A year has passed since the "Athens Declaration on Friendly Relations and Good-Neighbourliness" between Turkey and Greece when the leaders of both states projected their determination to "foster friendly relations, mutual respect, peaceful coexistence and understanding, and to resolve any dispute among them by peaceful means and in accordance with international law." A year after, Turkey is far from binding by international law or eliminating unwarranted tensions. Meanwhile, Greece remains loyal to cultivating a "positive agenda" despite evident Turkish provocations professing its neo-Ottoman aspirations.

Diplomacy is the quintessence of international affairs and an indispensable factor when tensed bilateral relations occur. In that regard, diplomacy should be conducted with a caveat especially when the promotion of a "positive agenda" is one sided. The latter is a case in point for Greece's PM Kyriakos Mitsotakis' adherence to retaining the policy of "calm waters", a term that signifies the desirable outcome should both parties implement the Declaration altogether.

A merit of this rapprochement for the Greek side is the decrease of Athens' FIR violations by Turkish jets and thus the possibilities of a military tension. However, Turkey's revisionist aspirations never ceased to be expressed verbally or pragmatically: over the Aegean Sea by denying Greece's sovereignty according to UNCLOS; in Cyprus by continuing the illegal occupation; in Syria by invading and occupying Syrian territories and promoting terrorism while celebrating the advancement of Jihadism. Meanwhile, Turkey eyes Jerusalem by threatening the Jewish state and above all its part in fostering global terrorism and undertaking the role of the patron of Hamas. In other words, as Turkey is distancing itself from the Western values and is violating every article of international and humanitarian law while working diligently to enhance its presence in the Middle East and Northern Africa via training terrorists and trading arms for influence, Greece adheres to International law and remains loyal to the Declaration and the "calm waters" policy.

Greece's differences with Turkey are not closely bilateral. They are incorporated into a bigger picture that Greece omits to underscore in the spirit of the "calm waters". Greece is a status quo power; a close US ally; an EU and NATO member. Meanwhile, Turkey does not fulfill EU fundamental criteria; It has expressed its willingness to join BRICS while is flirting with the Shanghai cooperation.

In a regional subsystem that undergoes cataclysmic changes and ahead of the new Trump presidency, Greece's posture is questionable. While Greece promotes to the international arena, Turkey's efforts to ameliorate the Greco-Turkish relations, in essence, what Athens achieves is to serve Turkey's goal of being seen as the honest broker and a reliable actor in the international arena.

As these lines are written, Turkey celebrates the toppling of Assad. Having backed the "rebels," Turkey comes out stronger, willing to undertake the role of the leader in the Arab world in the frame of reviving its Neo Ottoman empire. Kurds and Syrian Christians are holding their breath for the day after.

In an era where new alliances are formed, Greece must adjust its strategy and step in to safeguard its interests. As long as Greece "omits" to speak about the Turkish "casus belli" or the fact that Turkey's actions in the Eastern Mediterranean are against the Western interests, Ankara enjoys Athens' trust thus raising eyebrows if the current Greek foreign policy rebrands appeasement under the cloak of good neighborliness.

The post Greece: Rebranding appeasement appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

In late 2023, a question for a written answer was submitted to the European Parliament by an MEP regarding the influence of the "Muslim fundamentalist emirate of Qatar and the NGO Qatar Charity" in the European Union. A couple of months later, and after the October 7 massacre, the High Representative/Vice-President Joseph Borrell Fontelles replied, highlighting the "multifaceted relationship with Qatar based on mutual interest, […] on addressing shared challenges [..] and supporting Qatar in implementing its human rights reform agenda." In the same reply,y it has been noted that the EU has established a framework "for foreign direct investment and existing anti-money laundering and countering terrorist financing rules, allows for screening of investment flows into the EU" to address the question that was based on Qatar's money for influence.

Qatar's sprawling influence in Europe, Asia, Africa, and the US demonstrates that it no longer wishes to be just a rich small state. It wants to be powerful, and so far, it has accomplished it. Since the early 2000s, the Emirate of Qatar has skillfully invaded Europe via its soft power by investing in real estate, signature buildings, football teams and fashion brands. Meanwhile, it has successfully penetrated European economies as a major investor in critical infrastructure and energy resources, oil companies, aerospace industry, etc. Qatar holds strategic partnerships with France, the UK, Germany, Spain, Greece, Switzerland, and others.  In any other occasion, Qatar's advancement in Europe would be considered normal. However, the ongoing investigation of Qatargate, the European Corruption Scandal that reaches the top echelons of the European Parliament, raises questions about the levels of corruption that the EU continues to lure itself into.

Qatargate is not the only issue that Europe disregards. Qatar is renowned for providing financial and material support to extremist groups in the Middle East, such as the Taliban, Hamas, and the Muslim Brotherhood. This activity is also a derivative of its influence. Furthermore, it runs a funding program aiming at strengthening political Islam throughout Europe and retains close relations with Turkey, another great sponsor of international terrorism. Indicative of the twisted affairs between European states and Qatar are the paradigms of Greece and Cyprus. In May, during the official visit of Qatar's Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani in Athens and Nicosia, Greece and Cyprus agreed to strengthen their political and economic bilateral relations with Qatar.

Meanwhile, Qatar holds huge economic cooperation with Turkey. It retains strong political and ideological ties, especially in political Islam, with the AKP party of the Turkish President, Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

The disturbing truth about Qatar's relations with terrorism do not dissuade both the US and the EU to assign to what they call a "friend of the West" the role as a key mediator in the Gaza conflict, despite the Doha-Gaza alliance at financial, political, and military level. Hence, as the West closes its eyes on the Qatar factor, the consequences are already evident in the US where Qatar is the largest donor in the US higher education. The latte,r in conjunction with its relations and sponsorship of terrorism,m is a well-founded explanation of the rise of antisemitism on US campuses.

When it comes to the EU, during the 2024 European elections campaign, the EU reminded its citizens of the importance of the European values and principles upon which it was founded. The Qatar-EU affair comes in sharp contrast with the latter's values: peace, freedom, security, justice. How can the EU call its citizens to remember that democracy is not given when the EU itself undermines its own principles?

The latest IDF rescue operation of four Hamas hostages in Gaza and the reaction that followed brings to the fore the stake. Words of relief for the rescue soon were replaced by condemnation of another "massacre" where the operation took place. When such statements come from high-ranking EU officials, questions are raised about the EU policies and its decision-makers, considering the predicament that this article puts in the spotlight.

A final note. Recently, Mossad issued a warning on Iranian terror plots in Europe ahead of the Paris Olympics. The target remains the same: Jews and Israelis. In view of rising antisemitism in Europe, ambivalent statements, lack of a common policy in the Israel-Hamas war, and the Qatargate, room for terror squads will be left to plan attacks against Jews. Without a coherent strategy to address the infiltration of extremism via the flow of money and given that "Never Again" has faded, the EU and the Western world will remain quiet until we all witness again the silence of the lambs.

The post The silence of the lambs appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

There is a discrepancy between Turkey and the West on the Iranian attack against Israel. EU foreign ministers and the G7 group of Western leaders unanimously condemned Iran. NATO's statement to the G7 was in the same concept as well. Turkey, a NATO member, called for restraint and blatantly placed responsibility on Israel and its leadership.

Turkey a NATO member that retains close relations with Russia, China, and Iran called for restraint. Its rhetoric against Israel did not go unnoticed. It is framed in its aspiration to undertake the leading role in the Arab world. What did go unnoticed is that Turkey's posture is in sharp contrast with NATO and the EU which assigned to Turkey an active role in the Iranian-Israeli confrontation. Once again, the West turns a blind eye to Turkey, the elephant in the room.

The first Iranian attack against Israel from its soil should be approached with seriousness by the West. Iran did not just test Israel's readiness and defense. It was indeed a projection of its military capabilities against Israel and the West. Iran's missile arsenal is the largest and the most diverse in the Middle East, capable of bearing precision strikes. Iranian munitions have been improved while its missiles are inherently capable of carrying nuclear payloads. The latter did not go unnoticed by the coalition of states that along with Israel repelled the Iranian missiles and drones.

Iran informed Turkey in advance of its operation against Israel. Meanwhile, Washington assigned to Turkey the role of mediator between Iran and the USA and Israel and Iran to de-escalate the tension. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken thanked Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan for his ongoing engagement to prevent further escalation in the region. The day after, Turkey continues its talks with Hamas' Haniye in Doha, where Haniyeh resides while it raises its anguish over a possible regional war.

Turkey's posture is neither ambivalent nor questionable. It is about a well-known policy since the WWII. With the sole aim of serving its interests by any means, Turkey for ages has adopted a cynical policy that includes bargaining with everyone. The highest bidder wins. And as the wanton breaking of agreements and the constant demand for more trade-offs describes the timeless foreign policy of the Turks, the West not only chooses to overlook this pattern of behavior but rewards it by giving Turkey a prominent role in crisis management.

While the West has condemned Iran and decided on further actions against it, it once again remains silent on Turkey. Turkey has not only adopted a fierce rhetoric against Israel but shamelessly expressed its concerns over violations of international law regarding the alleged Israeli airstrike on a building next to the Iranian embassy in Damascus. However, it does not show signs of concerns regarding international law or a possible spillover of a regional conflict when it comes to its own actions as the incursions in Syria; the illegal occupation of 37% of the Republic of Cyprus since 1974; the persecutions of Kurds; the Turkish threats against Greece's sovereignty and of course Turkey's close cooperation with terrorists as Hamas and ISIS.

The Iranian attack of April 13 against Israel is a unique opportunity for introspection on behalf of the liberal world on how it wishes to confront rogue states such as Iran and its allies. Yet, the elephant in the room remains intact.

The post Turkey: The elephant in the room appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

There is a remarkable shift in the Greek foreign policy during the second prime ministership of Kyriakos Mitsotakis. The Athens Declaration on Friendly Relations and Good-Neighbourliness that was signed in December 2023 between Greece and Türkiye professes Mitsotakis' orientation of the Greek foreign policy. The amelioration of the Greco-Turkish relations is a foreign policy priority in this second term as it is being implemented under Foreign Minister Georgios Gerapetritis, a close confidant of Mitsotakis.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

On Feb. 14 , 2024, President of Türkiye Recep Tayyip Erdoğan visited Egypt. In an effort to rebuild Türkiye's relations between itself and the regional powers, Erdoğan agreed with Egyptian President Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi to evaluate the bilateral energy and defense relations. Türkiye has also agreed to supply Egypt with drones and cutting-edge military technology.

Türkiye's intervention in Africa is multifaceted. It concludes defense agreements as the security maritime deal with Somalia. Undoubtedly, it is one of the largest arms dealers in Africa that mostly sells its Turkish-made Bayraktar drones to many countries in which is also militarily involved and has established critical strongholds as in Libya, Senegal, Mali, Nigeria, Uganda, Ethiopia, Morocco. Following the well-known strategy arms for influence Türkiye aims at increasing its political influence in international organizations where the African caucus flourishes as in the United Nations.

Türkiye is moving beyond normalization. It seeks to strengthen its diplomatic ties while transforming them into strategic. This exact pattern was attempted with the State of Israel. The rapprochement between Türkiye and Israel died because of the October 7th massacre and the close relations between Türkiye and Hamas. Greece should study close the aforementioned paradigm.

During the first term of Kyriakos Mitsotakis' party in power (2019-23), Greece's foreign policy was undoubtedly proactive. Nikos Dendias, the then Foreign Minister and current Minister of Defense led an intense diplomatic activity in the sub-Saharan and Western Africa. The result was an upgraded presence of Greece in the region.

Dendias was the first Greek Foreign Minister that ever-visited Niger, Senegal, Cabo Verde, Nigeria, Ghana, South Africa and Rwanda. Along with increased diplomatic activity with old partners as Egypt, Israel, Morocco, Algeria and Libya, the aim was to broaden the geography of Greece's foreign policy in the Sahel.

Despite the difficult times of the pandemic, the irregular flows of migrants from Turkey, the war in Ukraine, Greece dared and achieved an unprecedented diplomatic activity in the Balkans, the Middle East and in Africa.

Hence, a legit question arises on the consequences for Greece should it not act proactively against Turkey's infiltration in Africa considering on the one hand, Türkiye's importance for the USA to counterbalance China and Russia in this region and on the other, Turkish revisionism that remains in the core of Erdogan's foreign policy in the Eastern Mediterranean.

Currently, Greece follows religiously the Good Neighborliness with Türkiye. Greece's strategy to negotiate its vital interests with Türkiye based on a 'positive agenda' while the latter continues to question the status quo of Greek islands and territorial waters soon after the Athens Declaration raises questions on Greece's position as a rational actor.

A rational actor should not only be able to read a sub-regional system but also to discern if his designed strategy can be implemented in a fluctuating environment. Greece's wish to deliver as an honest broker in regional conflicts may end up in undesirable outcomes should not be strategized and implemented cautiously.

Türkiye's arms for influence strategy together with a fierce rhetoric against Israel aims at undertaking a central role at the day after the war as the honest broker along with Qatar and Egypt. The Palestinian authority seems to assign to Turkey this role, too. On his three-day visit Mahmood Abbas is set to discuss the Gaza war and reconciliation efforts between Palestinian factions with President Erdoğan in Ankara. Therefore, how much room is left for Greece to act as an honest broker without jeopardizing both its vital interests and strategic affairs?

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The post Greek foreign policy 2.0 appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

On December 7, Athens held the fifth High-Level Cooperation Council (5^th HLCC) between Greece and Türkiye. Six years have passed since the last visit of President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan to Athens. But this time both sides have worked intensively to facilitate a framework for strengthening the cooperation between the two countries and to encourage open communication channels so that in times of crisis a possible escalation will be avoided.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

The agenda was set on issues such as tourism, education, and trade but also on critical ones for both sides as migration and visa liberalization from Türkiye to Greece, a gateway to Europe. For Türkiye, the agreement on increasing trade from $5 billion to $10 billion is beneficial for its deteriorating economy. The visa liberalization to visit ten Greek islands for seven days is also a good start for Türkiye's Visa Liberalization Dialogue with the EU. Furthermore, in these turbulent times where the flames of war ignite threats to international peace and stability, Türkiye's goodwill to sit at the table with its archenemy is a matter of prestige for its heavily damaged relations with the USA and the EU. Türkiye's military interference in Libya, and Syria, its posture on the war in Ukraine, on Gaza, all come in sharp contrast with the West's despite being a NATO ally. Thus, this good neighborhood policy for Erdoğan is a chance to save face from his fierce rhetoric against his Western allies and Israel.

Türkiye for the last 10 months abstains from engaging in dogfights with Greek jets as well as from any violations of Athens' FIR. This resulted in huge savings for Greece due to the high cost of hostile aircraft interceptions. Approximately 8 million euros will be allocated for education, the national health system, etc. Also, a 60% decrease in migration flows from Türkiye has a positive impact on Greece and Europe's security and economy. Moreover, Greece is expecting further increases in its revenues from visa liberalization and tourism from Türkiye to certain islands as has been agreed.

In that frame, the fifteen signed agreements have a positive impact on both sides. It was indeed a common goal to ameliorate the bilateral relations. On the one hand, Mitsotakis showed his eagerness to undertake personally the rapprochement with Türkiye immediately after his second reelection. Resolving the delimitation of the continental shelf in the International Court of Justice in Hague was highlighted as a top foreign policy priority. On the other hand, Erdoğan stated his eagerness to achieve a win-win, "kazan-kazan", as he put it in Turkish, agreement from this HLCC. His usual inflammatory rhetoric on contesting Greece's sovereignty on Greek islands, territorial waters, and air space was absent during this visit.

The 5^th HLCC was marked by the signing of the "Declaration on Friendship and Good Neighborhood" a hundred years after the Treaty of Lausanne that defined the borders between the modern states of Türkiye and Greece. For the Greek PM, the signing of the declaration seems as his personal contribution to the betterment of the Greco-Turkish relationship as his reference to the historic debt that he feels to bring the two states side by side shows. For Erdoğan, the amelioration of Türkiye's relations in this regional subsystem is his legacy as Türkiye marks its centennial and also part of his broader vision for a strong Turkish presence in the Mediterranean while having a leading role in the Muslim World.

Despite the good spirit and the friendly handshakes, profound divergence on sovereignty, terrorism and International Law (IL) was evident at the joint press conference of the Greek prime minister and the Turkish president. Greece is a fervent advocate of International Organizations (IOs) and International Law, especially the Law of the Seas.

Erdoğan insists on ignoring the IL as the case of Türkiye's invasion in Syria and the illegal incursions of the latter's sovereign territory show. He insists on calling the Muslim minority in Greece as Turkish minority, disdaining that way the Treaty of Lausanne. He also made clear at the HLCC that he wishes to resolve the Cyprus issue not according to the United Nations Security Council's resolutions but "on realities on the ground", which is translated into a division of the island.

Greece and Türkiye have also different views on terrorism. Greece strongly condemns the Hamas massacre and stands with Israel in its right to defend itself against Hamas and other terrorist groups that operate in Gaza. Meanwhile, Türkiye supports the terrorist group Hamas against Israel, but also hosts on its soil Hamas' office and provides them with passports thus fostering international terrorism.

Finally, Turkey's anti-Western words and deeds, its partnership with Iran and Russia, and the leading role that aspires to undertake in the Muslim world especially the day after the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza indicate that there is little room for hope to achieve a long-lasting peace between the two littoral states of the Aegean Sea.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The post The sea that unites, the issues that divide appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

It has recently been reported that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Recep Tayyip Erdogan are searching for a common ground to facilitate an official visit of the the leader of the Jewish State in Ankara. The effort to revive the ante-2010 Israeli-Turkish relations is certainly not new. Keeping in mind that the economic and trade relations never ceased, on the one hand, Turkey seeks a rapprochement since December 2020, and on the other, President Herzog's visit to Turkey was also towards this goal.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

Domestic and external imperatives in both countries are the driving force for this new reconciliation effort.  Netanyahu faces well-known challenges both domestically and externally that are equally existential for the Jewish State. Domestic instability affects the morale both of the prime minister himself, given the trial that he faces, and the state, since rallies against the judicial reforms jeopardize domestic cohesion amidst severe Iranian threats. The danger of Iran reaching 90% purity in uranium enrichment finds Israel pushing its allies and the international community in general for a solution that will dissolute once and for all the nuclear aspirations of the ayatollahs. Also, this seems to be the legacy of Netanyahu who foresaw the elusiveness of the JCPOA back in 2015 and insisted on a more aggressive action to cut off the head of the octopus.

Since the rest of the world does not endorse Israel's anguish and given the Israeli doctrine of self-reliance, thjis forces Israel to explore its possibilities, which also includes improved relations with Turkey whose location and relations with the Sunni and Shiite world are all critical. However, President Erdogan sets preconditions for the meeting.

There is a Greek saying, "What does the fox seek at the Shuk" that is being used to state that it is impossible for a fox to make its appearance in the market or at a bazaar because they will immediately try to catch it. This means that the culprit always gets away from places where it is easy to expose his crime.

The fox, meaning Erdoğan, demands as a prerequisite from Netanyahu to deliver to the Sultan news on gas cooperation between the two countries. Given the flourishing relations in defense, energy, and military cooperation between the axis of the pillars of democracy and stability in the region: Israel, Greece and Cyprus; the fact that the Hellenic world, Greece and Cyprus, strengthen their relations with the Israeli defense industry by agreeing to buy Iron Dome-Cyprus- and SPIKE missiles-Greece-, Israel is juggling between Turkey and Greece and Cyprus.

From a Hellenic perspective, the leader of the Republic of Cyprus, President Nikos Christodoulides, is clear on retaining the excellent relations with Israel. When it comes to Greece, Prime Minister, Kyriakos Mitsotakis, who, as the exit polls predict, will be in office for four more years, fervently supports the three plus one cooperation in the region, meaning, Israel, Greece, Cyprus and the US.

Plus, the designated Greek foreign policy of the last four years under the ministership of Nikos Dendias showed that Greece is an honest broker; retains good relations with the Arab world; does its best to sit at the negotiation table with Turkey, as long as the latter respects the International law. Despite the good spirit that has arisen from the Greek humanitarian aid to alleviate the Turkish people in the devastated 7.8 earthquake of February 2023 near the borders of Turkey and Syria, Turkey repeats itself by initiating again a hybrid war against Greece, as it did in 2020, by sending migrants in the land border between Turkey-Greece in Evros.

Greece and Cyprus know better than anyone what the mentality of any Turkish leadership is. Israel has made it crystal clear that it does not wish to interfere in the Greco-Turkish conflict. Meanwhile, Netanyahu who enjoys great relations with both leaders of Greece and Cyprus and has no illusions about the fox, has to weigh carefully any implications should he decide a change of the route of the Jewish ship in the turbulent waters of the Eastern Mediterranean where Turkey fantasizes the revival of its Ottoman past.

Netanyahu, the longest sitting prime minister with unique leadership skills should skillfully handle the situation in the deep waters of the East Mediterranean. After all, he is aware of the footprints of the culprit all over the land of Judea: It takes a walk around eastern Jerusalem to witness the established presence of Turkish entity. Bearing the sign of AKP (the Turkish ruling party) and a portrait of Sultan Erdoğan in shops, one such entity not only advertises its activities as the benefactor in Jerusalem but also puts an effort to "ease the hardships as a result of Israel's ongoing policy of Judaization", as they put it in their official site. On the domestic front, Erdoğan has officially embraced a terror group that became Erdoğan's most recent political ally. Finally, the well-known fact that Erdoğan openly supports Hamas and that Turkey fosters Hamas militias on its soil, does not seem to be a subject of a political change under the presidency of Erdoğan, who aspires to be the leader of the Muslim worls. Thus, this time, in this official visit, is it possible for the fox to make its appearance at the Shuk and simultaneously get away with his crimes?

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The post Netanyahu-Erdogan meeting: Proceed with caution appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.