Turkish Foreign Policy and Regional Geopolitics

[Foinikas]

Cyprus, Lebanon sign ‘milestone’ agreement​

President Christodoulides with his counterpart Joseph Aoun.

Cyprus Wednesday 26 November | 13:47 1 Comment
By Jean Christou

Cyprus and Lebanon on Wednesday signed an agreement on the delimitation of the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) between the two countries and agreed to explore the idea of a Cyprus-Lebanon electricity interconnection by creating technical teams and conducting a viability study.

In Beirut, President Nikos Christodoulides described the agreement “a milestone of strategic importance”, ending 20 years of talks on the issue.

Christodoulides travelled to Lebanon on Wednesday morning, where he held a private meeting with his counterpart, Joseph Aoun. An expanded meeting followed, after which Christodoulides and the Lebanese Minister of Transport and Public Works, Fayez Rassamni, signed the agreement on the delimitation of the EEZ.

He said the deal was an “important and historic occasion” and a milestone of strategic importance “which seals, in the clearest way, the level of our relations”.

“We are sending a strong, political message that Cyprus and Lebanon, on the basis of international law, relevant United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and of course good neighbourly relations, continue to invest in strengthening trust and mutual respect,” Christodoulides said.

He cited among other things, “the close and timeless ties that unite our countries, as well as our personal friendship.”

The agreement that was signed on Wednesday, the president said, would be to the benefit of Cypriots, Lebanese and the people of the region in general.

“We are bringing to an end a long-standing issue and are now looking to the future and to what, based on this, our countries can create together,” he said.

Christodoulides thanked his Lebanese counterpart as the deal would not have been possible “without your own political will and determination, as well as the contribution of Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, the government, and the political leadership of Lebanon.”


The successful completion of the negotiations was, he added, the result of “tireless and methodical work in a spirit of trust and transparency, by our two negotiating teams”.

Aoun, in his comments said the deal paved the way for the exploration of the marine resources of the two countries and could “form a foundation for international cooperation that can be extended to the entire region”.

“This agreement will allow both Lebanon and Cyprus to begin exploring their respective marine resources and will also strengthen cooperation between our countries at this level,” he said.

“We can now work on developing bilateral agreements, thus facilitating and strengthening the work of exploration companies in both countries.”

He also said that the launch of new joint projects in the energy sectors, especially renewable energy, as well as in telecommunications, electricity transmission and joint tourism programmes, could now proceed.

At the same time, he added, the two countries continue to cooperate in the field of common defence, security and search and rescue.

.
“Our cooperation does not target anyone, nor does it exclude anyone. It is not intended to block the path of any friend or partner. On the contrary, we want this agreement to be the foundation of an international cooperation that we wish to extend throughout our region, in order to offer stability and prosperity to all our countries and peoples,” Aoun said.

“We believe that this is the only way to put an end to the violence, wars and policies of hegemonic greed that have cost our region and its peoples so dearly.”

The Cyprus News Agency (CNA) said the agreement was based on the Median Line between the two countries, which was a long-standing position of the Republic.

The initial Cyprus-Lebanon EEZ Agreement was signed in January 2007, but was not ratified by Lebanon due to internal issues. After the signing of the Cyprus-Israel EEZ Agreement in 2010, the Lebanese side made claims of loss of maritime area, which were related to the dispute between them. The Lebanon-Israel dispute was resolved in 2022 through an agreement under American mediation, defining their lateral maritime boundary.

Following the election of President Aoun in January 2025, the Cyprus and Lebanon negotiations resumed at an intensive pace. In September 2025, negotiations were held in Beirut and a revised text of the deal was agreed upon, which was approved by the cabinets of both countries in October.

Turkey has consistently expressed opposition and taken actions to avoid signing this agreement. “Negotiations and discussions were conducted intensively, discreetly and methodically with the aim of achieving this historic agreement,” a source from the presidency told CNA.

The deal, the source said, substantially strengthens the prospects for cooperation in critical sectors, such as energy and infrastructure and provides the necessary legal and economic certainty and security to potential investor.

The two presidents on Wednesday also welcomed the dialogue that has already begun on the Cyprus-Lebanon electricity interconnection. Christodoulides said both countries had jointly approached the World Bank to prepare a relevant feasibility study” for the specific project.

In addition to the signing of the agreement and discussions on broader energy issues, Christodoulides said the two leaders also had the opportunity to exchange views on the further expansion of bilateral cooperation, regional developments that directly affect the two countries, and Lebanon-EU relations, “which Cyprus supports practically and substantially”.

Cyprus, Lebanon sign ‘milestone’ agreement

Cyprus and Lebanon on Wednesday signed an agreement on the delimitation of the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) between the two countries and agreed to explore the idea of a Cyprus-Lebanon electricity interconnection by creating technical teams and conducting a viability study. In Beirut, President...

cyprus-mail.com

 

[Foinikas]

First of all,I have no idea where this thread belongs. To the Turkish Foreign Policy? To the Europe section? To the Turkish Defence section? To the jokes section? To a miniverse called "The surreal region of the Balkans"? So mods and admins,please move the thread according to your wisdom.

Now,there's a funny thing that occured yesterday,I thought the Turkish friends here would post about it,I stumbled upon it on greek defence sites where many Greeks at the comments were again amused,frustrated,annoyed,laughed or just facepalm. This morning though,I was watching TV and as usual,
Manolis Kostidis reported on SKAI and I got to see parts from CNN Turk taking Dendias' statements and making a show about it.

Now,here's the original statement by the Greek MoD,Nikos Dendias:

"...we have completely changed the doctrine. The Aegean will no longer be protected only by the Fleet. It will be protected mainly by the missile artillery that will be dispersed and mobile in the hundreds if not thousands of islands of the Archipelago. We will close the Aegean from the land. The Fleet will be free to operate, but not bound in the narrow sea."

This phrase(along with the rest of the text I didn't post here)made a lot of greeks on defence sites laugh or become frustrated. Why? Because it's another one of those vague,empty visionary statements. What does the Minister mean about missile artillery? What systems? There's no contract yet,there's nothing. Does he mean we'll use the Harpoon from the Kortenaer frigates when they are retired? Does he mean we'll buy Exocet batteries? Maybe the Puls?More Spike NLOS? Does he imply the ELSA missiles he previously rushed to announce we'll be putting on our new frigates?

There are no deals signed,no orders,no announcements about any of that. Nothing. Yet,the MoD once more goes around talking about "missile walls". Then he says "will be dispered and mobile". How exactly will have them "mobile" on islands? You can't move them from island to island easily. It takes hours,it could take days. They can only be brought by aircraft or transport ships.

Then the Turks have their own take on his statement and things become even more weird.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

The Turkish analysts and journalists took the quote "we will close the Aegean from the land" and started the scenarios of Greece trying to blockade Turkey.
That's wrong though,what Dendias meant was in case of war,we could be able to hit any invading forces with land-based missile batteries and not just rely solely on the Navy.
Then comes the phrase "that will be dispersed and mobile in the hundreds if not thousands of islands of the Archipelago". The Turkish panel of experts and journalists took this as an intention to fill almost every island and islet with missile launchers and artillery.

This isn't an actual intention nor what Dendias said. Dendias meant we have so many islands we can install batteries there(on some islands,not all)and move it around. It's impossible for us to install missile batteries on not all,not most,but even a large number of islands.

Then of course,started the usual nagging about "Yunan wants to put weapons on islands that should have been demilitarized",which has been debunked as an argument so many times,yet continues as a Turkish foreign policy card. Never mind. Let's move on.

Then we have the lovely Turkish lady start wondering why is Dendias saying all that,why does Greece want to do all that,the Turkish panel wonders why does Greece imply Turkey as the enemy target of all that. The answer is simple: It's not out of the blue,just take a look at all the weaponry coming out of the Turkish factories and you'll get an idea. Cenk,Tayfun,talks about S-400s and new indigenous AA systems creating a no-fly zone over the Aegean(as per a certain member on PDF),it's all there.

Conclusion: There's no need to be alarmed by big talk of a Minister,especially when there's not even a single order or clear reference to specific weapons,only vague mentions of this and that. Not to mention that for some reason,Dendias talks about AA weapons being important,yet keeps insisting on taking out precious AA missiles out of the FDI HN and even the FREMM Bergamini and installing cruise missiles instead,in order to have...deterrence.

The full text:

"The Aegean Sea makes no sense for the Fleet to protect it, as it has been done until now. The new frigates, the new ships, are too expensive tools to remain confined to a narrow sea like the Aegean, exposed to modern threats. You can destroy a billion-euro frigate with a drone worth a few tens of thousands of euros. And also that they cannot develop their real potential in this environment, which is the load of strategic weapons that they will carry after the changes to the frigates. And let me not tell you too much, we have completely changed the doctrine. The Aegean will no longer be protected only by the Fleet. It will be protected mainly by the missile artillery that will be dispersed and mobile across the hundreds, if not thousands, of islands of the Archipelago. We will close the Aegean Sea off from land. The Fleet will be free to operate, but not bound in the narrow sea. And also changing the capabilities of the ships that we had already ordered, both the 4 French frigates - on December 18 I will receive the first one in France and we will raise the Greek flag - and the 4 Italian ones that we will receive later (2 plus 2), will all carry strategic missiles. That is, missiles that can be launched from anywhere in the Eastern Mediterranean and hit a target over 1,500 kilometers. The potential adversary will have a strong deterrent force.

In the air again, what was the main anti-aircraft force that we're discussing to this day of our Homeland? The answer is the Air Force. However, this is not a correct answer. It's a very precise answer anyway. Is it possible? It is possible. But is it correct? No, it's not correct. I'll tell you something that maybe some people know but haven't noticed. From 1973 onwards, a basic question was solved. What was the question. In the battle between aircraft and anti-aircraft, who is the strongest? And why do I say 1973? 1973 is the last war between Israel and Egypt. We all know that Israel won this war. But what perhaps many of us haven't noticed. There was a big battle between the Israeli air force - always one of the best in the world - and the anti-aircraft forces of Egypt at the time, if you remember, they had SAM missiles. The Israeli air force did not win. The Israelis lost too many planes and too many pilots. The way Israel managed to win the war is when General Sharon crossed the Canal and destroyed the Egyptian anti-aircraft guns on the ground. Or to give you a more modern example. Right now, Russia theoretically has complete air superiority over Ukraine. It has over 650 planes, Ukraine has much fewer and I don't know how many of them are flying. The Russian air force is not flying. It is not flying over Ukraine. Now the anti-aircraft gun can stop the plane. So why should Greece face the air threat with its planes? Greece has therefore made the choice with the New Doctrine that we are implementing, under what I have called "Achilles' Shield", to protect its territory holistically with missile systems. Just as it will protect, just as it will close, the sea.

 

[Persian Gulf]

Ali Larijani welcomes Fidan to Tehran

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Larijani is probably the third most important politician in Iran after Khamenei and Ghalibaf. Fidan also met Pezeshkian and I think Ghalibaf too.

 

[Sinan]

First of all,I have no idea where this thread belongs. To the Turkish Foreign Policy? To the Europe section? To the Turkish Defence section? To the jokes section? To a miniverse called "The surreal region of the Balkans"? So mods and admins,please move the thread according to your wisdom.

Now,there's a funny thing that occured yesterday,I thought the Turkish friends here would post about it,I stumbled upon it on greek defence sites where many Greeks at the comments were again amused,frustrated,annoyed,laughed or just facepalm. This morning though,I was watching TV and as usual,
Manolis Kostidis reported on SKAI and I got to see parts from CNN Turk taking Dendias' statements and making a show about it.

Now,here's the original statement by the Greek MoD,Nikos Dendias:

"...we have completely changed the doctrine. The Aegean will no longer be protected only by the Fleet. It will be protected mainly by the missile artillery that will be dispersed and mobile in the hundreds if not thousands of islands of the Archipelago. We will close the Aegean from the land. The Fleet will be free to operate, but not bound in the narrow sea."

This phrase(along with the rest of the text I didn't post here)made a lot of greeks on defence sites laugh or become frustrated. Why? Because it's another one of those vague,empty visionary statements. What does the Minister mean about missile artillery? What systems? There's no contract yet,there's nothing. Does he mean we'll use the Harpoon from the Kortenaer frigates when they are retired? Does he mean we'll buy Exocet batteries? Maybe the Puls?More Spike NLOS? Does he imply the ELSA missiles he previously rushed to announce we'll be putting on our new frigates?

There are no deals signed,no orders,no announcements about any of that. Nothing. Yet,the MoD once more goes around talking about "missile walls". Then he says "will be dispered and mobile". How exactly will have them "mobile" on islands? You can't move them from island to island easily. It takes hours,it could take days. They can only be brought by aircraft or transport ships.

Then the Turks have their own take on his statement and things become even more weird.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

The Turkish analysts and journalists took the quote "we will close the Aegean from the land" and started the scenarios of Greece trying to blockade Turkey.
That's wrong though,what Dendias meant was in case of war,we could be able to hit any invading forces with land-based missile batteries and not just rely solely on the Navy.
Then comes the phrase "that will be dispersed and mobile in the hundreds if not thousands of islands of the Archipelago". The Turkish panel of experts and journalists took this as an intention to fill almost every island and islet with missile launchers and artillery.

This isn't an actual intention nor what Dendias said. Dendias meant we have so many islands we can install batteries there(on some islands,not all)and move it around. It's impossible for us to install missile batteries on not all,not most,but even a large number of islands.

Then of course,started the usual nagging about "Yunan wants to put weapons on islands that should have been demilitarized",which has been debunked as an argument so many times,yet continues as a Turkish foreign policy card. Never mind. Let's move on.

Then we have the lovely Turkish lady start wondering why is Dendias saying all that,why does Greece want to do all that,the Turkish panel wonders why does Greece imply Turkey as the enemy target of all that. The answer is simple: It's not out of the blue,just take a look at all the weaponry coming out of the Turkish factories and you'll get an idea. Cenk,Tayfun,talks about S-400s and new indigenous AA systems creating a no-fly zone over the Aegean(as per a certain member on PDF),it's all there.

Conclusion: There's no need to be alarmed by big talk of a Minister,especially when there's not even a single order or clear reference to specific weapons,only vague mentions of this and that. Not to mention that for some reason,Dendias talks about AA weapons being important,yet keeps insisting on taking out precious AA missiles out of the FDI HN and even the FREMM Bergamini and installing cruise missiles instead,in order to have...deterrence.

The full text:

"The Aegean Sea makes no sense for the Fleet to protect it, as it has been done until now. The new frigates, the new ships, are too expensive tools to remain confined to a narrow sea like the Aegean, exposed to modern threats. You can destroy a billion-euro frigate with a drone worth a few tens of thousands of euros. And also that they cannot develop their real potential in this environment, which is the load of strategic weapons that they will carry after the changes to the frigates. And let me not tell you too much, we have completely changed the doctrine. The Aegean will no longer be protected only by the Fleet. It will be protected mainly by the missile artillery that will be dispersed and mobile across the hundreds, if not thousands, of islands of the Archipelago. We will close the Aegean Sea off from land. The Fleet will be free to operate, but not bound in the narrow sea. And also changing the capabilities of the ships that we had already ordered, both the 4 French frigates - on December 18 I will receive the first one in France and we will raise the Greek flag - and the 4 Italian ones that we will receive later (2 plus 2), will all carry strategic missiles. That is, missiles that can be launched from anywhere in the Eastern Mediterranean and hit a target over 1,500 kilometers. The potential adversary will have a strong deterrent force.

In the air again, what was the main anti-aircraft force that we're discussing to this day of our Homeland? The answer is the Air Force. However, this is not a correct answer. It's a very precise answer anyway. Is it possible? It is possible. But is it correct? No, it's not correct. I'll tell you something that maybe some people know but haven't noticed. From 1973 onwards, a basic question was solved. What was the question. In the battle between aircraft and anti-aircraft, who is the strongest? And why do I say 1973? 1973 is the last war between Israel and Egypt. We all know that Israel won this war. But what perhaps many of us haven't noticed. There was a big battle between the Israeli air force - always one of the best in the world - and the anti-aircraft forces of Egypt at the time, if you remember, they had SAM missiles. The Israeli air force did not win. The Israelis lost too many planes and too many pilots. The way Israel managed to win the war is when General Sharon crossed the Canal and destroyed the Egyptian anti-aircraft guns on the ground. Or to give you a more modern example. Right now, Russia theoretically has complete air superiority over Ukraine. It has over 650 planes, Ukraine has much fewer and I don't know how many of them are flying. The Russian air force is not flying. It is not flying over Ukraine. Now the anti-aircraft gun can stop the plane. So why should Greece face the air threat with its planes? Greece has therefore made the choice with the New Doctrine that we are implementing, under what I have called "Achilles' Shield", to protect its territory holistically with missile systems. Just as it will protect, just as it will close, the sea.

CNN Turk is a Erdogan controlled Tv station (remaining %90 also controlled by Erdogan) and owned by Yıldırım Demirören. Those speaking orangutans are not experts on anything, they just defend Erdogan's policies(internal, external) no matter what. Also, most of the people stopped viewing these clown channels and prefer to watch independent journalists' youtube channels. Because of this drop of ratings, they try to make these "news" sensational as possible.

Here, people don't care that much about Greece unless Greeks do something drastic and opposition makes a fuss about it.

Also, general consensus about Dendias is; he wants to be visible on the Greek media, makes sensetional statements, and plays for becoming the head of the party and country. He is not taken seriously.

 

[Foinikas]

Those speaking orangutans are not experts on anything, they just defend Erdogan's policies(internal, external) no matter what. Also, most of the people stopped viewing these clown channels and prefer to watch independent journalists' youtube channels. Because of this drop of ratings, they try to make these "news" sensational as possible.

I watched parts of the video with subs on and the only guy who seems serious and ok,even agreed with him at some points,was this gentleman Gaffar Yakinca



The rest and especially the guy on the top right,Coskun Basbug are the usual propaganda parrots. Years ago I thought CNN Turk was very independent,maybe it changed after 2016?

Also, general consensus about Dendias is; he wants to be visible on the Greek media, makes sensetional statements, and plays for becoming the head of the party and country. He is not taken seriously.

Exactly,man. Rumor here is that Dendias and Mitsotakis are fighting for the future leadership of the party. Especially after the 2007 elections. Dendias often makes statements that catch the government off guard. Not to mention the Armed Forces.
One day complaining about the budget for air defence being only 2,2 billion euros,the next saying he's not being given more more(so it's Mitsotakis' fault),then announcing we'll be making a 5 point AA shield worth 2,2 billion euros!

We order FDI HN frigates from France with 32 Aster-30 AA missiles on,suddenly Dendias announces the frigates will carry "ballistic weapons" too. After months of saying nothing,then talks about Scalp. So that means the frigates will carry MdCN. That means the Aster-30 will be reduced to 24. Then the media talk about 32 missiles again,as if the statement was just random. Then he talks again about the ships being able to have "ballistic weapons" on them and mentions the ELSA missile. Meanwhile,the ELSA is still a project in development. Not in production,not finalized,not tested,it's still in production. And he keeps saying "we will install missiles on the FREMM too".

And he's notorious for not signing anything. ESPECIALLY when it comes to Greek products. He's being called out for it on Greek defence sites.

At the same time,I see CNN Turk going bananas about his statements for 2 days now. They won't stop. They analyze it and have people comment on it,and the islands must disarm and Greeks are yalan and the MoD said they will surround the Aegean with missiles

I'm sure they will go berserk about news of the almost finished deal for the Barak MX.

 

[Sinan]

I watched parts of the video with subs on and the only guy who seems serious and ok,even agreed with him at some points,was this gentleman Gaffar Yakinca

The rest and especially the guy on the top right,Coskun Basbug are the usual propaganda parrots. Years ago I thought CNN Turk was very independent,maybe it changed after 2016?

Yeap, in 2018 sold to Demirören an Erdogan crownie.

Exactly,man. Rumor here is that Dendias and Mitsotakis are fighting for the future leadership of the party. Especially after the 2007 elections. Dendias often makes statements that catch the government off guard. Not to mention the Armed Forces.
One day complaining about the budget for air defence being only 2,2 billion euros,the next saying he's not being given more more(so it's Mitsotakis' fault),then announcing we'll be making a 5 point AA shield worth 2,2 billion euros!

We order FDI HN frigates from France with 32 Aster-30 AA missiles on,suddenly Dendias announces the frigates will carry "ballistic weapons" too. After months of saying nothing,then talks about Scalp. So that means the frigates will carry MdCN. That means the Aster-30 will be reduced to 24. Then the media talk about 32 missiles again,as if the statement was just random. Then he talks again about the ships being able to have "ballistic weapons" on them and mentions the ELSA missile. Meanwhile,the ELSA is still a project in development. Not in production,not finalized,not tested,it's still in production. And he keeps saying "we will install missiles on the FREMM too".

And he's notorious for not signing anything. ESPECIALLY when it comes to Greek products. He's being called out for it on Greek defence sites.

At the same time,I see CNN Turk going bananas about his statements for 2 days now. They won't stop. They analyze it and have people comment on it,and the islands must disarm and Greeks are yalan and the MoD said they will surround the Aegean with missiles

I'm sure they will go berserk about news of the almost finished deal for the Barak MX.

Some wars made a lot rating at the time, Turkey's Syria operations, war between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

Haberglobal, which is founded by an Azeri guy, gave news on Azeri and Armenis 7/24 and got a lot ratings. It was at that time they happen to be a big channel. And channel invaded by Erdogan stooges. So, CNNTurk trying to ride that wave (though that wave is non existent today)

Serious, defense analysts don't appear on tv since they gave the defense news as it is, not as propaganda.

They don't talk much on Greece. Once one of them said, most of the Islands are in artillery & rocket artillery range, can destroy whatever they put on islands, without using sophisticated weapons.

 

[Foinikas]

Haberglobal, which is founded by an Azeri guy, gave news on Azeri and Armenis 7/24 and got a lot ratings. It was at that time they happen to be a big channel. And channel invaded by Erdogan stooges. So, CNNTurk trying to ride that wave (though that wave is non existent today)

Oh I understand that. I remember in 2022,when the war in Ukraine started,some channels here and especially SKAI,had daily reports on the war apart from debates,breaking news and documentaries. And that went on for months. For the first few months. To be honest,I prefer that from watching nonsense on TV. It makes sense Haberglobal enjoyed good ratings,it's interesting.

So that's what happened. Because I remembered,there used to be a bald guy(I think bald)who was head of CNN Turk or something there and he was very friendly with Greek journalists,sometimes talked on Greek TV,it was a very friendly atmosphere.

 

[hyperman]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Saudi UAE proxy war now heating up.

This is good for Turkey, Turkey should throw its weight behind Saudi, the more intense the clash between the Saudis and Emiratis, the more the Emiratis will be isolated, with only Israel backing them.

 

[Eşbah]

NEW — Greece's former President Pavlopoulos:

“The Aegean belongs 75% to Greece. Turkey only has rights over a maximum of 25% of the Aegean. Equal sharing is not possible.”

“When we look at territorial waters, 43.5% of the Aegean is in Greece, while Turkey holds only 7.5%.”

“If Greece exercises its legal right to extend its territorial waters to 12 miles, then our share rises to 71.5%.”

“This also shows how utterly absurd Turkey's threat of war is from the perspective of International and European Law.”

“Turkey wants to take complete control of Cyprus.”

“If Turkey wants to have a place in the new architecture of the Eastern Mediterranean, it must understand that the occupation of Cyprus cannot continue.”

“Greece should continue to apply pressure in order not to miss historic opportunities.”

“Turkey is also trying to create conditions for the so-called Turkish minority in Western Thrace to gain independence in the future.”

“This is contrary to the Lausanne Treaty; the people there are recognized only as a Muslim minority, not as an ethnic Turkish minority.”

“Turkey's occupation of Cyprus has become a role model for Putin's revisionism.”

“Putin thought that the occupation in Cyprus went without consequences and therefore invading Ukraine would also go without consequences.”

“We must take firm stances on Cyprus and there should be no bargaining; a federal state and the withdrawal of occupation forces, the removal of third parties' guarantorship.”

“The illegal settlers placed in Cyprus by Turkey must gradually leave the territory of the Republic of Cyprus.”

“In no way, openly or covertly, should a two-state solution be allowed or tolerated; such a solution would only serve Turkey's fragmentation of Cyprus.”

“Hellenism has much more economic and military power than before to defend these positions.”

“Cyprus must return to the state it was in before the provocative and illegal Turkish occupation.”

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Literally a declaration of war but this is how former politicians usually talk. The question is, how much of what he said is actually mainstream among the Greek decision-makers?

 

[Foinikas]

Literally a declaration of war but this is how former politicians usually talk. The question is, how much of what he said is actually mainstream among the Greek decision-makers?

How exactly is it a declaration of war? What part exactly from what he said isn't true?

Treaty of Lausanne:

ARTICLE 12.

The decision taken on the 13th February 1914, by the Conference of London, in virtue of Articles 5 of the Treaty of London of the 17th-30th May, 1913, and 15 of the Treaty of Athens of the 1st-14th November, 1913, which decision was communicated to the Greek Government on the 13th February 1914, regarding the sovereignty of Greece over the islands of the Eastern Mediterranean, other than the islands of Imbros, Tenedos and Rabbit Islands, particularly the islands of Lemnos, Samothrace, Mytilene, Chios, Samos and Nikaria, is confirmed, subject to the provisions of the present Treaty respecting the islands placed under the sovereignty of Italy which form the subject of Article 15.
Except where a provision to the contrary is contained in the present Treaty, the islands situated at less than three miles from the Asiatic coast remain under Turkish sovereignty.

ARTICLE 15.

Turkey renounces in favour of Italy all rights and title over the following islands: Stampalia (Astrapalia), Rhodes (Rhodos), Calki (Kharki), Scarpanto, Casos (Casso), Piscopis (Tilos), Misiros (Nisyros), Calimnos (Kalymnos), Leros, Patmos, Lipsos (Lipso), Simi (Symi), and Cos (Kos), which are now occupied by Italy, and the islets dependent thereon, and also over the island of Castellorizzo.

ARTICLE 16.

Turkey hereby renounces all rights and title whatsoever over or respecting the territories situated outside the frontiers laid down in the present Treaty and the islands other than those over which her sovereignty is recognised by the said Treaty, the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned.
The provisions of the present Article do not prejudice any special arrangements arising from neighbourly relations which have been or may be concluded between Turkey and any limitrophe countries.

 

[Oublious]

Ther is no logic agreement possible with greece, you can read on ther posts. Later or sooner ther will be a war wher they going to losing all that island on our coast.

 

[Foinikas]

Ther is no logic agreement possible with greece, you can read on ther posts. Later or sooner ther will be a war wher they going to losing all that island on our coast.

Of course there is no logic agreement. When the Treaty says Turkey is only entitled to everything 3 nm from its coast with the exception of Imbros,Tenedos and Rabbit islands and then you say "give me half of the Aegean".

Of course there can't be a logic agreement,when you create a de facto State in Cyprus but you say "if you drill you must share the resources with the Turkish Cypriots,because it's one island".

How can you have a logic agreement,when the AKP government along with the MHP talk about "stolen islands" and dispute every Treaty signed from 1923 onwards.

 

[Oublious]

Of course there is no logic agreement. When the Treaty says Turkey is only entitled to everything 3 nm from its coast with the exception of Imbros,Tenedos and Rabbit islands and then you say "give me half of the Aegean".

Of course there can't be a logic agreement,when you create a de facto State in Cyprus but you say "if you drill you must share the resources with the Turkish Cypriots,because it's one island".

How can you have a logic agreement,when the AKP government along with the MHP talk about "stolen islands" and dispute every Treaty signed from 1923 onwards.

lol

greece should honour the treasty off Laussanne first and come back crying, Cyprus is your stupid fault remember.

 

[Foinikas]

lol

greece should honour the treasty off Laussanne first and come back crying, Cyprus is your stupid fault remember.

1. You gave us the ok to arm the islands. Blame your government,not us. Goes back to Paris,Montreaux etc.
2. Since you effectively went for a two-State solution,you can't demand half of the resources found on the Greek Cypriot side.

 

[Eşbah]

Türkiye is Russia's last major natural gas market in Europe after years of war-related Western sanctions on Moscow. It imports a total of 22 billion cubic metres of gas under the Gazprom (GAZP.MM), contracts that expire at the end of the year, amounting to less than 40% of Türkiye's overall gas mix, down from more than 50% in 2018.

Türkiye extends Russian gas imports for a year as it plans US investment

Türkiye has extended its expiring Russian gas import contracts by a year as it plans U

en.apa.az

Turkey's reliance on Russian natural gas has plummeted to 40%. They are further diversifying sources of supply. The US is getting a fair share. I wonder if the F35 deal is somehow connected to this.

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/turkeys-botas-mercuria-sign-20-year-lng-supply-deal-2025-09-24/