RELATIONS AND TENSIONS IN THE BALKANS AND THE SOUTH-EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN.
Vice Admiral (ret) G. Demestichas H.N. Honourable Chief of Hellenic Fleet – www.Apodimos.com
The problems that exist in the regions what the Balkans and the South-Eastern (SE) Mediterranean’s, this season are big problems and they influence Greece and their residents. However for the briefing of our emigrant brothers for happening in this region we asked the opinion from Vice Admiral (ret) G. Demestichas H.N. Honourable Chief of Hellenic Fleet in the English aiming at to many visitors of Apodimos.com, be completely also informed with a valid opinion. Vice Admiral (ret) G. Demestichas diachronically has supported the briefing of Greeks and Emigrant through the valid articles that it has granted to us for their briefing.
We will not be reported for the personality of Grigorios Demestichas and his offers in Greece and in the Greek Martial Navy because they are acquaintances in the experts and in the Greek population and we thank him for the offer of his article that exists also in Portal of elesme.gr.
RELATIONS AND TENSIONS IN THE BALKANS AND THE SOUTH-EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN
Vice Admiral (ret) G. Demestichas H.N. Honourable Chief of Hellenic Fleet
Just by glancing at «the Balkans and the South-Eastern (SE) Mediterranean» map, one can see the uniqueness of this particular area. It consists of continental countries and islands; it connects three (3) continents while being the cradle of civilizations. Moreover, this area was also the field of intense competition among its people of the coastal states, world’s superpowers as well as strong economic interests. In this area, great religions and many national movements were developed.
The Balkans and the SE Mediterranean still remains a zone of several contradictions: religious, political, social and economic. Especially, after the Golf- Afghanistan and Yugoslavia interventions, the revival of the Islamic Fundamentalism, the bursting situation that was created by the Iraq intervention, the evolution of the Palestinian issue as well as the national exaltation which lead to the instability in the Western Balkans, the area has been transformed further to an active zone of political and military crises that challenge the capability of the involved states and organizations with NATO, EU, United Nations, Russian Federation, and mainly the USA starring, in order to adopt and exercise flexible, innovative and effective approaches and policies. For the Hellenic nation, attention has been focused on Turkey’s aspirations for Cyprus, the Aegean as well as Thrace, and the developments of Greece’s neighbour states in the Balkans. Furthermore, attention has also been given to the developments in the SE Mediterranean and Middle East, not only due to economic interests with those of the Hellenic Merchant Marine being the most prominent, but also due to the powerful friendship bonds that were hammered for decades of centuries among people, that were not influenced from religious disputes since Orthodoxy and Islam have managed to develop independently and to coexist, with no problems, and by respecting each other.
Today’s situation in Albania and the «Western Balkans» area, which is comprised of the artificial states that arose from the disintegration of the Former Yugoslavia, remains unstable. This situation, is in contrast to the Eastern Balkans (Romania, Bulgaria) since their recent accession in NATO and the forthcoming accession in the EU, creates the prerequisites for stability and peace.
This instability in the Western Balkans, which was intensified by the recent facts regarding Kosovo and FYROM and the observed exaltation of the minorities subjects was due, to a large scale, to the unredeemed policy that creates problems in the viable coexistence in Kosovo, FYROM, Serbia and Montenegro, with relevant extensions also in Greece. For all of the above-mentioned reasons, Western Balkans is considered as an active area of possible crises. Despite the end of the armed conflicts in the area of Western Balkans, the danger of resurgence has not disappeared since the tension focus still exists; hence, no serious problem has essentially been resolved. Moreover, the fact that all these countries support their European orientation and they are seeking for their accession in NATO and the EU, does not improve the situation because the course towards the aforementioned goals is long and unsure (of course with the exception of Slovenia that is the only nationally homogenous country with the fewer economic and political problems and a member of the EU). The multicultural societies are possible to operate effectively, as long as they do not offend predominant rights of neighbour states, or else they become the centre of future turmoil. The particularities of the Balkans must be taken into serious consideration for upcoming planning in order to settle down the «past passions» as well as not to create claims for the next generations.
Specifically, the course of the Western Balkan countries towards NATO seems to be controlled by the USA, which in their «strategic aspirations» framework, for the reassurance of willing, certain and completely controlled satellite-countries in the Balkans, find the « appropriate prerequisites» in the Western Balkans, under the present situation.
In Western Balkans, Albania remains the « big question» since, in spite of its course towards the EU, a fact that is suspending itself, the vision for a «Greater Albania» concept is not prevented. According to the Plan of the Albanian Academy for «the solution of the national problem», the following objectives are published:
1. Kosovo’s independence
2. Autonomy of the Western FYROM area
3. Special regime for Montenegro
4. Recognition of the Albanian minority (which actually does not exist) and Minority Rights in Greece. The unacceptable behaviour during the scheduled visit in Albania of the Greek President of Democracy, in early November 2005, demonstrates the actual intention of the county or the spirit that has been promoted among its people. At this point, we would like to mention that the terms have been inverted. Any change in the borderlines is not desirable. Nevertheless, in the case of such a change in the Balkans, Greece, and only Greece against Albania, factually claims Northern Epirus, as it was agreed by all Western Forces that were fighting in the Word War II against Nazism.
The next time period will be critical for Serbia depending on the developments regarding the future and the status of Kosovo and Montenegro as well. The secession of these areas may signify a national exaltation in Serbia and a disorderly situation in the Balkans.
At the same time, the unredeemed aspirations (even internally) of FYROM with the persistence of the usurpation of the name «Republic of Macedonia» are the thorn of this county’s relationships with Greece, in which FYROM seeks for political and financial support. While the particular pursuit as an ideal, under the appropriate circumstances, creation of the «Great Bulgaria» should not escape from the Greek, State’s attention so as to proceed to specific actions, in time if needed.
As far as Turkey is concerned, it depends on its powerful presence in NATO and on its particular, with fluctuations however, bilateral relations with the USA. Turkey displays to the USA and the EU as well, its geopolitical and geo-strategic value due its geographical location, its racial and religious relation and influence towards the states of the Caspian, Central Asia and Middle East as well as the Moslem Minorities in Balkans. Its aim is to develop to a regional power, at the same time with its strategic choice to become a full member of the EU, a course that meets many obstacles stemming from the contrasts and contradictions of its political system.
The already formed new situation, with the start of Turkey’s accession talks with the EU (from the 3rd October 2005) is the sign of developments that will take place in the National Assembly and will lead either to a constitutional revision and subordination of the Turkish «status quo» to Political Leadership or to an overthrowing of the later and preservation of the current situation, in parallel with a special privileged relationship with the EU, with Turkey not being its member.
In the medium run, it is estimated that Turkey attempts to be a regional power in the area of SE Mediterranean, on the one side by modernizing its Armed Forces (organization, means, new technology, etc) and on the other side by engaging to intense diplomatic activity with the scope to improve its co-operations with Russia, China, Middle East and EU states, while its relations with the USA will vary depending on the developments regarding the creation of a newly independent Kurdish state at North Iraq.
As far as the Greek-Turkish relations are concerned, in spite of Greece’s support to Turkey’s request for commencement of accession negotiations with the EU and the implementation of a political approach to subjects of low priority, it is possible, at any time, for tensions to appear and crises to be created due to the retained Turkish occupation of Northern Cyprus and the direct questioning of Greek views regarding the domination over the aerial space above the Aegean, the right to extend the national territorial waters to 12 (n.m), the determination of the continental shelf and the maintenance of the Minority’s rights issue in Thrace.
At this point we have to note that the forthcoming change of the Turkish Defence Dogma, according to which the main threat for Turkey is terrorism, while Greece does not constitute a military threat anymore, is performed with political criteria so as to satisfy the EU and the USA whereas it is underlined the confrontation of the Kurdish threat from anywhere it comes from and it would be disastrous for Greece and Cyprus to believe that Turkish policy towards them will substantially change, in the medium term at least, despite whatever clauses are foreseen in the negotiating accession framework of the EU. The future will show how many steps Turkey is willing to take for smoothing out its relationships with Greece and Cyprus respectively.
The importance of Cyprus is evident since it has a central location in the SE Mediterranean basin. In spite of the adventures, tests, the cruel invasion of ’74 and the from then on Turkish occupation of the Northern part of the island, the expatriation of about two hundred thousands Greek-Cypriots with the fatal financial, social, and tensions of national-racial differences, consequences, Cyprus has accomplished major achievements literally as the «Republic of Cyprus» in both the financial and the social sectors.
Despite all of the aforementioned, Cyprus, although a member of the EU, cannot feel safe. Turkey, apart from being a candidate country for accession in the EU, is tighten up with its particularities, weaknesses, ambitions and aspirations, taking advantage of every potential and the international tolerance, still occupies Northern Cyprus and threats Cyprus and indirectly Greece.
Cyprus, even despite its achievements, is the only former colony, in which the international community deprives of the fundamental components of the full state dominance, meaning: the majority does not decide. Provided that finally a solution will been given to the Cyprus Problem, Cyprus, governing the whole island, without the Turkish threat (with or without Turkey’s accession in the EU) will constitute an area of stability and safety. Otherwise, Cyprus will be constantly under threat and Greece, of course, as well.
Independently from the form that a new plan for resolving the Cyprus Problem will have when it is brought up again, it is incomprehensible the fact that the security of the Republic of Cyprus is not secured politically as well as military.
Since the end of 1989, the area of the wider M. East has been reinstated once again, in a dramatic way, in the centre of the worldwide geopolitical and geo-strategic interest, as M. East in particular nowadays, has evolved into the most important area of crises and ceaseless tensions.
These crises that are continuous and complicated attract most countries’ interest, because they influence the worldwide developments and cause the involvements and interventions of international organisations and of the World’s Powerful States.
Following the collapse of the Soviet Union that constituted the traditional «protector» of the Arabic world, the weakening of the Arabic countries’ unity due to «peace treaties» that were signed with Israel, Egypt and Jordan, but also the fall of the Iraqi regime, it is possible for a new «status quo» to be created in the M. East area.
The revival of the «Palestinian Problem» with a dubious perspective of succeeding in attempting peace and coexistence between Israel and the Palestinian state is a source of extracting threats and risks. The antiterrorism campaign that is now running in Iraq and Afghanistan and the pressures towards other Arabic and Islamic countries, is possible to lead to unpredictable developments, from the full adaptation of the emerged prototype of «Democratising», till the alliance of specific states and the anti-western (not only anti-American) Arab-Islam explosion.
In this contemporary world, everybody and everything is interacting and interdependent. This is due to the fact that the new international system is based on the «Globalisation» principle. With reference to the Balkans and the SE Mediterranean, the Inter-Atlantic Community’s, meaning the NATO and the EU, influence has been elongated, while simultaneously, a leading role have both the USA first and foremost, and secondly the Russian Federation which tries to sustain whichever influence has salvaged, by being the heir of the Soviet Union. The Inter-Atlantic Community moves towards two directions:
1. The one concerns its larger cohesion with the activation of the two basic poles, NATO and the EU, and
2. The second concerns the configuration of its neighbouring area in order to go hand in hand with its interests.
In the Inter-Atlantic Community, in order to establish the Balkans, the SE Mediterranean, the M. East (as well as the area of Eurasia- Black Sea) as a controlled geopolitical and geo-economic area, initiatives are taken and mechanisms are developed, where usually the leading role has the USA, and are addressed to all these areas (e.g. Partnership for Peace, bilateral NATO relations with the Russian Federation, Mediterranean Cooperation Dialogue, Euro-Mediterranean Joint Action etc).
In parallel, the EU by implementing the Stability and Connection Procedure with the countries of the Western Balkans contributes in assisting the peaceful coexistence of people in the area and the resolution of any differences via dialogue. Respectively, the South Eastern European Cooperation Process (SEECP) (where at the time Greece is presiding) endorses the promotion of regional cooperation for security and stability reinforcement in the SE Europe.
The crisis and the Iraq War dominated the European political scene during 2002-3 and provoked important inter-Atlantic and intra-European disputes. NATO was divided, with France and Germany to deny any kind of involvement in that war. In any case, there was not (and there is not) a Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) which resulted to EU’s weakness to discuss with a single language for serious matters. When and if the promoted European Constitution is in force, the EU will have the potential to practise Common Foreign and Security Policy and become a powerful pole so as to be possible to promote alternative solutions also through the Inter-Atlantic cooperation on Balkan and M. East issues.
As far as Greece’s role about cooperation issues in the area is concerned, the main and dominant geopolitical and geo-strategic position is easily understood in relation by the shift of the basic orientation of international security from East-West relations that were effective the previous decades, to the North-South relations or West-Islamic countries. What is usually heard till today, which is promoted and extensively exploited is that Turkey has a particular strategic importance, something that is surely true, but this does not mean that Greece should degrade its importance; on the contrary Greece should promote and exploit it properly in combination with the promotion of national objectives, the support and the ensuring of national interests. Greece as a U.N. and UN’s Security Council member for 2005-6, as a member of the EU and other organisations, a full NATO member, has a «word» and a vote in all the aforementioned organisations, owes to have a role and demands, and at the same time to be able to defend common interests and promote its objectives, according to the principles of international law, treaties and agreements. It is also important to underline that Greece is a gate for the prosperity of the Balkan states and bridges Europe with the Middle East. and North-Eastern Africa.
The cooperation among people (like it is among persons) should be based on specific rules. Cooperation does not mean surrendering of the rights to what others demand. Only the cooperation that promotes the respective interests, in a fair way, of all parties is possible to survive.
Each country’s government should respond to the defend the vital interests of its people that include the national dominance and prosperity, while the influence of a country is possible to extend outside its borders and according to its economic and cultural potential.
It is a fact that security in Balkans and in SE Mediterranean is fragile. However, several mechanisms have been created, and the creation of more may also be needed so as to blunt whatever differences exist, under the assumption that all principles of respecting international laws and rules, human rights, religious freedom, equality before the law and national dominance are respected. The solution of differences and the prospect of cooperation of all Balkan and SE Mediterranean states will give the potential for all people to prosper given the geopolitical, geo-economic and geo-strategic advantages of the area.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
· HELISS studies
· Articles by G. Demestichas
