The Turkish Enemy in the Greek Aegean

Prologue

On January 23, 2026, Turkey informed Greece that it owned half of the Greek Aegean Sea. Turkey’s defense ministry issued two maritime directives (Navtexes) ordering Athens to coordinate with Ankara every activity, including research, east of the 25^th Meridian, the half section of the Aegean next to Turkey.

The Middle East Forum reported that while Greece and Turkey “continue to speak the language of dialogue, yet only Turkey seeks changes to the status quo.”

True, but the situation is worse. Ankara cares less about international law, much less about the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne that set the 3-mile limits on its Aegean coast. Greece, on the other hand, says the Middle East Forum, “maintains its long-standing position based on sovereignty, maritime zones, and airspace as defined by international law…. [The United States] should avoid falling into Turkey’s trap of eroding international law… Washington should reinforce its support for Greece as a reliable ally with a consistent record of upholding regional stability and international law.”

Is Turkey NATO’ deputy in the Aegean?

This is a timely advice, but as I said, Turkey acts like a rising empire blessed by NATO. Turkey issued two long-term navigational advisories / orders that tell Greece to demilitarize the following of its Aegean islands: Thasos, Psara, Samothrace, Lemnos, Lesbos, Chios, Ikaria, Samos, Astypalaia, Rhodes, Karpathos, Kassos, Leros, Patmos, Syme, Kos and Kastelorizo.

These are some of the most important islands in the Aegean that, for millennia, have been light houses of Greek civilization. For Turkey to speak the language of hubris and aggression against a NATO “ally,” Greece, must necessarily reflect NATO agreement, otherwise, NATO would have immediately discipline Turkey. But like repeated Turkish insults against Greece, NATO remains aloof.

Moreover, Turkey ordered Greece to do nothing without its permission in the half of the Aegean closer to its coast. Turkey also threatened that if Greece fails to follow its instructions in the Aegean, its army will intervene in the Aegean and do its bidding. Such a step will mean war.

Despite these offensive, ominous and war-provocative statements, like NATO, the Greek government has kept officially silent. We learn, however, that “the 3+1 cooperation scheme” is doing well — Greece, Cyprus and Israel are working together and have the support of the US.

Nevertheless, the Turkish Navtex represents a bomb about to explode, though “Athens perceives this practice as a form of permanent pressure intended to keep Greece in a defensive posture.” Another report claims that Athens considers the Turkish Navtexes “illegal [and] impulsive actions.” Greek government officials say: “We will continue to exercise our sovereign rights. NAVTEX[ES] are a technical tool issued for a specific purpose, such as a military exercise that may pose a risk to navigation. Under International Law, a NAVTEX that covers a vast area for a long period of time without being linked to a specific event is inconceivable. For this reason, the Turkish NAVTEX is absolutely illegal and has no legal basis whatsoever.”

The Turkish navigational telex / Navtex hit the airwaves on January 23, 2026. The next day, Jan. 24, 2026, the Greek Minister of Foreign Affairs, George Gerapetrites, was interviewed by the National Journal, a Greek newspaper in New York. The journalist asked him about the decision of the Greek government to finally propose the expansion of Greek marine sovereignty to 12 miles. He said:

“The extension of territorial waters to 12 nautical miles is an inalienable right of Greece that stems from the country’s sovereignty. As such, we will exercise it unilaterally at a time chosen by the Greek State, as was the case, moreover, 5 years ago, in the Ionian Sea and up to Cape Tainaro. I consider it self-evident that the exercise of a legitimate right cannot and should not cause a crisis in the relationship between two neighboring countries, much less can it constitute a reason for threats. As you know, we are discussing with Türkiye within the framework of a structured dialogue that began about 2 years ago. However, issues of sovereignty are not part of this dialogue. The only difference we have that can be brought before an international process is the delimitation of the EEZ [Exclusive Economic Zone] and continental shelf in the Aegean and the Eastern Mediterranean, a difference which, moreover, historically constitutes the underlying cause of the great tensions between the two countries. Dialogue does not mean retreat, weakness, or relinquishing national interests. Dialogue is the key to calm, stability and good neighborliness.”

Shortly after this interview, Gerapetrites addressed the UN Security Council. Among other policy interests, he said:

“Distinguished colleagues,

“As Greece continues its tenure on this Council, we do so with clarity of purpose and a strong sense of responsibility. At a time when the international system is facing profound challenges, the United Nations – and the Security Council in particular – continues to provide the central and indispensable framework for dialogue, cooperation and collective action in support of international peace and security. Greece’s foreign policy is firmly grounded in respect for the Charter of the United Nations and the principles enshrined therein: respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, the

inviolability of borders and the prohibition of the threat or use of force. These principles are not abstract ideals. They constitute the foundation of a stable international order and guide our collective work within this Council….

“Greece remains firmly committed to working with all members of this Council, with the United Nations, and with regional partners to turn commitments into action so that hope prevails over suffering, dignity over despair and peace becomes a reality delivered.

“As a country of the Eastern Mediterranean, Greece is deeply conscious of the direct impact

that instability in the region has on international peace and security. This awareness, together with our longstanding commitment to multilateralism and international law, underpins our readiness to act as a constructive and reliable partner in efforts to promote dialogue, de-escalation and lasting peace.” (emphasis mine)

Gerapetrites also spoke to the UN Secretary General Antony Guterres, Jan. 28, 2026. He probably repeated to Guterres what he said to the UN Security Council.

From the published record, Gerapetrites said nothing to the UN Security Council and Guterres about theTurkish insults threatening Greek sovereignty in the Aegean. However, his eloquent statement included defense of international law, the UN Charter, national sovereignty, inviolability of national borders, a two-state solution in Palestine and Israel, protection of the Kurds in Syria and religious minorities in the Middle East.

In a talk / interview with the Council on Foreign Relations, also on Jan. 28, 2026, Gerapetrites defended US-Greek alliance, even though, with Trump, traditional relations among countries become money deals. In explaining the role of Greece, he said that because of geography and geopolitics, Greece has been spending about 3 percent of its GDP on defense. Without naming the enemy next door, he most certainly meant Turkey. He also said that “more than 50 percent” of energy in Greece comes “from renewable energy sources.”

The question of energy arose because Greece has become a carrier for liquified natural gas (LNG) exported by America to Europe.

Greece: a strong US ally

“We have the strongest merchant fleet in the world,” Gerapetrites said, “almost one-third [of] the overall American LNG is carried through Greek vessels. So I think Greece is a very great, a very critical ally for the United States. And it’s a very safe ally, because… Greece has proven in the last at least six, seven years, with a new government, that we are very strong on our beliefs, we consider very highly our traditional allies, and we do not develop any transactional policies. We operate as a matter of principle. And I think this renders us truly honest brokers in this whole energy market.”

On February 3, 2026, the Greek Minister of Defense, Nikos Dentias, met US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth at the Pentagon. They spoke about strategic issues, the reform of the armed forces of Greece and the Greek acquisition of the fighter jets F-35s.

Dendias explained his visit to Washington:

“At the conclusion of my visit to Washington and my participation in the “Delphi Forum”, I had the opportunity today to meet with the Minister of War Mr. Hegseth, in the presence also of the Under Secretary of War for Policy Mr. Colby.

“During this meeting, I had the opportunity to explain Greece’s positions on a range of broader issues affecting our region, the strategic challenges we face, and our efforts to reform the Greek Armed Forces, the “Agenda 2030.” I also referred to a series of agreements we have signed with the US, such as the agreement for the purchase of F-35s, and the manner in which these agreements will be implemented in the best possible way for the Greek Armed Forces. Finally, I invited the Secretary in writing to visit Greece.”

In the midst of a geopolitical upheaval

Then Dendias spoke to the Foundation for Defense of Democracies in Washington, DC. The director of FDD, Jonathan Schanzer, asked Dendias critical questions, including the secret enemy of Greece in the room, Turkey. This made Dendias uncomfortable. He even painted a loathsome image of Erdogan as a friend of free speech and civilization, instantly forgetting the genocidal history of Turkey against the Greeks and the ceaseless aggressive policy of Turkey, and Erdogan in particular, against his country. He even suggested that Trump could pull Erdogan from jihadist Islam and bring him to Western culture. He even made fun of Erdogan’s slogan / policy of blue homeland representing the Aegean.

I found this friendly joke too friendly to Erdogan and uncharacteristic of diplomatic talk. Also unconnected to reality. Unbelievable.

On July 25, 2024, Erdogan sent 4 worships in the waters of the Greek island of Kassos to disrupt and prevent an Italian ship hired by the Greek government to securely place a cable in the waters of the Aegean to connect Crete and Cyprus. After such a hostile act, we hear Dendias, the Greek Secretary of Defense, praising Erdogan? One naturally wonders, and Jonathan Schanzer wondered, whose side Dendias really represented? That of Turkey or that of Greece? For unfathomable reasons, Dendias may be undermining his country, without even understanding why he was doing the harm.

But Dendias had also some important things to say about the defense of his country.

“[The Greeks are] in the middle, in the very middle, of a huge geopolitical upheaval,” he said. “That’s where we are. And we’re at the same time, a mid-sized European country, member of the European Union, democracy, member of NATO, looking in order to create a better future for the Western Balkans, create stability in the East flank of NATO and of Europe…. We need help. We need help from the European Union. We need help from the United States…. Our immediate need is not asking for particular platforms or particular systems or for money. What I prioritize as number one is to have a clear understanding of where we are…. if we agree with the United States where we want… to be in 10 years’ time, then the rest will follow.”

Strategic thinking

Dendias was right to criticize EU and US for being ruthless with the Greek debt, only a few years ago. They forced the country to sell its assets, including the port of Piraeus to China. He said: “[W]hen I travel in capitals, especially in Washington, I’m being asked, “Why did you let the Chinese have [the port of Piraeus], such a precious part of your infrastructure?” And the answer is very funny. We didn’t let it happen. We were obliged to do it. And let’s move back during the [debt] crisis. You know, during the crisis, Greece was obliged to sell state assets in order to balance our books, which I understand. Now, one of the state assets we were obliged to sell was the Port of Piraeus. So, at the time we flagged the issue, we asked all Europeans, the European Union especially – because the Troika [European Central Bank, European Commission and the International Monetary Fund of the US] was the one obliging us to sell the asset – that they should present at least a European company to take over the port. And then we flagged the same issue to the United States, so they would bring an American company to take over. And nobody, nobody was willing to take the geopolitical risk. So, the Chinese appear[ed\ out of nowhere, and they take over the port. And now we have to answer why the port is being owned by the Chinese. That shows the lack of strategic thinking of the Western world. Because that was not two centuries ago. That was 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014.… if our system cannot see 20 years ahead, I’m sorry, but then probably we’re doomed. So, we need strategic thinking.”

Turkey

The other major strategic issue for Dendias was Turkey. It was embarrassing to read his defense of Erdogan who does not hide his overt hostility towards Greece. He even called Turkey Türkiye to show he followed the Turkish script. So, Dendias, resorted to the rules of the game. “There are rules,” he said. “The rules is not Israeli rules, not Greek rules, not Egyptian rules, not Turkey’s rules. It’s the international Convention of the Law of the Sea. If Türkiye accepts international Convention on the Law of the Sea and subscribes to the international Convention of the Law of the Sea, then we cooperate altogether.”

Dendias naively concluded that it’s only a matter of time before Turkey will understand the legitimacy of international law and the country will behave accordingly. “Because at some point in the future,” he said, “if we have lines of communication open, eventually Türkiye may understand that its interests also lie much closer to what we are doing, what Israeli is doing, what the European Union is doing, than on a rather individualistic approach towards recreating some sort of Ottoman Empire.”

How to defend Greece

“[P]rotecting the country from external challenges,” Dendias said, “I would say Achilles Shield. And the Agenda 2030 has all components that could enable Greece to address whatever challenges the future may present. But what I would like to see there is A, a European defense element. Europe to be able to project power. Europe to have the capacity to understand challenges not just coming from Russia and the north, but challenges coming from the south. The Sahel right now – I’m repeating myself constantly trying to wake up my European friends – the Sahel is right now a paradise for Islamist radicalism and terrorism. And we don’t do anything about it…. And the other thing we have to do is bring India closer to us. India is the biggest country in the world population wise, 1.5 billion people, four times the population of the European Union. It will be the third economic power in the – of the world in a few years, and they’re a democracy. So, we have to create a common understanding with India.”

Cyprus

Finally, the host of the discussion at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, Jonathan Schanzer, urged Dendias to say something about Cyprus, a brother country to Greece, which lost nearly half of its territory to the NATO blessed Turkish invasion of 1974.

“When we are speaking about Cyprus as a brother country and a brother nation,” Dendias said, “we don’t speak only about the Greek Cypriots. We speak about the Turkish Cypriots as well. What we are advocating for is a unified Cyprus, member of the European Union, for full rights for everybody.”

Achilles Shield

Schanzer challenged the idealism and questionable optimism of Dendias, forcing him to talk of being ready “for the worst –and hope for the best.” Dendias then spoke about the Achilles Shield as a major strategic asset. He said the Achilles Shield is “a much more holistic approach than anything else existing right now. It’s much more holistic than Iron Dome or the Golden Dome because it includes everything. Every kind of challenge coming from the space or cybersecurity or the sea or under the sea or the air or ballistic missiles or cruise missiles, whatever. And we’re working with Israel on this and we’re asking Israel for help and assistance, but, but not as it used to happen in the past, by purchasing platforms or weapons system. We’re not going to do that. We’re going to produce at least 50 percent of those systems in Greece and also get the knowhow and have this extremely efficient and extremely successful Israeli innovation ecosystem to work with our ecosystem because we need a jump start. On that, we have been a little late.”

NATO orthodoxy

Dendias is not entirely a fool. He, like his colleague, Foreign Minister George Gerapetrites, is immersed in the NATO orthodoxy. That secular and American-inspired dogma says NATO exists to fight Russia. This immediately promotes Turkey because of its large army and geographical borders with Russia. The assumption is that in case of war with Russia, Turkey will lead the onslaught. Of course, this is not likely to happen because the Turks are afraid of Russia. It lost all wars it fought against Russia. But aside from this ahistorical dogma of NATO, war with Russia means the destruction of Europe, Turkey and possibly America.

Second, the EU is in an equal crisis afflicting NATO. Germany governs EU. German influence keeps Turkey well-armed and close to EU. This German factor affects Greece. Because of the debt history of Greece and the refusal of Germany to repay Greece the huge WWII debt it owns the country, Greek officials must be either very angry or tempted to becoming ethnonihilists, that is, they may convince themselves Greece deserves the second class it occupies in the EU and the threatening posture of Turkey.

The European Union, that includes Greece and the Republic of Cyprus, is falling apart. Trump threatened to grab Greenland, which is part of Denmark, which is member of NATO and EU. This opened a can of warms the Europeans did not want to see. Who is running EU and who governs NATO? Imitating and taking orders from the US and NATO for decades unmade Europe because the US helped Germany to become Germany of wars. Second, the US presence in Europe unmade political Europe. For example, EU’s political parties are becoming images of plutocratic funded US parties. “Across Europe, traditional parties are a shadow of what they once were. Socially uprooted and economically dependent, they too [like those of America] have been hollowed out… The consequences are legion: emboldened far rights, poisoned public spheres, fissiparous loyalties and a political future defined more by helplessness than by choice.”

This disease and helplessness has hit Greece very hard. The Kyriakos Mitsotakis administration is very likely to go along with Erdogan’s demands for the same reasons EU leaders obey the US and NATO. It’s easy, undemocratic and profitable. Democracy barely exists. It definitely has been hollowed out. This means that Mitsotakis is likely to find some accommodating legal language to give Turkey half of the Aegean or, if Erdogan is outright insulting in his personal meeting with Mitsotakis, then Mitsotakis might resist Erdogan or plan for war against Turkey. Under these hazardous circumstances, there’s no reason whatsoever to meet with Erdogan. And yet, he did.

Epilogue

I look at this Turkish aggression as offensive and certainly not neighborly, yet as nothing unusual. In fact, Turkish aggression against Greece is the result of NATO training Greece to bend to the will of Turkey. The moment Greek prime minister Mitsotakis heard Turkish officials talking about the Aegean as their “blue homeland,” he should have informed NATO and the US in particular that such talk was unacceptable. He should have immediately started preparing the country, if it became necessary, to fight Turkey. But instead, he put up with one Turkish humiliation after another, all the time arguing that he and Erdogan liked the quiet waters of the Aegean.

Of course, the waters of the Aegean had been stormy, especially since the infamous Imia crisis of 1996, when the US sided with Turkey and the Imia islands were lost to Greek sovereignty simply because the Clinton administration, knowing full well that the islands were Greek, still wanted to please the Turks. The US ambassador to Greece, Thomas M. T. Miles, who watched the Imia crisis carefully, was very upset by America’s deception.

That unfair treatment of Greece became dogma in NATO. We see it in the aggressive behavior of Turkey, as it blossomed in the Navtex of January 23, 2026. The Islamic Turks have had centuries of manipulating Christian powers. Their menace against Greece is the hatred they harbor for the Christian West. But will the US and the countries of the EU understand the strategic game of the Turkish enemy hovering over the Aegean before the Navtex becomes a declaration of war?

The post The Turkish Enemy in the Greek Aegean appeared first on CounterPunch.org.