JOURNALIST: Did the public clash with Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu reflect the content of your one-on-one talks?
N. DENDIAS: The Turkish Minister of Foreign Affairs, my friend Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu, and I did in fact disagree, in spite of the very good climate created in my talks with him. Each side expressed its positions, both during the talks and publicly. In this context, I set out Greece’s firm positions, which are well known in any case. It was obvious that there was lack of agreement on a number of issues. However, I want to underscore that the purpose of my visit to Ankara – the first visit by a Minister of Foreign Affairs since 2015 – was to discuss the prospects for a positive agenda with Turkey so that, in an initial stage, there could be a climate of de-escalation, not agreement. We hope that this approach will gradually bring a significant improvement in bilateral relations. In the interests of our two neighbouring countries. And of both peoples, who, after all, are linked by many things.
The firm goal of the Mitsotakis government is to improve both Greek-Turkish bilateral relations and EU-Turkey relations. Therefore, we submitted specific proposals in a number of important sectors. These include economy, trade, transport, electricity – in the context of cooperation with Bulgaria, as well – telecommunications, and so on. At the same time, we proposed meetings of the relevant working groups, some of which have not met for years now. And I would like to emphasise that this initiative met with an immediate positive response from Turkey, which also submitted its proposals, creating a clear framework within which we can talk constructively.
And allow me to reiterate that the climate in the meeting with Turkish President Erdoğan was positive. I also want to note the symbolic importance we attach to the fact that the Turkish President agreed to receive the Greek Minister of Foreign Affairs. As was to be expected, we reiterated our commitment to International Law and European values. In this spirit, in spite of the public coverage of the meeting, I would like to believe that, as I said, this meeting can serve as the first act in a gradual improvement of relations with Turkey. This will not be easy. We have to work together to achieve this goal. And we cannot take issues on which we have different views and approaches and sweep them under the carpet. We have to make the necessary effort. For this reason, our meetings will continue on the political level. I invited my Turkish counterpart, my friend Mevlüt, to visit Athens on a date to be decided upon jointly. And this meeting can contribute towards the preparation of a meeting between Prime Minister Mitsotakis and the Turkish President, Mr. Erdoğan.
JOURNALIST: Can an agreement on the Aegean and the Eastern Mediterranean be reached in this climate? Especially when Turkey is publicly raising Greece’s red lines as subjects for debate? Do you see the Turkish side toughening its line?
N. DENDIAS: I do not see a toughening of Turkey’s position on issues that concern the Aegean and the Eastern Mediterranean. But I do see a firming of positions that diverge from international legality, which makes the prospect of resolving these issues more difficult, but not impossible. If we adopt common rules – in other words, if Turkey accepts UNCLOS – a solution might be attainable. Moreover, Greece has already proceeded to the delimitation of the exclusive economic zone with both Italy and Egypt. And we have agreed with Albania to refer the matter to the International Court in The Hague.
The problem we have faced so far with Turkey is that there is no common denominator in terms of the framework for resolving our dispute. In other words, while Greece has underscored that the issue must be dealt with based on international rules – in this case, the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, which has been accepted by the vast majority of the UN member states – Turkey does not accept this framework and puts forward positions that are groundless and outside the framework of international legality.
I stressed the difference in our approaches during my meetings in Turkey. And we agreed to disagree. First of all, in a friendly climate before the press conference. I hope, however, that Turkey will change its stance and fall into line with the other countries of the world.
I would like to note that countries like the U.S., despite not having ratified UNCLOS, consider UNCLOS a fundamental rule regarding issues of the Law of the Sea, as was stressed at the recent summit meeting between the U.S., India, Japan and Australia.
JOURNALIST: Is the Eastern Mediterranean part of a possible negotiation with Turkey? Is it being discussed in the exploratory talks? With regard to Libya, what is the best-case scenario? Inactivation of the Turkey-Libya memorandum?
N. DENDIAS: Regarding the first part of your question, allow me to be very brief. Our position is that we must delimit the exclusive economic zone and, by extension, the continental shelf with Turkey in the Aegean and in the Eastern Mediterranean, always in accordance with International Law. This is the only matter we are discussing in the exploratory talks. And we look forward to the 63rd meeting, which will take place in Turkey.
Regarding the Turkey-Libya ‘memorandum’, in my meetings with Libyan officials last week and in Ankara, I stressed the clear positions adopted by the European Union in December 2019. I want to stress: this position is not just Greek; it is the agreed position supported by all of the 27 EU member states. The ‘memorandum’ is null and void and cannot produce any legal effect.
During my recent meeting with the speaker of the Libyan House of Representatives, Mr. Saleh, beyond the very positive things he said about Greece, he said in no uncertain terms that the ‘memorandum’ in question will not be ratified by the Libyan House of Representatives. And he also referred to the recent ruling of the Libyan court in this direction. A ruling based on an application submitted by the Libyan House of Representatives.
JOURNALIST: In the ongoing talks on renewal of the Mutual Defense Cooperation Agreement (MDCA), is Greece requesting guarantees that include assistance in the form of money or access to U.S. arms surpluses? Are we talking about bases or relocation of forces in sensitive regions?
N. DENDIAS: The negotiations on the renewal of the Mutual Defense Cooperation Agreement between Greece and the U.S. are a process in which the Ministry of National Defence also has a decisive role. In this context, you will allow me not to go into detail about the negotiations, which are ongoing.
But I would like to underscore the importance we attach to the completion of these negotiations at the soonest possible time – ideally, by the end of the summer. If epidemiological conditions allow, the signing of the new agreement could be combined with a visit of my American counterpart, Mr Blinken, to Athens. We have already discussed this issue over the phone, as well as during the meeting we had on the sidelines of the NATO ministerial a few weeks ago.
I also want to stress that, beyond the technical details of the renewal of this agreement, its importance lies in the strategic role the U.S. now attributes to our country. And this is much more important than the various issues contained in the renewed agreement.
Of course, as we have stressed to the American side, the renewed agreement should also reflect the very close relationship that has been developed between the two countries, starting during the time of the previous U.S. administration. The manner in which this relationship is set out remains to be determined.
And I would like to conclude on this issue by underscoring that channels of direct communication have already been developed between the two countries, starting with that between U.S. President Biden and Prime Minister Mitsotakis. In this context, the agreement should be seen as another of the links between the two countries in many sectors.
