Will the post-election era lead to rapprochement between Ankara and Athens?

Türkiye's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis met on the sidelines of NATO Summit in Vilnius, Lithuania, on Wednesday.

According to Türkiye’s communications directorate, the meeting took place in a good atmosphere with President Erdogan and Mitsotakis agreeing to continue dialogue that would benefit both countries in the positive climate formed in bilateral relations over recent months.

The two leaders emphasised that they look forward to more frequent contact at all levels, towards building a climate of trust and the conditions that will lead to the improvement of Türkiye – Greece relations.

A new chapter in bilateral relations

Türkiye and Greece share a history intertwined with territorial disputes, maritime disagreements, and divergent geopolitical interests. These issues have often strained relations between the two countries, resulting in periods of heightened tensions and occasional conflicts.

However, recent developments between two countries have opened up avenues for renewed dialogue and diplomatic initiatives.

With the election cycle now behind them, President Erdogan and Prime Minister Mitsotakis have expressed their desire to embark on a new chapter in their bilateral relations.

With a fresh popular mandate, the leaders of both nations are making bold moves, aiming to turn a new page, says political scientist and International Relations expert Theodoros Tsikas.

Tsikas tells TRT World that the Erdogan-Mitsotakis meeting on the sidelines of the NATO Summit in Vilnius, Lithuania, signifies a shared commitment to starting afresh.

The meeting, which was scheduled following President Erdogan's congratulatory message to Prime Minister Mitsotakis on his election victory, was a concise and private gathering. Joining the two leaders were their respective foreign ministers and trusted advisers.

Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan hold discussions with his Greek counterpart, Giorgos Gerapetritis, with the resumption of exploratory talks and potential implementation of confidence-building measures (CBMs) among the viable steps being considered.

In another notable development, Türkiye’s Defence Minister Yasar Guler and his Greek counterpart, Nikos Dendias, have agreed in a phone call on Wednesday to resume confidence-building meetings halted last year, the Turkish Defense Ministry has announced.

With the two nations thawing relations, the critical question lingers: can the two archrivals shun historic baggage and build a peaceful future?

A history of tensions

For years Türkiye and Greece have found themselves entangled in a persistent rivalry, their relationship marred by recurring disputes over matters of sovereignty and security.

One of the most significant events in their shared history is the Greco-Turkish War of 1919-1922, arising from the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. This brutal conflict resulted in a large-scale population exchange, with millions of people forcibly uprooted from their homes based on their ethnic and religious backgrounds. The wounds from this traumatic event still resonate within the collective memories of both societies.

The aftermath of World War II saw the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne in 1923, which aimed to establish peace and define the borders between Türkiye and Greece.

The demilitarised status of the Eastern Aegean Islands is a fundamental point of contention between Türkiye and Greece in the Aegean Sea. Beside Lausanne Treaty, several other international agreements like 1913 Treaty of London, and 1914 Decision of Six Powers, have explicitly demilitarised these islands, imposing legal obligations that Greece is bound to uphold.

However, despite numerous appeals from Türkiye, Greece has continuously violated the demilitarised status of the Eastern Aegean Islands, in clear contravention of its contractual obligations.

These illegal acts have been ongoing since the 1960s and have significantly intensified in recent years, becoming a crucial and unresolved dispute between the two countries.

It is worth noting that Türkiye’s persistent calls for Greece to respect the demilitarised status of these islands have been consistently disregarded, further exacerbating the tensions between the two nations.

The 1947 Treaty of Paris further attempted to address these issues, but disputes over the interpretation and implementation of these agreements have continued to strain relations.

The longstanding issue of the Island of Cyprus has added another layer to these tensions. The island has been a focal point of contention since it gained independence from British colonial rule in 1960.

Cyprus has been divided since 1974, when a Greek Cypriot coup was followed by violence against the island's Turks and Ankara's intervention as a guarantor power.

It saw an on-and-off peace process in the past, including the failed 2017 initiative in Switzerland under the auspices of guarantor countries Türkiye, Greece and the UK. However, they all failed despite Türkiye’s efforts to continue negotiations.

The unresolved Cyprus problem remains an obstacle to peaceful coexistence and has had a profound impact on the broader relationship between Türkiye and Greece.

Throughout the years, competing narratives have contributed to the perpetuation of animosity and mistrust between the two sides.

Current Challenges

The present-day challenges that Türkiye and Greece face are multifaceted and interconnected.

One of the primary areas of conflict revolves around territorial waters and maritime boundaries in the Aegean Sea and the Eastern Mediterranean.

Tensions between the two nations reached a new height as Türkiye lodged formal protests against both Greece and the United States in September, 2022.

In official demarches sent to the embassies in Ankara, Türkiye accused both countries of violating the region's "demilitarised" status.

While Greece acknowledges the presence of military infrastructure on the islands in question, it justifies its policy as a "right of self-defence". Türkiye maintains that the transportation of US armoured vehicles to the Eastern Aegean represents a clear violation of the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne and the 1947 Paris Peace Treaty, and poses a significant threat to Türkiye’s security.

These disagreements have often escalated, with incidents of airspace violations, military posturing, and near-miss encounters between naval vessels.

Zuhal Mert Uzuner, an associate professor at the department of political science and international relations at Marmara University, believes that exploratory talks might generate a limited solution, particularly regarding the delimitation of territorial seas for the Eastern Aegean islands.

The influence of external actors and geopolitical dynamics in the region have also complicated the bilateral dynamics between Türkiye and Greece, with various nations seeking to assert their interests and leverage the ongoing tensions for their own strategic objectives.

The potential evolution of relations between the two nations is significantly impacted by the United States' regional policies.

The current Greek government shares a strong bond with the United States, thus placing high importance on de-escalating tensions, promoting dialogue with Ankara, and utilising the NATO alliance for security reasons, says Uzuner to TRT World.

A positive momentum?

As both nations emerge from recent elections, a sense of optimism pervades the air. Experts emphasise the absence of tensions and a favourable climate preceding the elections.

The significance of these developments is further underscored by external factors, such as the ongoing crisis in Ukraine, which has prompted a concerted effort by Washington and European powers to unite against common threats.

Uzuner views this positive momentum as “an agreement on non-agreement” — an approach that seeks to manage conflicts by freezing contentious matters, rather than reaching comprehensive solutions.

As existing disagreements between two sides are multifaceted and complex in nature, Uzuner emphasises that it is “unrealistic to anticipate a swift resolution.

A potential crisis between Ankara and Athens would only weaken this collective endeavour, tells Dr. Meinardus to TRT World.

Uzuner views this positive momentum as “an agreement on non-agreement” — an approach that seeks to manage conflicts by freezing contentious matters.

At present, both sides perceive themselves as being more advantageous within the context of international developments.

For Türkiye, the tensions with Greece are not the primary focus, while Greece views itself as having established a secure and robust front within the European Union to counter any potential Turkish aggression, says Uzuner.

“For now, the expectation is the limitation of tension, particularly within the framework of NATO solidarity,” she adds.

According to Tsikas, de-escalation efforts had already begun prior to recent earthquakes, including diplomatic advisers from both sides, Ibrahim Kalin and Anna Maria Boura, meeting in Brussels. Greek aid to earthquake zones in Türkiye further added to the efforts of consolidation.

However, Tsikas underlines that while “normality in bilateral relations is extremely useful, it is not enough. As long as the problems remain open, they can become a source of tension again at some other time in the future”.

Ali Huseyinoglu, an associate Professor of International Relations and Vice Head of Balkan Research Institute at Trakya University, echoed similar views.

He underlines that the “possibility of both conflict and cooperation should not be overestimated, as they are both embedded in bilateral relations and can co-exist.”

In the context of the leaders coming together, he says a positive atmosphere is being observed.

But when it comes to the “nationally sensitive issues,” as referred to in Greek, such as the Cyprus situation, the Aegean disputes,minority issues, and the exploration of hydrocarbon resources in the Eastern Mediterranean, progress requires a preliminary dialogue within the respective communities, Huseyinoglu tells TRT World.

“Although bilateral relations show signs of improvement, especially in the realm of trade, achieving better relations in the future hinges on the ability of both leaders to persuade their nations and enact policy changes within relevant agencies,” he adds.

It is essential to recognise that this is not solely a matter for the leaders but also has national aspects to it.

In this respect, Huseyinoglu underlines that resolving the problem necessitates the development of mutual understanding through broader discussions involving the state and society, which will lay the groundwork for effective problem-solving.

Trust-Building and Promising Areas for Cooperation

In the quest for mutual understanding and trust, the East Mediterranean emerges as a potentially fruitful area of cooperation, suggests Uzuner.

By initiating discussions on common threats and interests, such as environmental issues or disaster management, both nations can work towards decreasing the prevailing blocking perspective and overcoming hurdles stemming from regional initiatives like the East Med Gas Forum, Uzuner further adds.

Huseyinoglu further underscores the fluidity observed in bilateral relations, where the motivations of each country toward the other can undergo changes and evolve over time.

While conflicts and disputes are not uncommon, Huseyinoglu emphasises that cooperation in various fields like trade, tourism, and cultural exchange can also emerge.

“The reality of such relationships is multifaceted and nuanced, defying rigid categorizations and residing within the complexities of shades of grey,” Huseyinoglu adds.