.png)
By: Nikhil Reddy
Upon Erdogan assuming power and extending his power to a near autocratic level, Turkey’s international relations have worsened significantly, as can be seen by Turkey’s relationship with Greece. Tensions between these two nations go back centuries, to the days where the Ottomans were in complete control of the region. This most recent conflict between them is one of the most severe yet, with it being the longest conflict between the two since Turkey’s 1974 military intervention of a fellow Mediterranean nation and Greek ally, Cyprus. These tensions have steadily grown since 1974, and have finally boiled over into an international stalemate that threatens to bring an end to the tenuous peace brokered by the European Union in 2004.
What is the cause of the tensions?
While Turkey has control over numerous islands throughout the Eastern Mediterranean, they pale in comparison to the number of Greek islands. This allows Greece to use their islands to extend the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ for short), which is the area immediately off of a country’s coastline where they have uninterrupted access to all of the natural resources the area has to offer. Greece is signed on the United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which strictly defines the limits of the EEZ from 12-200 nautical miles off of the coast of a country or Island. Turkey, however, is not subscribed to UNCLOS and instead opts for its own definition for the limits of an EEZ. Turkey measures a country’s EEZ by the extent of a country’s underwater continental shelf (remember 8th-grade Geology?), which would leave Greece with a tiny EEZ and Turkey and Jordan to control the vast majority of drilling rights in the Eastern Mediterranean. This is where the conflict lies, Turkey disagrees with Greece’s EEZ’s territory on a fundamental level, but Greece objects to this challenge, and wants to keep its EEZ the same it has been.
Why Now?
It is no secret that there has long been oil and natural gas in the Eastern Mediterranean, with countries like Egypt, Cyprus, and Jordan all having made claims and started drilling. However, one of the largest underground reserves of Natural Gas was recently discovered off of the Greek island of Crete, in the region that is disputed depending on Turkey’s EEZ definition or the UN/Greece’s EEZ definition. This gives the increasingly isolated, aggressive, and desperate Turkey an opportunity to decrease its massive budgetary deficit, caused by energy imports and a devalued currency. This has made this already disputed region even more militarized, with both Greece and Turkey extending their military influence into the region, and Turkey has even sent survey ships guarded by platoons of missile boats. This issue for Turkey becomes even more worrisome because if Greece were to gain uninterrupted access to this natural gas, it would be sent to Europe directly through the prospective Eastern Mediterranean Pipeline. Turkey is not a part of this pipeline and would have to begin paying even more for its imported energy if the pipeline is completed and Greece gets to drill for this underwater natural gas.
Who is there to prevent a war?
Since the Obama Administration, the US has been slowly pulling troops out of the Eastern Mediterranean and Eastern Europe, deeming the presence of the troops a threat that might provoke Russia in the long run. Biden is unlikely to reverse this trend anytime soon, and this leaves the European Union nations to try and work with Greece and Turkey to mediate this deal. This is exactly what Greece wants, as Turkey has alienated themselves from the EU nations through their relationship with Russia. Turkey has rejected any sort of international mediation and has instead opted to try and pursue bilateral mediation with Greece directly, hoping to use Turkey’s hard power to pressure a weak Greece into a Turkish sided deal. Greece continues to reject bilateral negotiations, and no forms of negotiations seem likely to occur anytime soon. This has led to individual countries taking sides and is the first time where Western European nations will have to take the lead on an Eastern European Foreign Policy Issue in a long time.
Who is on what side?
After the failed 2016 coup attempt, Turkey’s overall policy took a decidedly nationalistic turn, with Erdogan leading the charge for Turkish expansion across the Mediterranean, Aegean, and Black Seas. This has put Turkey in conflict with numerous countries, including France, Egypt, and the UAE. Greece has used the antagonization of Turkish relations with these countries to build their own relations with them. Greece has run military exercises with France, Egypt, and the UAE off of Crete, showing that Greece will hold its ground and claims in the region. Turkey does have a few allies, however. Most notably, Turkey has inked a deal with the UN-recognized (but extremely shaky) Libyan government who would also gain from the continental shelf method of EEZ limitations. Turkey also has fairly strong relations with both Russia and Ukraine, but both of those nations don’t really have a stake or presence in the region. This sets up a clear conflict between the Greek side (Greece, France, UAE, and Egypt) and the Turkish side (Russia-backed Turkey, and Jordan).
How can this conflict be solved?
NATO-led de-escalation is already beginning, significantly reducing the risk of an accident that would spark a bloody, international war between nations. However, this only freezes the conflict, which is similar to what occurred during the 1974 conflict, thus simply waiting for another inevitable conflict between Turkey and Greece to spark. Therefore, both sides must temper their intense rhetoric and begin to formulate a solution that does not solely focus on national sovereignty, but encompasses the complex economic issues that help to define this conflict. . If political leaders in both countries were to change the narrative about the conflict, de-escalation would not be seen as a sign of weakness, but as allowing for a mutually beneficial deal to be peacefully negotiated. This all helps to de-escalate the conflict, but that cannot be the end goal. Instead, the European Union needs to extend the Barcelona Process (this gives all signed nations greater access to EU markets and treats the Eastern and Southern Mediterranean nations as a group of countries.) to all of the Eastern Mediterranean nations. This would force cooperation between the Eastern Mediterranean (especially regarding energy), reducing Turkey’s energy costs, helping Greece’s seeming everlasting economic recovery, and pushing Turkey off of the track for an isolated nationalist country. This would push for cooperation between Egypt, Jordan, Turkey, and Greece and offer a long-term solution to the problem, while simultaneously allowing the EU to extend influence into a Russia dominated region.
Greece and Turkey disagree on the most fundamental of definitions of limiting the EEZ, and this disagreement has turned into an international conflict. This conflict has the potential to boil over into an international war, and thus requires the assistance of NATO, Greece, Turkey, and the EU to create long-lasting peace.
Discussion Questions:
What is the best and most plausible solution to the national sovereignty and economic issues of this conflict?
Does the EU itself have an obligation to take an institutional stance toward this conflict?
Should Turkey still be considered to be a possible EU member in the future, despite their many failings?
How can the international community attempt to curtail Erdogan’s increased aggression in the region?
Should the US re-engage in the Eastern and Southern Mediterranean regions?
Sources Used:
Further Reading:
Comments