Mehmet Efe Caman, Turkey’s writer announces:
In previous articles, I have analyzed Turkey’s approach to the Eastern Mediterranean and the Aegean Sea. Even though I received a lot of reactions, in my opinion, it is important to write these. The foreign policy mentality they have, the deep-rooted Eurasian elements that reached the government, can be understood from the current tough and aggressive positions of Turkey. As I have said, Turkey seems to be pursuing a violation of the Lausanne Treaty.
In today’s video that leaked on social media, Dogu Perincek, speaking on a show by Ahmet Hakan, states that issues in the Eastern Mediterranean can not be resolved by law and negotiations, but by military force and even war. Perincek is not one of the idiots of the Islamist crew. After all, if it were one of them I would not answer. But, as is well known, the deeper sections of the regime, and especially the military navy, have imposed on Erdogan and his entourage the expansive position of the so-called “Blue Homeland”, which undermines the Treaty of Lausanne. As much as Erdogan tries to encourage himself with the show he did around the gas in the Black Sea, “the gods want kurbans”.
If we pay attention to the sounds that come from deep, we perceive the rhythms of the drums of war. Erdogan realizes that his electoral base, in such an environment of economic problems, financial difficulties, and decline, will not think about these but will dive into the neo-Ottoman dreams. In fact, even the regime parties of the so-called opposition, strongly defend this expansive rhetoric about the Blue Homeland.
As I mentioned, I wrote the truth in my writings, as according to the texts of international law – first with the Treaty of Lausanne – the rhetoric and positions of Turkey are a departure from the status quo and are far from the line of logic. Those who tried to answer me through social media, most of them are people who try to protect Turkey and support its current expansionist trend. One of their common arguments is that Greece, in violation of the Treaty of Lausanne, equipped islands in the eastern Aegean. Although these issues are very technical, they need to be summarized to inform people. The deeper we go, the more information we need.
Divide the Aegean in two?
An approach from the axis of law and injustice of the type “But the Aegean is a big sea! Let’s divide it into two equal parts “is really cut off from reality! And from justice as well. The sovereign rights and borders of states are one of the most important issues in international relations and international law. The sovereign rights of Greece in the Aegean islands are unquestionable. What Turkey perceives as a problem is the proximity of some Greek islands to the coast of Anatolia.
But that does not change reality. Except for Imbros and Tenedos, the Princes’ Islands and all the islands, islets, and islets located at a distance of three miles from Anatolia, all the other islands, islets and islets belong to Greece. In this, it is not possible to take into account cafe conversations of the type “But this is too much!”.
Land without owner, whether it is land or island, is no different, they do not belong to you. Perfect! The delivery of these islands to Greece was done with international conditions. Nor is it an incident that happened yesterday. The Treaty of Lausanne was signed in 1923 and the islands remained in Greece. The Dodecanese belonged to Italy and when Italy lost the war after the Second World War, in the Treaty of Paris these islands passed to Greece. Turkey did not object to this, nor was there any legal ground for such a thing. That is why Turkey did not even feel the need to send a delegation to Paris.
Like in 1945
Let us now note the following. The islands as well as the mainland have rights to the continental shelf, territorial waters, and the EEZ. Turkey does not accept this. Okay but that doesn’t matter. Because there is a rule of international law. This is stated in the Maritime Law Convention of 1983. Yes, Turkey did not sign it and that is why it does not bind it.
But this is also an oral rule of international law. Moreover, the non-recognition of this situation of the islands does not change anything. This is the status quo. Greece will never accept the change of the status quo. The situation is similar to that after 1945 when the Soviets were seeking bases in the Straits, while they were also seeking Kars and Ardahan. Why did Turkey not accept those requests? But because he was right! So Mr.
Today, Greece is right on the issue of the status quo and the rights of the Aegean islands.
Because the Greeks are equipping the islands
Let us come to the issue of the equipment of the Aegean islands. When did Greece do this? After the establishment of the Aegean army by Turkey! What is the reason that Turkey, outside the framework of NATO, established the Aegean army? This is an army that is directed against Greece. This is the first. And the second reason why Greece equipped the Aegean islands, is that after the landing of Cyprus in 1974, as had happened with Cyprus, suddenly, as if it had fallen from the sky, Aegean issues began to be raised. And yet the so-called Aegean issues did not exist before 1950.
After 1950, the Democratic Party began to pursue a more active foreign policy. For this reason, Cyprus became one of the most basic playing fields. When after 1974 Turkey did not withdraw its military presence from Cyprus and did not restore what was imposed by the constitution of the Republic of Cyprus, Greece became concerned. And even more so when the KKTC was set up in the direction of the coup generals in the early 1980s, Turkey has now become a full-fledged invader under international law. Today we denounce the Russian invasion and integration of Crimea by Russia, right? But this is exactly Turkey’s position in Cyprus.
Turkey, which since 1974 has intervened in its capacity as a guarantor state under the London and Zurich treaties that granted it that status, has not done what it should. And yet the official purpose of the intervention was to neutralize the coup that Nikos Sampson had done together with the members of EOKA. That was the excuse. That is, to restore the Constitution of Cyprus. To ensure the constitutional order on the island. Because those conditions did not allow Turkey to occupy and divide Cyprus.
In these circumstances, Greece feared that Turkey would follow a similar behavior in the Aegean. And he equipped the islands to ensure their minimal defense. What will he equip? The Greek army is there to protect its own islands. Looking at the current stance of the expansionist regime in Ankara, can you say that this move by Greece was unnecessary? Turkey today publicly declares that it does not recognize the sovereignty of the neighboring country. If under these circumstances Greece could not defend its islands, in your opinion would not this be a threat to its territorial integrity?
Turkey changed the status quo
See international politics moving forward with actions and reactions. Turkey has taken action and now a reaction to it is inevitable. Turkey after 1974, not withdrawing its army from Cyprus, made a change in the status quo. This is the action. While Greece in response equipped its islands in the Aegean. Turkey has held 40% of another country’s territory militarily since 1974. Is there any inconvenience I say? I’m sorry but this is the truth. In fact, with the Annan plan (withdrawal of troops from the island and reunification of Cyprus), the current rulers in Ankara had tacitly accepted this.
Now Perincek has clearly expressed the wishes of the team he represents. What does it mean? He declares that this story is solved by war! Do you agree with that? If your answer is yes, then I have bad news for you. This is not patriotism. This is called expansionism. The foundation of the theme is the fine line between good and evil. Today, Turkey is strengthening the foundations of the order laid by Lausanne. If Greece did that, Ankara would have to defend the Lausanne Treaty with all its might. For what reason; Because it was Lausanne that invalidated the Treaty of Sevres, for that! If Lausanne does not exist then the Treaty of Sevres applies.
Turkey seems shrouded in the text of Lausanne, but it is the guarantee of its existence. But he does not think at all what is the alternative to this text. Forgive me but this is a position not very smart. In addition, it is a legally and morally weak position. And most importantly, it is a dangerous place. Why; For the territorial integrity that Turkey says it values so much. I hope that the rioters in Ankara and some adventurous second-class officers with profiles like Enver Pasha do not set the country on fire.
Mehmet Efe Caman –