Turkey-Greece crisis talks: An exercise in minimal expectations

1 / 3
This handout picture taken and released on January 25, 2021, by the Turkish Foreign Ministry press office shows Greek diplomat Pavlos Apostolidis (2L), Turkish Deputy Foreign Minister Sedat Onal (2R), Turkish President's spokesman Ibrahim Kalin (3R) and their delegation meeting at Dolmabahce palace in Istanbul as talks resumed over Eastern Mediterranean dispute. (AFP/Turkish Foreign Ministry)
Short Url
Updated 03 February 2021
Follow

Turkey-Greece crisis talks: An exercise in minimal expectations

  • Following a five-year pause, Greece and Turkey held a meeting in January to address their many disputes
  • In order to give diplomacy a chance, the US and the EU are unlikely to slap further sanctions on Turkey

WASHINGTON D.C.: After a tumultuous four years of Donald Trump’s rule, Joe Biden has entered the White House with a packed domestic agenda, not least the ongoing pandemic and its economic repercussions but also the gnawing issue of race relations. As such, one might expect Biden to place America’s foreign relations on the backburner, at least for the time being.

However, Biden has a strong track record on high-level diplomacy, chalking up several years of engagement with America’s friends and foes, projecting US national interests abroad. Now that he has assumed the highest office in the land, he has pledged to restore America’s image on the world stage.

Coincidentally, Biden’s tenure began just days before long-awaited talks between Greece and Turkey took place in Istanbul — the latest in the protracted territorial dispute which has long threatened the peace of the Mediterranean Sea.




A handout photo released by the Greek National Defence Ministry on August 26, 2020 shows ships of the Hellenic Navy taking part in a military exercise in the eastern Mediterranean Sea, on August 25, 2020. (AFP/Greek Defense Ministry/File Photo)

Delayed by several months, and following a relative easing of tensions, talks between Greece and Turkey are, on the surface at least, an exercise in minimal expectations. Exploratory talks resumed after a pause of five years, picking up where they left off in 2016.

Little progress toward normalizing relations was made between 2002 to 2016, during which time some 60 rounds of talks took place. There is little sign things will be any different this time around.

However, Biden is not Trump. He will need very little time getting up to speed on the dispute in the eastern Mediterranean and his active involvement in the State Department’s handling of the issue is beyond doubt.

Furthermore, Biden will end the Trump-era practice of direct diplomacy between the White House and Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, preferring instead to act through the standard institutional channels.

Greece has reason to feel optimistic about the US stance. Biden has on numerous occasions endorsed the Greek position on de-escalation, solving outstanding issues through dialogue and recourse to international law. He is also a supporter of the religious rights of the Greek minority in Turkey, and especially of the role of the patriarchate in Istanbul.

By any measure, Greek-US relations are at their peak, having been strengthened during the Trump years and made stronger through multiple agreements on trade and mutual defense.

FASTFACT

Greece-Turkey

* 11 Turkey’s rank in Global Firepower military strength.

* 29 Greece’s rank in Global Firepower military strength.

* $18.2b Turkey’s annual military budget.

* $7b Greece’s annual military budget.

Biden has also surrounded himself with seasoned diplomats and advisers who worked with him during his eight-year tenure as Barack Obama’s vice president, and whose concern for peace and stability in the region is echoed in Greek rhetoric and policy initiatives.

By contrast, a big question mark hangs over Washington’s Turkey file. Ankara’s flourishing relationship with Moscow and its purchase of the Russian S-400 missile defense system has led to US sanctions that Biden will be in no hurry to lift.

Turkey’s position in NATO has been weakened, leaving member states including France questioning its reliability. Indeed, Washington considers the presence of S-400s on Turkish soil as a threat to its F-35 fighter jets and to NATO defense systems in general.

This is not the only issue blighting the bilateral relationship. Ankara continues to complain about the perceived US role in the 2016 coup attempt and rejects US charges levelled against its state-owned Halkbank concerning its alleged role in helping Iran evade US sanctions.




Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan (L) and Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis (R) shake hands in front of the Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu (C) during a bilateral meeting on the sidelines of the NATO summit at the Grove hotel in Watford, northeast of London. (AFP/Murat Cetinmuhurda/Turkish Presidential Press Service/File Photo)

More telling still is the view which emerged from talks between Jake Sullivan, Biden’s national security adviser, and Bjoern Seibert, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s cabinet chief, who “agreed to work together on issues of mutual concern, including China and Turkey,” according to a White House statement.

Linking Turkey with China, the main US geopolitical adversary, is a blow to Erdogan’s hopes of a close relationship with the new Biden administration.

If the US chooses to get involved in the Greece-Turkey dispute, Athens rightly expects to reap the rewards. Yet it would be premature to assume the Biden administration will automatically apply pressure on Turkey.

Firstly, the exploratory talks are informal and require no mediation. Talking directly to one another, even if disagreements are substantial, is preferable to having external sponsors.

Secondly, Turkey is currently trying to recalibrate its relations with the West as well as countries closer to home, including the Gulf states and Israel. The US is likely to give Turkey the benefit of the doubt, at least in the initial stages of the new administration, and give it time to prove its willingness for constructive cooperation.

Thirdly, for all of Turkey’s recent acts of bravado, the country remains a potentially critical ally for the US in an intensely volatile region. Not only does Turkey possess NATO’s second largest army, it also has the strategic positioning to act as a brake on Russia’s ambitions in the Middle East, particularly in Syria.

By the time talks concluded on Jan 25, a few facts stood out.




Turkish President and leader of the Justice and Development (AK) Party Recep Tayyip Erdogan speaks during a parliamentary group meeting on January 27, 2021 at the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (GNAT) in Ankara. (AFP/File Photo)

Although the talks were intended to take place at a merely technical level, the Turkish delegation included Erdogan’s trusted advisor Ibrahim Kalin. The move was likely designed to underscore Turkey’s sincerity in bringing the talks to a successful conclusion, a message that its foreign minister communicated to EU officials the previous day.

Another interesting fact is that both sides followed standard practice by not revealing the content of their talks. This is largely a positive sign, since press leaks are usually aimed at shifting the blame onto the opposite side and undermining prospects for a positive result.

More encouraging still, Greece and Turkey have agreed to proceed with the next round of talks in March, this time in Athens.

Washington, just like Brussels, welcomed the talks and highlighted the importance of dialogue between the two sides. Confirming its attempt to adopt an equidistant approach, the US will continue to encourage both Athens and Ankara to resolve at least some of their disputes.

For Greece, these are limited and specific: the determination of the continental shelf in the Aegean Sea and the delimitation of the two countries’ respective Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ).

For Turkey, on the other hand, the list includes issues such as minority rights, the demilitarization of the Greek Dodecanese islands and the alignment of Greece’s sea borders on the Aegean (6 miles) with its airspace in the same region (10 miles).




Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis has reason to be optimistic about the US stance during the Biden administration. (AFP/File Photo)

What is certain, save for any big surprises, is the US (and the EU) will refrain from further sanctions on Turkey.

Pre-existing problems pertaining to the Aegean dispute and the Cyprus issue, the primary bone of contention for many decades, have recently been compounded by zero-sum games on hydrocarbon exploration in the eastern Mediterranean, as well as the migrant and refugee crisis, fueled further by the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The fact that other states with interests in the region, such as Cyprus, Israel, France, Italy, Libya and Egypt, are now part of the larger Eastern Mediterranean dispute raises the stakes and pushes Greece and Turkey to adopt maximalist positions.

For all of Washington’s desire to see normalization, it is highly unlikely that concrete progress will be made in the coming months.

------------------

Twitter: @dimitsar


Demand by UN for access to Iran’s uranium

Updated 24 June 2025
Follow

Demand by UN for access to Iran’s uranium

  • ‘We must ... go back to Iran’s nuclear sites and account for the stockpiles of uranium, including, most importantly, the 400 kg enriched to 60 percent,’ IAEA chief says

VIENNA: The UN nuclear watchdog on Monday demanded access to highly enriched uranium that Iran is thought to have moved before US attacks last weekend on its nuclear development sites.

“Iran, Israel and the Middle East need peace,” said Rafael Grossi, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency. “We must ... go back to Iran’s nuclear sites and account for the stockpiles of uranium, including, most importantly, the 400 kg enriched to 60 percent.”

US strikes on the underground Fordow nuclear site had probably caused “significant damage,” Grossi said, but it was impossible to assess without a visit.

Meanwhile Israel launched new strikes on Monday on the notorious Evin prison and Revolutionary Guard command centers in Tehran. Video footage showed rescue workers combing the flattened wreckage of a building at the prison, and carrying an injured man on a stretcher.

Israel said its strikes on Tehran were intended to hit the Iranian ruling apparatus broadly, and its ability to sustain power. Evin has long been Iran’s primary jail for political and security detainees. Several high-profile foreign prisoners are also held there.
 


Iraq removes, South Korea eases restrictions on import of Brazil chicken meat

Updated 24 June 2025
Follow

Iraq removes, South Korea eases restrictions on import of Brazil chicken meat

  • South Korea ow restricts only chicken meat from the region affected by the bird flu, the ministry said, without providing more details

SAO PAULO: Iraq removed a trade ban it had imposed on Brazilian chicken meat after a bird flu case on a commercial farm last month, while South Korea eased its restrictions, the Brazilian Agriculture Ministry said on Monday.
South Korea ow restricts only chicken meat from the region affected by the bird flu, the ministry said, without providing more details. Both Iraq and South Korea had imposed nationwide trade bans to Brazilian chicken meat.
Brazil hopes to reverse trade bans after declaring last week itself free of the bird flu virus in commercial flocks following a 28-day period without any new commercial farm outbreaks.

 


What the intensifying Israel-Iran conflict says about the future of diplomacy

Updated 23 June 2025
Follow

What the intensifying Israel-Iran conflict says about the future of diplomacy

  • Efforts in Geneva to restart diplomacy now hang in the balance, with Iran and the US hardening positions after recent strikes
  • Analysts warn that without regional diplomacy led by powers like Saudi Arabia, the Israel-Iran conflict risks spiralling into a wider war

LONON/DUBAI: The Iranian missile attack which was intercepted by Qatar on Monday night when it launched missiles against US troops stationed at Al-Udeid Air Base comes as a major setback for peace in the region.

As Iranian missiles lit up the sky over Doha in a retaliatory strike targeting the US military, a diplomatic solution to the Israel-Iran conflict, which has now drawn in the US, seemed further away than ever, with Tehran appearing to wash its hands of further nuclear talks.

Although no casualties were reported at Al-Udeid Air Base — the largest US base in the region — Iran’s counterattack is likely to invite additional American strikes and further regional escalation.

Saudi Arabia and the UAE have both condemned the attack on Qatari sovereignty. The Saudi foreign ministry lambasted Iran for its “unjustifiable” attack, offering to deploy “all its capabilities” to support Doha.

Since the Israeli-Iran conflict dramatically escalated over the weekend, the mixed global response to Israeli and US strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities is testing the limits of modern diplomacy and exposing deep divisions among major powers.

This handout satellite picture provided by Maxar Technologies and taken on June 22, 2025, shows damage after US strikes on the Isfahan nuclear enrichment facility in central Iran. (AFP)

What most seem to agree on is that while diplomacy is on the decline, it could have been the solution.

Experts say the fractured international reaction to the escalation reflects a shifting global order and the erosion of the post-Cold War consensus.

“There is no ‘global response’ to speak of at this moment,” Brian Katulis, senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, told Arab News. “This Israel-Iran war is taking place in a fractured geopolitical context.”

He argues that divisions among the US, China and Russia “make it next to impossible to marshal a collective diplomatic effort in the way that the world did in previous eras, like the immediate post-Cold War period of the 1990s.

“That’s why we will continue to see a lot of empty words disconnected from the actions that are actually reshaping the Middle East as we know it.”

On June 13, Israel launched airstrikes on Iranian military and nuclear sites including Natanz, Isfahan and Tehran, reportedly killing senior officials, nuclear scientists and civilians. In response, Iran launched “Operation True Promise III,” firing missiles and drones into Israel. Several struck Tel Aviv, Haifa and other cities, causing civilian casualties.

Despite initially assuring G7 allies that the US would stay out of the conflict, President Donald Trump reversed course on June 22, ordering B-2 bombers to strike Iran’s underground nuclear facilities with MOP “bunker-buster” bombs — weapons only the US possesses.

Although Trump declared that the strikes had “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear program, it remains unclear whether Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium was destroyed or relocated in time. If material and technical capacity remain, diplomacy may be the only path to prevent Iran from eventually building a nuclear weapon — a goal the regime could now prioritize more urgently.

Even with severe military losses and the effective loss of airspace control, Iran appears undeterred. Hostilities with Israel continue, and the possibility of Iranian retaliation against US targets is growing. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has indicated that the war will not end until Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is removed from power.

Israeli rescuers search through the rubble at the site of an overnight Iranian missile strike in Bat Yam on June 15, 2025. (AFP)

The US entry into the conflict has triggered a range of diplomatic responses — from enthusiastic support to fierce condemnation. Netanyahu praised Trump’s decision as a “courageous choice” that would “alter history.” Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, meanwhile, called it an “outrageous, grave and unprecedented violation” of international law, insisting Tehran reserves “all options” to defend its interests.

Iran’s ambassador to the UN demanded an emergency Security Council session and called the strikes “premeditated acts of aggression.”

Russia, a close ally of Iran, “strongly condemned” the US action. Its Foreign Ministry labeled the strikes a “gross violation of international law,” while Dmitry Medvedev, deputy head of Russia’s Security Council, dismissed their impact and provocatively suggested some states might now help Iran obtain nuclear weapons.

China echoed the condemnation. The Chinese Foreign Ministry said the strikes “seriously violate the purposes and principles of the UN Charter,” and warned of regional destabilization.

FASTFACTS

  • China and Russia have condemned US strikes on Iran while the UN and Europe have appealed for deescalation.
  • Analysts say without regional diplomacy led by powers like Saudi Arabia, the Israel-Iran conflict risks spiraling into wider war.

Chinese Ambassador to the UN Fu Cong called on Israel to halt hostilities immediately and backed a UN resolution demanding an unconditional ceasefire. Chinese analysts have also warned that the conflict threatens global trade routes such as the Strait of Hormuz.

Other voices have called for diplomacy. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned of a “hazardous escalation,” stressing that “military solutions are not viable” and urging a return to negotiations.

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer — positioning himself as a bridge between the US and Europe — highlighted the danger of the war spreading beyond the region. While stopping short of endorsing the US strikes, he reiterated that Iran must not develop nuclear weapons and called for negotiations to stabilize the region.

European powers had previously been pressing for a deal requiring Iran to halt uranium enrichment, curb its missile program and stop supporting proxy groups. But Iran has rejected a full halt, claiming its enrichment is for peaceful purposes.

With Western diplomacy faltering, regional actors are stepping in. Most Arab states — including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan and the Gulf states — have condemned Israel’s strikes on Iran and are working to deescalate tensions.

Still, these efforts have so far achieved little. Strikes continue, ceasefire mechanisms remain absent and attempts to coordinate sanctions or arms embargoes have stalled.

A narrow diplomatic window may remain. Recent Geneva meetings involving Iranian, US, and European officials showed conditional openness to talks. But the latest US strikes have likely hardened positions.

A plume of heavy smoke and fire rise over an oil refinery in southern Tehran, after it was hit in an overnight Israeli strike, on June 15, 2025. (AFP)

Analysts say the only viable path forward begins with renewed diplomacy, ideally starting with a ceasefire. Yet fundamental disagreements over Iran’s nuclear ambitions and widespread distrust leave a comprehensive solution elusive.

Some fear that Israel, emboldened by US support, may escalate its military campaign to seek regime change in Tehran — a move that would risk greater instability across the Middle East, as the world has seen in the recent attack over Qatar. 

Others argue that Iran’s military retaliation is a necessary step before negotiations can resume. However, nobody seems to safely conclude just how far this retaliation will go. 

Firas Maksad, managing director for the Middle East and North Africa at Eurasia Group, told CNN that without such a response, Iran would lack both international leverage and domestic legitimacy to reenter talks.

Still, he later added: “Diplomacy is dead for the foreseeable future.”

With Iran and Israel entrenched and global powers divided, prospects for a diplomatic breakthrough appear slim. Yet Katulis believes regional “swing states” — such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE — could help shift the dynamic.

“One of the biggest brakes on further escalation lies right in the heart of the Middle East itself,” he said. “The key ‘swing states’ like Saudi Arabia and the UAE could lead more regional collective efforts to avoid further escalation by working publicly and quietly with the main combatants to find pathways toward a diplomatic settlement.”

In geopolitical terms, these “swing states” balance relationships with Washington, Moscow and Beijing — and can influence outcomes through neutrality or engagement. Katulis believes Riyadh, in particular, could help change the calculus.

Right now, he said, Israel and Iran “have more incentives to engage in military action than they do to pursue diplomacy.” But “the key powers in the region like Saudi Arabia could do even more than they are already doing to change the calculus for Israel and Iran.”

Saudi Arabia has condemned Israel’s actions as violations of international law and warned that continued escalation threatens long-term regional stability. The Kingdom has urged the UN Security Council to take meaningful steps to prevent further deterioration and has refused to allow its airspace to be used in military operations — a clear signal of its neutrality and strategic caution.

Israeli first responders gather in front of a building destroyed by an Iranian strike in Tel Aviv on June 22, 2025. (AFP)

Looking ahead, the stakes remain dangerously high. Maksad has warned that unchecked escalation could have serious consequences.

“The last step in that escalatory ladder is to go after American bases, whether it is in the GCC, or perhaps even attempt to disrupt shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, where some 20 percent of global energy passes through,” he told CNN.

As the war drags on, the fragmented international response highlights the fragility of global diplomacy and the difficulty of conflict resolution in an increasingly multipolar world.

For Tehran, halting enrichment altogether would not only undermine decades of strategic investment but also damage regime legitimacy. As Maksad put it, Tehran’s “entire prestige rests on enrichment.”

Still, he sees a potential way forward: Focusing not on enrichment itself, but on preventing a weapon. “That,” he said, “opens up the possibility of a negotiated outcome.”

 


13-year-old Palestinian boy shot and killed by Israeli forces in West Bank

Updated 23 June 2025
Follow

13-year-old Palestinian boy shot and killed by Israeli forces in West Bank

  • Soldiers briefly detained Ammar Mutaz Hamayel after he was shot near the village of Kafr Malik, 17 km from Ramallah
  • He was handed over to Palestinian paramedics who took him to hospital, where he was pronounced dead

LONDON: A Palestinian teenager died after being shot by Israeli forces on Monday in the occupied West Bank.

Israeli forces briefly detained 13-year-old Ammar Mutaz Hamayel after he was shot near the village of Kafr Malik, before handing him over to a Palestinian ambulance crew, the Wafa news agency reported. The paramedics took him to the Palestine Medical Complex in Ramallah, where he was pronounced dead.

Kafr Malik, which has a population of about 2,500 Palestinians, is located 17 kilometers northeast of Ramallah and is surrounded by the Israeli settlement of Kokhav HaShahar.


Risk of genocide in Sudan ‘very high’: UN

Updated 23 June 2025
Follow

Risk of genocide in Sudan ‘very high’: UN

  • The fighting has killed tens of thousands and displaced 13 million, including 4 million who fled abroad, triggering what the UN has called the world’s worst humanitarian crisis

GENEVA: The risk of genocide in Sudan’s devastating civil war remains “very high,” amid ongoing ethnically motivated attacks by the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces, a top UN official warned Monday.

Since April 2023, Sudan has been torn apart by a power struggle between army chief Gen. Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan and RSF commander Gen. Mohammed Hamdan Dagalo.

The fighting has killed tens of thousands and displaced 13 million, including 4 million who fled abroad, triggering what the UN has called the world’s worst humanitarian crisis.

“Both parties have committed serious human rights violations,” said Virginia Gamba, a UN under-secretary-general  and acting special adviser to UN chief Antonio Guterres on the prevention of genocide.

“Of specific concern to my mandate is the continued and targeted attacks against certain ethnic groups, particularly in the Darfur and Kordofan regions,” she told the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.

She highlighted in particular that the RSF and allied armed militias “continue to conduct ethnically motivated attacks against the Zaghawa, Masalit and Fur groups.”

“The risk of genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity in Sudan remains very high,” Gamba warned.