasse we have been experiencing for decades. Even if only this debate begins it will be a great step forward. And as Plato says: “The beginning is half of the whole”.