Minister of Foreign Affairs Nikos Dendias’ interview with “IN.GR” and journalist A. Fotaki – highlights (05.05.2023)

JOURNALIST: Minister, are we going to war with Türkiye or not?
N. DENDIAS: Of course not. First and foremost, I believe that a specific climate has been created that, regardless of the circumstances, does not allow our neighboring country to take any imprudent steps.
But above all, the situation on the ground following the devastating earthquake in Türkiye is different. I cannot say though what this will lead to after the elections.
JOURNALIST: Following a “honeymoon” period in the beginning, we have seen Türkiye voicing its firm positions again. We don’t have threats, or provocations on the ground, as you mentioned, but Athens is also taking some distance, even as it emphasizes the importance of maintaining a good climate and engaging in dialogue. What impact can these elections have?
N. DENDIAS: First of all, we have not distanced ourselves from our firm positions as well. I have repeated them a million times. And to be clear, no one is naive to simply believe that the fixed positions of one country or another would change merely because the earthquakes occurred and a certain stance was taken as a humanitarian duty. Greece did not seek and does not seek a quid pro quo for its stance anyway.
Aside from that, the aim is to maintain a positive climate before and after the elections so that the two newly elected governments that will hopefully have political capital will try to resolve our sole dispute. We will see.
JOURNALIST: For Greece, our sole dispute concerns the continental shelf and Exclusive Economic Zone, doesn’t it?
N. DENDIAS: Yes, that’s right.
JOURNALIST: The territorial waters are 12 miles in extent. Is that a panacea or could we accept different positions?
N. DENDIAS: The 12 miles is something that concerns Greece. Just like the respective 12 miles is something that concerns Türkiye. Our country’s territorial waters are a sovereign right of ours.
Consequently, our country has the rights granted to it by UNCLOS. That’s it. It’s not something you could negotiate with Türkiye or any other country. And when we discussed it with Italy, there was no negotiation. And when we discussed it with Albania, there was no negotiation. And when we discussed this issue with Egypt, there was no negotiation. As is explicitly stated in UNCLOS “every country has the right to extend its territorial sea up to 12 miles”. Greece has this right. Obviously, Türkiye has it as well.
JOURNALIST: Could we accept a narrower range of our territorial waters in some areas in order to reach an agreement?
N. DENDIAS: No. Because the way you put it turns the issue of territorial waters into a negotiable issue. What Greece does with its territorial waters is its own inalienable right.
JOURNALIST: Is it finally the time to move on from exploratory contacts and engage in talks with Türkiye?
N. DENDIAS: Let me tell you, the exploratory contacts began after Helsinki, with the expectation that in 2004 we would be able to refer all our differences to The Hague ICJ in view of Türkiye’s European perspective as well. The exploratory talks were actually an attempt to address the technical issues and offer a proposal so that negotiations at political level could commence at that time.
The year 2004 then passed. Nothing was referred to The Hague. The exploratory talks continued. We have concluded 63 rounds. And I’m saying just one thing. We should not expect a different outcome if we follow exactly the same formula in the 64th, 65th, 66th, and so on rounds.
So, I’ve got some ideas for how to breathe new life into this; a fresh perspective, so that we can see whether we can find a solution to our dispute.
JOURNALIST: Since you mentioned 2004, at that time the two sides had come close, but neither government, either the one that left or the one that followed, signed any special agreement or went to The Hague. Furthermore, we have the precedent of the “Prespa Agreement”, when there was a lot of talk about “traitors” and so on. Do you believe you would sign a compromise agreement on terms that would be fair to Greece? And how much do you believe Türkiye is willing to do so in the current geopolitical environment?
N. DENDIAS: These are two completely separate questions and you’re adding a parameter that you will allow me to refute. The “Prespa” issue has nothing to do, neither as a mindset, as a perception nor as a negotiation, with the issues concerning the resolution of the dispute between Greece and Türkiye. Or to put it more simply, we cannot confuse a lake with the sea.

I have signed a great number of agreements, whether they are defense agreements or agreements on Exclusive Economic Zones with Italy, and Egypt.
Apparently, there’s no signature in principle, but I have agreed with Edi Rama on a framework with Albania.
So, let me assure you, I wouldn’t hesitate in the least to sign anything that would resolve the Greek-Turkish dispute. With one exception, however: that this would serve the national interest and be consistent with the long-standing Greek position and attitude, to which I believe the entire political system has subscribed.
Besides, this is evident from what has been done so far. The agreements that have been signed have enjoyed the support or – shall I say – the tolerance, sometimes, in some other respects, of almost the entire political system of the country as well as the overwhelming majority of Greek society.
We are not doomed, Ms. Fotaki, to always be in a relationship of rivalry with Türkiye; nothing necessitates that. We can find a solution. But we can do so on the basis of International Law, on the basis of the International Law of the Sea, not on an exogenous framework of principles and values that no one accepts except the side proposing it.
JOURNALIST: Does the calm in Greek-Turkish waters has caused turbulence in Greek-Cypriot relations?
N. DENDIAS: Of course not; quite the opposite. A good climate between Greece and Türkiye is one that facilitates the resolution of a difficult issue, the Cyprus issue.
The solution of a bizonal bicommunal federation is not an easy solution. And from what I know, because I was not there, there was a significant convergence in Crans-Montana. Unfortunately, it was not confirmed in Geneva, during the only negotiation on the Cyprus issue I attended.
However, I believe that a positive climate between Greece and Türkiye directly facilitates the resolution of the Cyprus problem.
JOURNALIST: Was there any dissatisfaction voiced by Nicosia regarding the IMO?  
N. DENDIAS: But how could there be dissatisfaction since we had discussed it previously?  I had informed my friend, the current President Nikos Christodoulides, many, many days before we reached an agreement with Türkiye and it was announced.
JOURNALIST: As regards the Balkans, Greece appears to be playing a leading role. Recently, there was an issue related to “Kosovo” in the context of the membership application to the Council of Europe. Do you believe we should have taken a different stance?
N. DENDIAS: Certainly not.
The stance of abstention was a constructive stance, as it aids Belgrade, serves the long-standing Greek-Serbian relations, and helps Pristina as well, in the sense that it demonstrates that if it helps, in turn, in the negotiations with Belgrade, there is a window of opportunity for integration in the European and international affairs.
Before you ask me why bitterness was expressed, -rather sotto voce, I must say, by a part of the Serbian political system-, I think that was to be expected. These things are happening, and if you like they are also being used as leverage; we are aware of these things.
JOURNALIST: You have stated repeatedly that the Kosovo issue cannot be compared with the Cyprus issue. Could Cyprus change its stance?
N. DENDIAS: Cyprus, as an independent state, will determine its own actions. I say what the International Court of Justice says, verbatim, that the issue of recognition of Kosovo has nothing to do with the issue of the pseudo-state.
This is the internationally, legally established position; it is not a personal view that can be refuted by another argument.
JOURNALIST: US diplomats believe that the solution to the Macedonian issue, that is the Prespa Agreement was the one that effectively unlocked Greece’s leading role in the Balkans. Do you believe that the government should have resolved the pending issues, and passed the memoranda?
N. DENDIAS: Every government constantly evaluates the national interest and the negotiating cards it holds.
Therefore, I believe that the Greek government, the new Greek government that will emerge after the elections, which I hope and I am confident will be us, will look at the issue and determine what is in Greece’s best interest.
JOURNALIST: So, you cannot be committed that the day after the elections, we will have…
N. DENDIAS: Look, even if I were to make a commitment, it would not matter, because if one is to be made, it should come from the leader of the party to win the elections and the current and next Prime Minister. I am a Minister; I’m not the Prime Minister.
JOURNALIST: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine created a kind of momentum that appears to have strengthened Greece’s role as well. Do you believe Greece has claimed and received what it was entitled to from the mutual defense cooperation agreement with the United States? Of course, on the basis of what it offered in return.
N. DENDIAS: I’ll tell you. I don’t view it as a game of give and take; I see it as securing a role of a reliable, serious, values- and principles-driven ally – and I believe that Greece has secured that and has demonstrated that on several occasions.
I believe that the entire political system in the United States -and beyond, but since you’re asking about the United States- sees Greece as a serious, stable, and reliable ally in the Balkans and in the Eastern Mediterranean.
And I think that’s a major achievement as well as a clear response to another approach that says you should never be assumed as a certainty, but rather should always leave others in doubt about your choices.
The latter, in my humble opinion, is not a choice that serves the national interest; it is a policy that Türkiye is pursuing and it is precisely because Türkiye is pursuing it that Greece’s geopolitical value is increasing. It is precisely because of the stability of its position that Greece enjoys this increased geopolitical value.
Allow me to say one more thing. Greece is not supporting Ukraine; rather it is supporting a principled position. What’s this? The independence and territorial integrity of all states, in accordance with the United Nations Charter.
If Greece subscribed to the opposite principle, that a large country with its military power can change not only its own borders but also those of a neighboring, smaller country, despite the Treaties, tell me then what analogy would this Greek position serve? Ultimately, what narrative would it serve in our region, the Greek one or another?
JOURNALIST: So, do you believe that in the coming days, even if there’s a change of leadership in Türkiye, Greece will maintain its role and worth among its allies?
N. DENDIAS: That’s of course up to the next Greek government.
JOURNALIST: What if Türkiye elected a highly pro-Western government?
N. DENDIAS: Nothing would change.
JOURNALIST: Do you believe that a Kılıçdaroğlu government, let’s say, could suddenly change course on foreign policy issues, not only as regards Greece but also with regard to Russia and in general?
N. DENDIAS: But, Türkiye’s relationship with Greece and its relationship with NATO and its policy in the Eastern Mediterranean is […].
Without naming who will be the head of the next Turkish government -either it’s President Erdogan, someone else, or the leader of the Republican Party-, I would hope that Türkiye will have a policy shift and get a clear pro-European, pro-Western trajectory. Because that would obviously bring it closer to Greece.
What do we wish for? We wish for a stable, prosperous, democratic, pro-Western Türkiye. That’s what we hope for and what we desire. We do not want Türkiye to become a radical Islamic country on the Aegean coast. That, if you like, might be a geopolitical nightmare for Greece.
But all this is up to the Turkish leadership, Turkish society, and the Turkish people. Greece is obliged to have relations with any Turkish government.
JOURNALIST: So, is the expansion of the US footprint in Greece, I mean in terms of the bases, the facilitations as they’re called in the MDCA that has been signed, …
N. DENDIAS: I often refer to them as understandings…
JOURNALIST: Understandings… aren’t they also a deterrent in Greece’s hands?
N. DENDIAS: I’d say it’s more complex than that since that sounds anti-Turkish.
I believe that the United States as a superpower, the strongest military power on the planet, and a country that has a very important role within NATO, is interested in stability and security in the Eastern Mediterranean and promotes good relations among its allies.
In this sense, the presence of the United States in our region should be welcome. And it’s a presence that adds to, rather than detracts from Greece and Greek citizens’ sense of security.
JOURNALIST: It was Syriza that started negotiating the new areas to be included in the MDCA and it was Syriza that denounced it when you signed it.
N. DENDIAS: You know, I’m not going to undo the wonderful, in my view, achievement that we’re leaving behind which is also an indicator of a successful foreign policy.
What’s that? To have achieved a mutual understanding, if not an agreement, on the basic lines of foreign policy.
So, a couple of weeks before I leave the ministry, I’m not going to change policy and engage in a logic of complaints.
What, on the other hand, do I wish for Syriza, for its future, regardless of where Greek society places it in the upcoming elections?
To keep moving forward on the basis of stable parameters that serve our national interest, and they are clear. And the relations with the United States are one such parameter.
What we have achieved is tremendous. That is a significant improvement in the relations between the United States and Greece. I do not think it is worthwhile for any future government of the Hellenic Republic, regardless of party affiliation, to jeopardize this.
JOURNALIST: Because what you say about political culture on national issues is really very important, is this a message to all parties for the day after the elections, regardless of whether they are in the government or the opposition?  And I include New Democracy in that.
N. DENDIAS: Thar goes without saying. I believe that New Democracy has given some examples during its tenure.        
I wouldn’t call it a message, Ms. Fotaki, I would call it something much more serious. I would call it a condition essential to our national survival.  We Greeks are too few in number and we have too many problems. Our region generates problems and crises; therefore, we cannot afford to quarrel with one another.
And we have to be extremely cautious because discord among us is a distinct element of our  DNA. If you like, it demonstrates our continuity from 1000 years before Christ to the present day.
This must be avoided. Every time it has occurred it has resulted in national crises and national tragedies.
[…]
JOURNALIST: Thank you very much, Mr. Dendias.
N. DENDIAS: Likewise. All the best.