Turkey

[Don Giovanni]

Trump needs convincing, and there's no better example then the one that fell on Bush Sr's lap when Saddam invaded Kuwait. Saddam, up to that point, was a neocon darling and bulwark against Iran. I think if it ever got to the point of Turkey invading Greece, it would work in our favor. The reality is that the Pentagon do want Erdogan out, whether Trump does or not is less relevant. We can't jump the shark like we did in Cyprus, but we can goad Turkey and we shouldn't be afraid of that risk.

A big challenge are the personal relations Trump has developed with those close to Erdogan (most notably his son-in-law) when he had his tower built in Istanbul. Greece has no such personal connection to the sitting president. Of the men who are running, Biden was perhaps the one and only who might have stood up to Turkey with any kind of conviction. It will be hard for him to get the nomination, but of the Democrats only he and Bloomberg stand any real chance in a general election.

[Don Giovanni]

Who was the last US president who was pro Greek exactly?

Can't remember any, but we nearly had a few men become president.

Spiro Agnew was Greek and served as vice-president to Richard Nixon. Had he stuck in there, he could well have replaced Nixon, but separate scandals snarled them both.

We also had a couple of Greeks run for president, like Paul Tsongas. He had to drop out of the 1992 election for health reasons. He had early campaign success by winning New Hampshire. Michael Dukakis won the Democratic nomination, but lost in a landslide in the general election to Bush Sr.

That's about as close as Greece has gotten to a favorable president.

[Reaper]

I spose the only Greek to become a foreign president was this gentleman:





https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bartolom%C3%A9_Mitre

[Soprano76]

Bernie has been pretty vocal about his opposition to Turkey, recently stating that "Turkey is not an ally." He is most likely to win the Dem nom out of any single candidate and matches up favorably to Trump in many of the polls I've seen.

[aek66]

Who was the last US president who was pro Greek exactly?

obviously, due to the dynamics of usa-turkey relations and the fact that greece wasn't a NATO poster-boy during the yugo/kosovo wars....i'd say any usa president would have been hard-pressed to be overtly pro-greek. i know that old man bush and old man mitsotaki had a good relationship, i believe bush visited crete more than once.

this is a very interesting chat between president bush, pm mitsotaki and usa secretary of state l. eagleburger in 1992. time is a thief and all of these gentlemen have died. this is now declassified and i find it fascinating. bush asks very good questions as american president, mitsotaki is statesman-like as he is concise and the urgency about fyrom is evident. eagleburger does decide to grant greece a favor or two. unfortunately, everything unraveled for greece from eu nations, due to greece's support for yugo-serbia. i omitted the earlier discussion about cyprus.

Prime Minister Mitsotakis: I also talked about Yugoslavia with Secretary Eagleburger and General Scowcroft at Lunch.

The President: I want to hear your views.

Prime Minister Mitsotakis: As I told Secretary Eagleburger, the situation is critical. My country, and me personally, are ready to help find a solution to this difficult situation. We want to place our traditionally good relations with Serbia in the service of the common effort. We're ready to take up any action you would like -- influence the Serbs to open roads, etc.

The President: We encourage you to use your influence. We have tried. We're very worried about the situation. It is really terrible, especially for the children. Many people are encouraging me to use all kinds of military force. But I'll be .damned if I'll send one American kid into a situation that is unclear and where we can't win. The humanitarian situation is our greatest concern. These are historic rivalries. Greece can't solve them; the U.S. can't solve them.

Prime Minister Mitsotakis: The war in Bosnia won't end soon.

The President: Everybody hates each other so much. It's bad enough in American politics.

Prime Minister Mitsotakis: In Kosovo, a very important effort should be displayed to prevent spillover.

The President: It's like a boiling pot.

Prime Minister Mitsotakis: The most important thing in the whole affair is to have frontiers respected. External and internal frontiers. The solution in Kosovo could be an advanced state of autonomy without going as far as self-determination. We think the Albanians are beginning to understand this. A way should be found to the Serbs and Albanians to reach an understanding.

The President: You are absolutely right. You may be in a better place to help this happen.

Prime Minister Mitsotakis: An issue most close to our Greek hearts is the one of Skopje/Macedonia. We will be discussing this in Edinburgh.

The President: Are you optimistic? We have a lot of hope.

Prime Minister Mitsotakis: I'll make no forecasts. What I tried to explain to Secretary Eagleburger and General Scowcroft is that our approach is a positive one. We want this republic to exist and we have taken several initiatives in this sense. For one,· there is the border guarantees. Albania, Bulgaria, and Serbia all made this declaration. What we cannot accept is their official name to include the term Macedonia. I'll be very frank. If something like that were to happen, there will be real destabilization. But this issue can be settled now as a starting point for a positive approach. So far with Yugoslavia we have had a lot of failures, why not success for once? The inclusion of Macedonia in their official name is desired by less that 50% of the people. A recent poll there resulted in no more than 17% of the population wanting that name.

The President: Then why does the administration of Macedonia get so hung up on the name?

Prime Minister Mitsotakis: There is something behind it, from the period under communism. It is not easy for the present administration to release from old habits. Democracy in this area will be an exaggeration. The old line communists under Tito still hold power. But Gligorov is a serious man. A deal could be reached with him. This is why the solution like we have suggested is a good formula.

The President: I'll make a statement, and I would like you to tell me what's wrong with it. But first, I do want to say that I value our relations. Every American knows that our relations are far, far better. But my statement is this: This Republic has gone about the achieving of its democracy and status in accord with Helsinki principles. It has proceeded and conducted itself in an almost exemplary way. So I'm saying two things: They've observed Helsinki Accords and their performance has been exemplary. Do you agree with those points, or do Greeks see things differently

Prime Minister Mitsotakis: I would not agree that they are an exemplary democracy. But it is a republic we could tolerate.

The President: No, I'm not saying an exemplary democracy, but rather that they have pursued it in an exemplary way.

Prime Minister Mitsotakis: I agree. Yes. This is precisely why we have no problems with this republic and we want it to exist. But we can't accept the name. After Lisbon -- which justified us -- the reaction of Gligorov has been to provoke Greece. This republic was set up by Tito and Stalin after WWII in order to "lost words" United States; my generation remembers it. But the people in power in Skopje are the same -- when they use this name, we become very suspicious. We want them to stop using this term and implying they have claims on us. Even in their constitution they have provision for nationals abroad, including in Greece. This is why we make the single request that they chose another name. We cannot accept this -- any Greek government could not. Otherwise we would be destabilized.

The President: I wanted to be sure, there's nothing else that would cause you problems.

Prime Minister Mitsotakis: Another problem I ask for U.S. to help to prevent the admission of this country in the UN because if they are admitted, this discussion is valueless.

The President: But if you have no problem with the name, it can go ahead.

Prime Minister Mitsotakis: I ask if you can help postpone.

Acting Secretary Eagleburger: We'll see what we can do.

Prime Minister Mitsotakis: It is very important. It would be a tragedy. I can't afford it. I don't exaggerate, I try to compromise. But if this happens this would be a tragedy for Greece and for me.

The President: Is there any division of opinion on this at home in Greece?

Prime Minister Mitsotakis: No. It is the only issue where Papandreou and my ex-Foreign Minister Samaras and I agree.

The President: We want to try to be helpful, maybe we can help delay.

Acting Secretary Eagleburger: It won't be coming up before Edinburgh. If a solution is found, there will be no problem.

Prime Minister Mitsotakis: It is very important for us to delay during interim period. <

[Filikieteria1821]

Ahhh when Greece had a little bit of international clout - now we have baboons losing on the world stage time and time again.

[Reaper]

This is fascinating. What is evident from this transcript is Greece's policy concerning the world since the 1920s. Asking for something but giving nothing in return. No concept of quid pro quo.

For example, this part:

Prime Minister Mitsotakis: The most important thing in the whole affair is to have frontiers respected. External and internal frontiers. The solution in Kosovo could be an advanced state of autonomy without going as far as self-determination. We think the Albanians are beginning to understand this. A way should be found to the Serbs and Albanians to reach an understanding.

The President: You are absolutely right. You may be in a better place to help this happen.

Prime Minister Mitsotakis: An issue most close to our Greek hearts is the one of Skopje/Macedonia. We will be discussing this in Edinburgh.

This is an opening bid by the US. The correct response by a country that understands basic negotiation is to move on this statement. America is telling us we are in a better situation to deal with this - so come up with a plan and get Bush to sign on it. A peace summit in Athens, Greek peace troops on the ground to calm the area etc. This was an invitation to Greece to become a regional player and just as today - it is is ignored in favour of the age old Greek policy of managed decline. And to think the Greek left think the US controls Greece... not even Greece controls Greece.. Greece is a non entity and fights to be a non entity.

Another example of Greece self sabotage.

The President: Then why does the administration of Macedonia get so hung up on the name?

Prime Minister Mitsotakis: There is something behind it, from the period under communism. It is not easy for the present administration to release from old habits. Democracy in this area will be an exaggeration. The old line communists under Tito still hold power. But Gligorov is a serious man. A deal could be reached with him. This is why the solution like we have suggested is a good formula.

A convoluted nothing answer to a sincere US question. A more succinct answer would have been - ''they feel this name legitimises their territorial ambitions in Northern Greece. This has been going on for the best part of a century and destabilises the entire region.''

Not only do the Greeks do nothing pro-active and offer the US nothing - they ask the US for favour for free..

The President: But if you have no problem with the name, it can go ahead.

Prime Minister Mitsotakis: I ask if you can help postpone.

Acting Secretary Eagleburger: We'll see what we can do.

This transcript is fascinating but confirms everything i have been saying. Greece is actively perusing a policy of managed decline. There seems there was plenty of scope with Bush but the Greeks actively avoided bringing anything positive out the relationship.

[Don Giovanni]

The real baboons occupy the white house and the kulliye.

Our challenge is Erdogan. He has been in and out of power for nearly two decades (our own leaders are practically babies by comparison). Because of the failed coup, he is emboldened and his countrymen have taken an under siege mentality, giving him the edge, enough backing to remain in power. Every win, every bold move only convinces his supporters more and more he's the right man to be in charge. So we need to bloody his nose when the chance comes. Dead Turkish soldiers in Libya and Syria will hurt him the most. We simply need to get tougher and work from a united front. Greece can't be idle and has to be prepared to act, even militarily in Libya if that's what it takes. That's what our leadership must come to terms with.

The message we need to send is that Turkey is the new Iran, but worse. Turkey, under Erdogan, is a snake in the grass waiting for the perfect moment to uncoil. That is how Mitsotakis needs to take Erdogan on. He needs to badger this point on the international stage.

As far as France is concerned, they have stakes in Libya. They want to get back on the center stage. This is their chance and we need to help them realize it in so far as they're interests assist our own. I blame them for the mess they created in Libya, largely of their own doing, but time to correct course and put another colonel/dictator (just like Ghadafi was) in power of the country.

@Reaper

Bush Sr said it best himself, he didn't want to involve American troops into a situation that was unclear and in a mission with no definable route to victory.

How many Greek soldiers would want to get onto a battlefield and kill Serbs? How many of us would suit up to do just that? They didn't do anything to us and have been historic allies. Moreover, we didn't intervene in their defense either. No Greek troops fought for Serbs. NATO and our American partners involved themselves into a situation that didn't require their involvement. This is their game to encircle and contain Russia, which is of no benefit to us, and saw the opportunity once the Soviets fell. We did the right thing staying out.

The discussion is whether we ought to have gone to war with trans-Macedonia over the name issue. If we forced the old Yugoslav guard out because it really did affect our national security and sovereignty, then there's something to be said. We don't the need the Americans to solve our problems, we need to solve them ourselves. That for me is where discussions begin on our failings during that period, not whether we should have gone to war or have assisted the war effort against Serbia. And even then, the answer isn't so simple, but we might have missed an opportunity to take out their leadership and reduce that "country" to a split province for Serbia, Albania and Bulgaria.

[Reaper]

@Reaper

Bush Sr said it best himself, he didn't want to involve American troops into a situation that was unclear and in a mission with no definable route to victory.

How many Greek soldiers would want to get onto a battlefield and kill Serbs? How many of us would suit up to do just that? They didn't do anything to us and have been historic allies. Moreover, we didn't intervene in their defense either. No Greek troops fought for Serbs. NATO and our American partners involved themselves into a situation that didn't require their involvement. This is their game to encircle and contain Russia, which is of no benefit to us, and saw the opportunity once the Soviets fell. We did the right thing staying out.

We were offered to become a player. This at no stage involved risking Greek lives. ALL peace talks should have been in Athens. Athens should have been doing what Berlin is doing with Libya and Syria. Mediating. Also - we should have sent troops as I said - but for peace keeping and non combative purposes regarding security. Because we didn't - it damaged Greece. Because we actively were not involved - the country became weaker - not stronger. Again - we are not Switzerland - residing in a safe geopolitical neighbourhood. We are in an area where the nation is confronted daily. Not acting = conceding. Sure an idealist can complain, 'but we shouldn't be in this position in the first place..' But we are. This part if the world has never been stable. So... either concede or expand. Stasis = losing territoriality.

The discussion is whether we ought to have gone to war with trans-Macedonia over the name issue. If we forced the old Yugoslav guard out because it really did affect our national security and sovereignty, then there's something to be said. We don't the need the Americans to solve our problems, we need to solve them ourselves. That for me is where discussions begin on our failings during that period, not whether we should have gone to war or have assisted the war effort against Serbia. And even then, the answer isn't so simple, but we might have missed an opportunity to take out their leadership and reduce that "country" to a split province for Serbia, Albania and Bulgaria.

Again - there is a middle way. Act but with full US backing. We did neither. We waited decades until the descendants of Greek communists got into power (Syriza) and they gave away the name and ethnicity anyway. Before the communists gave away the position - more nations were recognising FYROM as Macedonia anyway - so waiting again.. = losing.

Again. Not acting lead to destruction of all positions concerning Greek influence. This is a strategy. The Strategy is managed decline. The UK adopted the same strategy after Suez. Lose everything - but as slowly as possible. Greece has the most shameful politics I have witnessed. At least Turkey, Skopje etc fight for their position. We actively concede - but in the most disgustingly confused and convoluted manner. I would be amazed if any non Greek has any sympathy for Greeks at all.

[Filikieteria1821]

I agree that the leader of the US and Turkey are baboons but they yield a ton more power. It's one thing to be stupid yet powerful, its another thing to be weak and stupid.

As far as I can tell, the entire Greek mindset in regards to Greece's own status in the world and versus Turkey is self defeating. Greece does not create, it reacts to other nations.

Greece needs to stop reacting, and start creating. The foreign policy of Greece has been so heavily decimated over the last 20 years that if we continue on this path, there is no doubt that Greece will find itself in a position where more national concessions will be forfeited.

I think a lot of world leaders recognize that Turkey is really a bubble ready to burst, but Greece needs to be at the forefront of testing Turkey. We should have been in Libya prior to the deal, and we should be there now. Instead, the EU has said it's going to use naval assets to enforce the embargo. Is Greece part of this task force?

Why does everything Greece do have to be approved by international bodies? Greece operates too scared and the turks know this. We need an entirely new identity as a country, specifically at the top. We have people occupying very important positions who are scared, and know that they don't want to rock the boat.

[Filikieteria1821]

I've recognized one thing in terms of geopolitics, if you're not a part of it in some capacity, you're out of it entirely. For every issue you choose to not become a part of, you become more forgotten and less important. Think about all the things Greece could have been part of, but opted against it due to fear, or economic issues.

Greece should have had it's embassy in damascus operating, it's closed. Same with Libyta, it's been suspended.

Turks make an illegal deal with a fake government, Greeks say "we are ready to offer Haftar support?"

Where is the support? Where are the troops on the ground? Why aren't Greek military units stations with the LNA helping them train? Why aren't Greek ships off the coast of Libya, but Turkish ships are?

If you're not assertive in your foreign policy, then you stand to lose.

[Don Giovanni]

Except Turkey hasn't sent in troops to Libya, they sent mercenary jihadists from Syria. We need to keep supporting Haftar any which way we can. Greek boots should only be put on the ground if Turkish ones land first. We go in there, guess what happens? Turkey puts their boots on the ground. Let them make that mistake, let Erdogan own it otherwise he has the excuse that Greece gave him no choice. Let Haftar make as much headway as he can on his own and let him keep hitting Turkish (Lebanese) ships in Libyan ports. The more the Turks get sucked in, the worst it will get for them and we need to encourage that, but in the right way.

Anyways, we are making a lot of inroads and we are taking charge of the situation where we can. For example:

According to our sources in Brussels, Greece is already claiming the right to command the EUNAVFOR Med maritime operation off Libya, a reconfiguration of which was given minimalist approval by European Union member states on February 17. By taking charge of this operation, which should finally ensure that the Libyan arms embargo is brought into effect, Athens clearly wants to stop Turkey's deliveries to the Fayez Sarraj government in Tripoli, which in return is backing Turkey's claims over Cyprus's territorial waters. To get its way, Athena has indicated that it will provide several ships for the operation, as decisions are awaited regarding the operations' naval capacities on March 23. In any case, EUNAVFOR Med's headquarters is unlikely to stay in Rome and Real Admiral Fabio Agostini, who will succeed Enrico Credendino on February 21, will probably not stay in the job beyond March 23. If Athens succeeds, the main beneficiary will be Khalifa Haftar, who is on good terms with Greece. The eastern Libyan strong man does not care about the maritime blockade. His arms and equipment arrive by air from the United Arab Emirates and Jordan and overland from Egypt.

That will put Haftar in a position to win out. We need to support him and let him get across the finish line. I don't think Erdogan will put boots on the ground, but if he does, Greece has to be prepared to do the same and more.

[Don Giovanni]

Why does everything Greece do have to be approved by international bodies? Greece operates too scared and the turks know this. We need an entirely new identity as a country, specifically at the top. We have people occupying very important positions who are scared, and know that they don't want to rock the boat.

Unfortunately our status in the EU and NATO has reduced us to a vassal state. Our leaders have indeed become too comfortable with this status. Despite that, I see more positives than negatives as far as the latest developments are concerned. I still believe Mitsotakis needs to get more surefooted and speak up with more conviction. He has to learn to do that. If he's not cut out for this, he needs to step aside and allow someone in who will.

[Reaper]

Except Turkey hasn't sent in troops to Libya, they sent mercenary jihadists from Syria. We need to keep supporting Haftar any which way we can. Greek boots should only be put on the ground if Turkish ones land first. We go in there, guess what happens? Turkey puts their boots on the ground. Let them make that mistake, let Erdogan own it otherwise he has the excuse that Greece gave him no choice. Let Haftar make as much headway as he can on his own and let him keep hitting Turkish (Lebanese) ships in Libyan ports. The more the Turks get sucked in, the worst it will get for them and we need to encourage that, but in the right way.

Anyways, we are making a lot of inroads and we are taking charge of the situation where we can. For example:



That will put Haftar in a position to win out. We need to support him and let him get across the finish line. I don't think Erdogan will put boots on the ground, but if he does, Greece has to be prepared to do the same and more.

Turkey has boots on the ground in Libya. Not only that - they have shipped weapons systems, tanks, ACVs etc. The troops they have sent - around 5k - are there to organise the defence of Tripoli. They are also managing the anti aircraft weapons they imported in Tripoli and Misrata. They are also building bases there as I type this. They are all in. They have had to pull troops out of Eastern Thrace to fill positions in Libya, Syria and Iraq. They are stretched.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...led-government

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-51003034


This was one of their first shipments of troops and armour - armour Turks will be piloting:

https://twitter.com/LNA2019M/status/1222929871162236929

Since they have done this Haftar has halted his advances.

Added to this Turkey has imported over 3000 Syrian jihadists. Their pay is around $2000 per month and the ones Haftar has captured claim they were also promised housing in Turkey for their families.

[Reaper]

Unfortunately our status in the EU and NATO has reduced us to a vassal state. Our leaders have indeed become too comfortable with this status. Despite that, I see more positives than negatives as far as the latest developments are concerned. I still believe Mitsotakis needs to get more surefooted and speak up with more conviction. He has to learn to do that. If he's not cut out for this, he needs to step aside and allow someone in who will.

That for me is the problem. He doesn't need or have to do anything. If he continues Greece's policy of managed decline - nothing will happen to him. Turkey can take some empty Greek islets - nothing will happen to him. Now he lowers the pension age by a few months - then yes, I agree, he could be in trouble.