Το ημερολόγιο έδειχνε Πέντε του Δεκέμβρη, το έτος 2024, εσπερινός του Αγίου Νικολάου στον ομώνυμο ναό στον Λυκαβηττό. Πώς περνά ο καιρός, πάει ένας ολόκληρος χρόνος … Συνάμα με τες ευχές μου για την ονομαστική του εορτή ενεχειρώ  στο Νίκο της διαρκούσης Προεδρίας ένα προσωπικό εμπιστευτικό υπόμνημα. Περί εξωτερικής πολιτικής. Αναφέρομαι σε ανέξοδους τρόπους ενίσχυσης του διεθνούς κύρους της κολοβής μας δημοκρατίας κτίζοντας σε διεθνείς πρωτοβουλίες της ανένταχτης – κομματικώς ομιλούντες – ταπεινότητας μου. Ένα κράτος κολοβό, όχι μόνο λόγω Τουρκικής κατοχής στον βορρά και Βρετανικής επικυριαρχίας στο νότο αλλά επιπροσθέτως από την αβελτηρία των ταγών αυτής. Ο Νίκος μού χαμογελά και ευχαριστεί.

Μια κουτσουλιά τόπος είμαστε. Πέντε μέρες αργότερα τον συναντώ εκ νέου στην διχοτομημένη πρωτεύουσα. Εκδήλωση διεθνούς κοινωνικού χαρακτήρα. Έχοντας γνώση της προτίμησης του στην αμεσότητα του ενικού και της πολύχρονης μας, αν και άκαρπης γνωριμίας – σίγουρα όχι λόγω δικής μου υπαιτιότητάς – χαιρετώ, ερωτώντας τον: «Νίκο τι θα πράξεις; Τα όσα σού προτείνω είναι προς δικό σου συμφέρον και του διεθνούς μας κύρους πάνω από όλα». Με ύφος απόλυτης σιγουριάς και εμπιστοσύνης μού απαντά κοφτά:

«Είπα του Κόμπου να σε δει…»

Επιτρέψτε μου να συνεχίσω την αφήγηση σε ύφος λαϊκό, κατ’ εικόνα και ομοίωση του Προεδρικού ύφους. Ο Κόμπος με … γκαστρώνει για ένα … εννιάμηνο. Η κύηση οδηγεί τελικά την συνάντηση μας στις 19 του Αυγούστου στο Υπουργείο. Παρατώ την επιστημοσύνη και την συγγραφή στη Βρετανική Βιβλιοθήκη (Λονδίνο, εννοείται) για χάρη της. Καταφθάνω στον ατημέλητο κήπο του κτιρίου του Υπουργείου. Ανεβαίνω με βάση το πρωτόκολλο στο γραφείο Υπουργού με συνοδεία νεαρού διπλωμάτη.

Το αποτέλεσμα της πολυπόθητης συνάντησης; Σκέτο … ανεμογκάστρι!

Πέραν της γλαφυρότητας και της χαριτολογημένης αφήγησης, η ουσία είναι πραγματικά δύσπεπτη. Ο Κόμπος φτάνει στο χτένι. Δεν θα ήταν δυνατό να κρατώ μέσα μου αυτόν τον Κόμπο … για χρόνια. Για να έχω ήσυχη την συνείδηση μου απέναντι στους ενενηντάχρονους γονείς, που με ανάθρεψαν με ιδανικά και αξίες, με σεβασμό στην πολυετή πορεία μου στα διεθνή ιδρύματα, κρίνω ότι οφείλω να εκθέσω σοβαρότατα ατοπήματα στην άσκηση εξωτερικής πολιτικής. Εξηγούμαι:

Βιέννη, Δεκέμβρης 2024. Οργανισμός για την Ασφάλεια και Συνεργασία στην Ευρώπη – ΟΑΣΕ.  Σύνοδος ΥΠΕΞ των συμμετεχόντων κρατών. Θέμα: Εκλογή νέου Γενικού Γραμματέα του Οργανισμού. Βαρύτατη η ευθύνη του Κωνσταντίνου Κόμπου: συναίνεσε αμαχητί στην εκλογή του Τούρκου βετεράνου διπλωμάτη Σινιρλίογλου στην κορυφή της ηγετικής πυραμίδας του μοναδικού πολυμερούς Ευρασιατικού Οργανισμού Ασφάλειας. Είναι η πρώτη φορά που εκλέγεται Τούρκος στην ηγεσία ΟΑΣΕ για τριετή θητεία. Με την σύμφωνο γνώμη του Κόμπου. Ο καθένας μπορεί να ανατρέξει στο διαδίκτυο και να μάθει ποιος είναι ο Feridun Sinirlioglu …

Χωρίς κανένα απολύτως αντάλλαγμα! Εκλογή του Τούρκου Εν Λευκώ!

Σε μια απέλπιδα προσπάθεια μου να λύσω τον επί χρόνια Άλυτο … Κόμπο υπέδειξα ότι είμαι εγκεκριμένος διαμεσολαβητής ΟΑΣΕ εδώ και μια δεκαετία, αποφοιτήσας της Διπλωματικής του Ακαδημίας προ εικοσαετίας (2003). Μολαταύτα ουδέποτε κλήθηκα σε αποστολή του Οργανισμού. Το γεγονός αυτό και μόνο οφείλεται στην ανεπάρκεια και αναποτελεσματικότητα του Υπουργείου των Εξω … φρενικών. Πού είναι το Γραφείο Προώθησης των Κυπρίων Ειδημόνων για Πρόσληψη στους Διεθνείς Οργανισμούς; Άλυτος Κόμπος! Πόσο μακριά θα φτάσεις με τους έξι άξονες της εξωτερικής πολιτικής; Και δεκάξι να ΄χεις αν δεν έχεις τους ανθρώπους σου στους διεθνείς οργανισμούς, πως θα ασκήσεις επιρροή; Εκατό τριάντα δύο εκατομμύρια ευρώ σού εγκρίνει η Βουλή για το Υπουργείο ετησίως, δεν μπορείς να διαθέσεις δύο, να παλέψεις τον διορισμό Κυπρίων προσοντούχων;

Αλλά είπαμε, χρόνια τώρα, συσκέψεις και συναντήσεις και ανεμογκάστρι! Υπέβαλα στο νεαρότερο Κωνσταντίνο Κόμπο ότι όφειλε στα πλαίσια της υπηρεσίας του προς αυτό το ημι-κατεχόμενο από την Τουρκία κράτος, να εξαργυρώσει τουλάχιστον την συναίνεση του στην εκλογή Σινιρλίογλου, με απτό αντάλλαγμα: την τοποθέτηση μου σε σημαίνουσα – τη βάσει προσόντων και αποφοίτησης της Διπλωματικής Ακαδημίας Βιέννης – θέση στη Γραμματεία ΟΑΣΕ, σφήνα στον Τούρκο διπλωμάτη. Εφόσον η συναίνεση του ήτο μονόδρομος, όπως διατεινόταν. Αυτό επέβαλλε η εξυπηρέτηση των Κυπριακών συμφερόντων. Αντ’ αυτού επέλεξε το μηδενικό για την Κύπρο αποτέλεσμα αφού η Άγκυρα μπλόκαρε την υποψηφιότητα του για την προεδρία του 2026 … Εύγε Άλυτε Κόμπε!

Είκοσι δύο χρόνια στην  αίθουσα αναμονής για μια θέση στον ΟΑΣΕ, κτίζω διεθνείς διασυνδέσεις για την Κύπρο μας  με έξοδα από την τσέπη μου. Σε διηπειρωτικές διαδρομές που με βρίσκουν από το Τόκιο μέχρι το Μπουένος Άιρες. Σε πέραν των εξήντα χωρών …

Ουδέν έπραξεν ο Κόμπος! Θέτοντας το σε πρώην υπουργό, μού  υπέδειξε με νόημα: Ουδείς πράττει ουδέν!

The 2025 EU Non-Proliferation & Disarmament Conference was organised by the Istituto Affari Internazionali (IAI) of Rome. Remarkably, this year, the IAI celebrates its 60^th anniversary of existence. The Istituto Affari Internazionali (IAI), an important think tank in Italy focused on international affairs, receives funding primarily from the Italian government through various budgetary allocations. As of 2025, its annual funding from the Italian state is approximately €4.2 million.

In sharp contrast, the International Security Forum Cyprus has, in the seventeen years of its operation, received zero funding from the Cypriot government. Nevertheless, ISF raises the security and foreign policy-oriented research flag of the Republic of Cyprus where there is no presence otherwise.

The Brussels EU Disarmament Conference is the annual flagship event that brings together experts from governments, international organizations and research institutions worldwide to discuss all aspects of the EU’s non-proliferation and disarmament agenda. Invariably, this agenda, includes arms control, chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, space security and emerging technologies. Over two days, participants engaged in open and substantive discussions aimed at advancing global non-proliferation and disarmament objectives. The Conference also seeks to support the implementation of the EU Strategic Compass. It formulates policy recommendations to strengthen the EU’s role in these fields.

European and American museums are confronted by requests of the return of artifacts bought or seized by colonial powers: Greece Presses for the Return of the Parthenon Marbles to where they belong: Athens Acropolis.

Researchers still looking for the Amber Room, Tsarist treasure allegedly stolen by the Nazi occupation forces and presumably destroyed or still hidden somewhere in Germany.

In 2008 a scandal hit the world of archaeology in Spain as it was reported that supposedly ancient artifacts were faked. In time the scandal became connected to the attempts to strengthen a real or imaginary Basque nationalist past. This episode in Spanish archaeology history is a modern example of how archaeology has played a role in shaping modern national identities and the creation of national myths.[1] In the Spanish case, Basque nationalism rooted in a very ancient language was one of the sources of conflict in 20th century Spain. It contributed to fueling the Spanish civil war in the 1930s and terrorism in Spain after the transition from Franco’s dictatorship to a modern democracy. Only in 2017 ETA (Euskadi Ta Askatasuna – Basque Country and Freedom)[2] finally stopped fighting the Spanish state. Paradoxically, the end of this violent Basque separatism was followed in Spain by a Catalan separatism and the attempt of some Catalan parties to declare independence by arguing for a separate identity that set apart the Catalonian region linguistically and culturally from mainstream Spanish history.

The archaeological background to modern nationalism and conflicts is not new. In fact, in the earlier part of the 19^th century the Greeks, with great European support and sympathy, fought against the Ottoman Empire for a political and cultural independence that was stimulated by a connection to Classical Greece and of course the Byzantine Empire. By 1870, the German archeologist Heinrich Schliemann had begun discovering Homer’s Troy. His findings and the discovery of artifacts connected to ancient Greece stimulated enthusiastic interest in the near-Eastern archaeological and historical heritage.[3][4] Streams of archaeological discoveries reshaped a new Hellenic identity that shaped Greek politics and the conflicts with the Ottoman Empire, conflicts that saw the catastrophic Greek-Turkish war of 1922 and decades later the conflict in Cyprus between the Greek majority and the Turkish minority.

In Cyprus, the destruction of Greek archaeological sites was one of the subjects of the Greek-Cypriot political stance against the occupation of northern Cyprus by thousands of Turkish soldiers following the 1974 invasion of the island, when Turkey claimed it was protecting the rights of the Turkish-speaking minority.[5] The invasion followed years of conflict in Cyprus, ruled for decades by the British from 1878 until 1960[6]. The ethnic conflict was resolved through a compromise where the Greek-Cypriot desire to be reunited with Greece was set aside by giving independence to the island along with a constitutional compromise between the two ethno-linguistic groups.

Modern archaeology and the new scientific disciplines associated with it have now come to create greater knowledge and insight into the past of many regions across the globe.  They have also fueled value systems and political ideologies that have now come to spread increasingly across regions and nations, serving to bolster the perennial search for power and meaning in an international system tied by new economic realities and social mobility that challenges older historical and religious traditions. Some intellectuals and critics have used the encounter of the West with the non-traditional world, especially Islamic in the Middle East, as an example of cultural colonialism above and beyond political and economic imperialism. A classic case of the debate on the subject was the systematic work of Edward Said who wrote extensively criticizing western scholarship as being unable to truly understand the East – especially the Middle East – in his work Orientalism. His approach was very influential in the academic world, and continues being so, though his understanding of the Western-European insights into the Middle East especially are methodologically unsound and ideologically biased.[7]

Thus, archaeology comes to have even greater relevance in the reformulation of many aspects of international relations and ideological and civilizational clashes.  It then becomes even more incumbent on academics at large, especially historians, archaeologists, and ethno-linguists to dispel whenever possible the constant mythologizing and distortion of historical and archaeological scholarship.[8] The Americas were not exempt from these trends.

Across the Atlantic the mystification of new archaeological and linguistic discoveries became a systematic component of local nationalism, particularly when studying pre-Columbian civilizations in Central and South American states and Native American tribes in the United States and Canada. In Mexico, the Aztec heritage boosted Indianismo, which came to be one of the pillars of the new regime in Mexico after the epic of revolution that shaped a new Mexico after 1912.  From the 1920s onwards, the official historiography of Mexico emphasized Aztec civilization which had been systematically studied since the 19^th century by Western archaeologists and denounced the Spanish conquest as an assault on some past noble human experiment.  The reformulation of a new Mexican identity saw even a revival of attempts to remove the bones of Hernán Cortés, the Spanish conquistador who had been entombed in Mexico City. By 2020, the Mexican government, run by a progressive leftist president was seeking official apologies from Spain for the Spanish Conquest of the Aztec Empire, and for the violence involved in the establishment of Spanish cultural hegemony in Mexico.[9]

The reinterpretation of the past by now had come to see in both North and South America the denunciation of Columbus and the arrival of the Europeans. In some respects, it was a reassertion of the Rousseauian paradigm of the Noble Savage being overwhelmed by civilization. In fact, the reaffirmation of aboriginal rights in North, South, and Central America from the Arctic Circle to Patagonia, in claims to land and resources came to be often articulated through archaeological discoveries and the assertion of the parity of native languages with Spanish as in Peru, Bolivia, Mexico, or Guatemala.

Even in Europe, the creation of a pan-European identity seemed to have enhanced the reaffirmation of ethno-linguistic ideologies rooted in mythical pasts given some superficial credibility by archaeology and linguistics. Examples range from the Dardanian movement in the Balkans following the independence of Kosovo as Albanians and Kosovars reiterated their European roots by linking to classical Greek history and mythology, including the destruction of Serbian Orthodox religious sites to the revival of Celtic religions and outright paganism professing a return to animism and Norse religions in Scandinavia. In the United States within the last generation there has been a revitalization of Neo-Pagan religion and witchcraft, ranging from the Church of Satan as an established institution to Wicca as a legitimate religious experience.[10] New political movements, ranging from neo-Scandinavian nationalism to neo-Nazism have connected their political ideology to Old Norse religious mythologies.[11]

These new phenomena tended to have a more strictly sociological significance and had yet to develop a political relevance. The age of instant electronic communication lent itself to the mystification of archaeology, ethnography, and linguistics from Europe and North America to the rest of the globe.  Fueled by misperceived scientific and academic research, science fiction, UFO sightings, political propaganda, mysticism, religion, eschatology, and catastrophism gave rise to a vast body of literature, movies, and internet-propagated debate and speculations grounded in the outright mystification of science and racialism intensifying and legitimizing national conflicts and political violence.

Their interpretation of the past through archaeological discoveries and political influence in terms of modern ideological postures characterizes every area of the world, ranging from Latin America to Australia and Africa. [12] European and American museums came to be confronted by requests of the return of artifacts bought or seized by colonial powers. The British museum, for example, was going to return the Benin bronzes to Nigeria.[13] The bronzes had been seized by British troops in 1897 during the British conquest of Benin. Benin today is in modern Nigeria, and part of the federal state.

The Greek Cause for the Parthenon Marbles Return to Athens

In modern Europe one of the more chronic problems in archaeological politics is the pressing demand of the Greek state for the repatriation of the Parthenon Marbles, also known as the Elgin Marbles, from the British Museum to Athens. The Marbles were part of the façade of the Acropolis of Athens and were allegedly purchased by Lord Elgin, the British Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire in 1807. The issue came up again following Brexit, as the Greek government pressed once again for the return of the Elgin Marbles.[14] The subject became part of the diplomatic bargaining between the United Kingdom and Brussels over the future of the political relationship between the European Union and London. The controversy has been going on for decades. In the same vein, stolen art from Italy is a subject of Italian international requests for return of what it considers to be Italian cultural patrimony.[15]

Last but not least, the Nazi German state’s looting of European art all over the occupied areas during World War II still stands out as an example of the role of war in the displacement of national art and culture. Researchers are still looking for the Amber Room, a Tsarist treasure allegedly stolen by the Nazi occupation forces and presumably destroyed or still hidden somewhere in Germany.[16]

Thus, one may conclude here by saying that symbolically archaeology goes beyond the mere study of the past through what remains of the past materially, but it also shapes how individuals and nations may see themselves in the modern age. As archaeological explorations expand, inevitably the reinterpretation of the past also takes place. This is especially relevant in the Middle East, which by many standards, is the birthplace of civilization. Arguably, the most important dimension of this past is a religious experience that has characterized the Middle East ever since the birth and evolution of Judaism, the rise of Christianity and the shaping of monotheistic belief systems.

Modern Re-Elaboration of Jewish Identity Through Rise of Zionism

Perhaps the most outstanding example is the modern re-elaboration of a Jewish identity through the rise of modern Zionism in 19^th century Europe and the creation of the modern state of Israel in 1947. In the 2^nd century AD, the Romans wiped out what had been a Jewish ethno-religious state in Judea along with the destruction of what had originally been the Temple of Solomon in 70 AD. Judea became a Roman province and hundreds of thousands of Jews were enslaved and deported throughout the Roman Empire, though the territory still held a considerable population of Jews.

Some decades later, in 132 AD the Jews rebelled again. This revolt saw Emperor Hadrian raze Jerusalem and rename it Aelia Capitolina. To add insult to injury, Judea came to be renamed Palestina with a reference to one of the peoples in the area, the Philistines mentioned in the Bible. From then to modern times, Palestine was a common name for a territory that eventually became the state of Israel and came to be seen by Jews scattered across the world as a land to return to with the coming of the Messiah. Herein lies an added Christian dimension to the religious and cultural relevance of the Jewish historical linkage to a lost state, to be restored with, by a coming Messiah for Jews and the second coming of Christ for all Christian denominations.

The rise of Islam in the 7^th century and the conquest of Jerusalem by the Muslims in southern Arabia added a third monotheistic appeal to the city of Jerusalem which came to have historical and cultural consequences for centuries for the people of the region, Europe, and in time for international relations from the 19^th century onwards. By the 18^th century, there was already a historical and archaeological interest in the Middle East and the biblical connection was the most relevant aspect of it. In the development of modern states in the Middle East, whether Turkey, Iran, Egypt, or as a matter of fact anywhere else in the world, reconstructing the past through archaeology and other disciplines such as linguistics was not a new phenomenon, and continues to be ever more relevant. Paradoxically, in an ever more globalized world, national identity becomes ever more relevant for domestic political purposes. The reconstruction of the past through archaeology to enhance modern national identity becomes ever more interesting in terms of ideological, economic, and international premises. Thus, tourism, education, propaganda, articulated through mass and social media come to stand out and add to an even greater dimension to the models developed in the theories of international relations and conflict.

[1] Ashley Cowie, “Archaeologist Busted for Faking Artifacts Showing Jesus Crucifixion,” in Ancient Origins, 8 February 2020. https://www.ancient-origins.net/news-history-archaeology/iru-veleia-artifacts-0013266

[2] Claude Canellas, Sonya Dowsett, and Isla Binnie, “Basque militants ETA surrender arms in end to decades of conflict” Reuters, April 2017. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-spain-eta-idUSKBN1790YK

[3] Caroline Moorehead, Priam’s Gold: Schliemann and the Lost Treasure of Troy (New York: I.B. Tauris, 2016).

[4] Robert Payne, The Gold of Troy: The Story of Heinrich Schliemann and the Buried Cities of Ancient Greece (Dorset: Dorset Press, 1990).

[5] Lefkios Zaphiriou, Costas Nicolaides, Miltos Miltiadou, Marianna Mammidou, Van Coufoudakis, “The Loss of a Civilization; Destruction of cultural heritage in occupied Cyprus” Government of Cyprus, 2012.

[6] For a Turkish perspective, see Ozmatyatli, I. O. & Ozkul, A. E. “20th Century British Colonialism in Cyprus

through Education.” (Egitim Arastirmalari-Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 50, 1-20. 2013).

[7] Morris Mottale, “Book Review: Orientalism and Islam: European Thinkers on Oriental Despotism in the Middle East and India.” (Canadian Political Science Association, 2010).

[8] See Also: The MESA Debate, 22 November 1986. Cf: Robert D. Kaplan, “Remembering Elie Kedourie: How One Analyst Spoke Truth to Power in the Middle East.” (The National Interest, 25 April 2020)

[9] “Mexico demands apology from Spain and the Vatican over conquest.” (BBC, 26 March 2019). See Also, Renzo Pipoli “Spain denies Mexico apology over 1521 Spanish conquest.” (UPI, 26 March 2019)

[10] See for example Jessica Bennet “When Did Everybody Become a Witch?” (New York Times, 24 October 2019). See also; David Brooks “Commentary: Witchcraft enjoying a surge in popularity” (New York Times, 13 June 2019).

[11] Samuel Sigal “What To Do When Racists Try To Hijack Your Religion” (The Atlantic, November 2, 2017).

[12] Paul Daley “There’s a new push for the return of looted Aboriginal artefacts – in the name of ‘truth telling’.” (The Guardian, 1 December 2019). See Also; Geoff Gray “A Cautious Silence: The politics of Australian anthropology”. (Aboriginal Studies Press: August 1, 2007)

[13] Kieron Monks “British Museum to return Benin bronzes to Nigeria.” (CNN, 14 December 2018). See also: “The British Conquest of Benin and the Oba’s Return”, Art Institute of Chicago (2013).

[14] Ian Wishart “EU Brings Greek Demand for Elgin Marbles Into Brexit Talks.” (MSN, 19 February 2020).

[15] See for Example “Italian Court Orders Getty Museum To Return Statue To Italy”. (NPR, 5 December 2018).

[16] “Amber Room: Priceless Russian treasure stolen by Nazis ‘discovered by German researchers’” (The Independent, 19 October 2017).

Indicatively, total final energy consumption is forecast to double in Turkey by year 2050. This is the EnerOutlook forecast based on sustained economic development of emerging economies which takes into account the effect of global warming (such a scenario is compatible with a global temperature rise of between three to four degrees Celsius).

To address the problem of increasing domestic energy demand, Ankara has been actively pursuing nuclear energy to lessen its high dependency on energy imports. Consequently, in May 2010, Russia and Turkey signed a Cooperation Agreement, under which Rosatom State Cooperation has since been constructing the Akkuyu Nuclear Power Plant. This NPP will eventually contain four reactors with a combined capacity of 4800 MW. Other nuclear power projects in Sinop, Black Sea region and the Eastern Thrace region remain in the planning stages.

Construction of the Akkuyu NPP begun in December 2017. Its final cost is expected to rise over 20 billion USD – roughly equivalent to the size of Cyprus’ economic output in 2020. The first reactor is expected to become operational in 2023, the year that marks the centenary anniversary of the Republic of Turkey. No doubt, Erdogan’s government is planning festivities for this significant event, to boost its plunging popularity.

Despite serious concerns about the safety of the Akkuyu NPP, located as it is, in the high seismic activity region of Mersin, construction continuous. Every consecutive year in the following three years (2024-26) will see a new reactor coming into operation.

The first controversy over the impact of this huge nuclear power project on the environment appeared already six years ago: on 12 January 2015, it was reported that the signatures of specialists on a Turkish government-sanctioned environmental impact report had been forged. The appointed specialists had resigned six months prior to its submission, and the contracting company had then made unilateral changes to the report. Naturally so, this revelation sparked protest within the Turkish Cypriot community. The proximity of the prospective Akkuyu Nuclear Power Plant to our island could not be lightheartedly ignored. This powerful NPP will operate at about 110 kms from Lefkosia. In the context of an unexpected nuclear accident caused by an earthquake or otherwise, North or South Cyprus becomes immaterial. A fatal nuclear accident carries the danger of overwhelming both parts of the island.

In this respect, it is vital that the leaderships of both Greek and Turkish Cypriots stand in unison: the Eastern Mediterranean environment and its protection is a common cause. More so as Ankara exhibits a mixed approach, to say the least, towards international legal instruments on nuclear safety: Whereas Turkey signed up to the Convention on Nuclear Safety which entered into force 24 October 1996, it has not done the same with the Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management which entered into force 18 June 2001.

Ο συνάδελφος αναλυτής Κώστας Βενιζέλος απηχώντας ομοίως την πιο πάνω θεώρηση των πραγμάτων, σε πρόσφατο άρθρο του στον «Φ» (24/7/2021), αναφέρεται σε πληροφορίες για επανασύσταση από την Κυπριακή κυβέρνηση δύο επιστροπών [μελετών] του 2007 για τις Βρετανικές Βάσεις. Τον Οκτώβρη του 2016, το άρθρο μας υπό τον τίτλο «Βρετανικές Βάσεις εκ Νέου στο Προσκήνιο» χαρακτήριζε την πολιτική μας απέναντι στις ΒΒ ‘περιστασιακή, αποσπασματική και ασπόνδυλη’. Πέντε σχεδόν χρόνια μετά, δυστυχώς, δικαιωνόμαστε. Θα επανέλθουμε με περισσότερα στοιχεία σε βάθος παρελθόντος χρόνου για την εγκαταληφθείσα διαπραγμάτευση με την Βρετανική κυβέρνηση. Για την ώρα παραθέτουμε το άρθρο του 2016 αυτούσιο:

«Θα έλεγε κανείς ότι η απασχόληση μας ως πολιτεία και δη πλήρες μέλος του ΟΗΕ και της ΕΕ με το θέμα των Βρετανικών Βάσεων (ΒΒ) είναι περιστασιακή, αποσπασματική και ασπόνδυλη. Αντικατοπτρίζει προφανώς τον τρόπο με τον οποίο χαράσσουμε ή ίσως δεν χαράσσουμε καν πολιτική, απλά αντιδρούμε περιστασιακά στις αυθαιρεσίες των όσων έχουν φροντίσει από δεκαετίες βάσει σχεδίου να διαμελίσουν αυτό τον τόπο για να τον κρατούν υπόδουλο προς εύκολη εξυπηρέτηση των συμφερόντων τους.

Έτσι και τώρα βρεθήκαμε για μια ακόμη φορά εν όψει μιας νέας αυθαιρεσίας των Βρετανών οι οποίοι αποφάσισαν και διέταξαν εν κρυπτώ την αποψίλωση του δασυλλίου Ξυλοφάγου επικαλούμενοι λόγους ασφάλειας λόγω παρακείμενου πεδίου βολής αλλά και πατώντας πάνω σε ασύγγνωστη, ανάρμοστη και βάναυση συμπεριφορά σε βάρος αθώων … πτηνών από μέρους μερίδας ασυνείδητων Κυπρίων αγροτών.

Το θέμα των ΒΒ εκτείνεται σε βάθος χρόνου εξηκονταετίας και επεχειρήθη από μέρους των Βρετανών να καταστεί περίπλοκο και δυσεπίλυτο μέσα από την Συνθήκη Εγκαθίδρυσης (ΣΕ) της Κυπριακής Δημοκρατίας (ΚΔ). Η ΣΕ είναι αυτή κάθε αυτή βεβαρημένη με πολλές σελίδες λεπτομερειακής κατοχύρωσης των δικαιωμάτων πρόσβασης, χρήσης (αν όχι και κατάχρησης) του εδάφους, εναερίου και θαλασσίου χώρου της ΚΔ τόσο εντός όσο και εκτός ΒΒ. (Η τελευταία αναφορά μας παραπέμπει στις διαβόητες περιοχές διακατοχής και άλλες εγκαταστάσεις οι οποίες αποτελούν αναπόσπαστο μέρος της ΣΕ). Οι δεκάδες σελίδες των Παραρτημάτων της ΣΕ καθορίζουν με σαφή τρόπο αυτά τα δικαιώματα. Το ίδιο το κείμενο της ΣΕ στα δώδεκα του άρθρα δίνει το στίγμα της ύπαρξης της Συνθήκης ως διακρατικής συμφωνίας διασφάλισης της μονιμότητας της Βρετανικής στρατιωτικής παρουσίας επί της νήσου.

Η εξασφάλιση άτεγκτων όρων μόνιμης Βρετανικής στρατιωτικής παρουσίας στη νήσο μας γίνεται με ένα κεκαλυμμένο και ύπουλο θα έλεγε κανείς τρόπο. Από την μια αναφέρεται στην ΣΕ ότι δεν είναι πρόθεση του Ηνωμένου Βασιλείου να ιδρύσει ‘κράτος εν κράτει’ έχοντας εξασφαλίσει την παρουσία των Βάσεων του στο διηνεκές. Από την άλλη όμως, η δεδηλωμένη άρνηση τέτοιας πρόθεσης αυτομάτως αναιρείται από την φύση και την δομή την οποία οι Βρετανοί επιδίωξαν να δώσουν στις Βάσεις τους. Τις ονόμασαν και τις δόμησαν ως ‘κυρίαρχες’. Ο όρος ‘κυρίαρχος’ αποδίδεται μόνο σε κρατικές οντότητες. Αν και κατά το γράμμα της ΣΕ οι ΒΒ δεν αποτελούν κράτος, επιδιώκεται κατ’ ουσίαν, να είναι μέσα από την λειτουργία μιας ολοκληρωμένης κρατικής διοίκησης η οποία εμπερικλείεται στην όλη δομή της ούτω καλούμενης Διοίκησης των Κυριάρχων Περιοχών Βάσεων – ΔΚΠΒ.

Έτσι η ‘ΔΚΠΒ’ διαθέτει Πολιτικό Διοικητή (πέραν του Στρατιωτικού), Αστυνομία, Δικαστήρια, Ακτοφυλακή και Τελωνεία. Δεν διαθέτει, βέβαια, Υπουργικό Συμβούλιο διότι υπεύθυνη για την χάραξη πολιτικής είναι η κυβέρνηση του Λονδίνου και οι καθ’ ύλην αρμόδιοι Υπουργοί της, ‘Αμυνας και Εξωτερικών. Μολαταύτα γίνεται αντιληπτό ότι οι Βρετανοί δια της εγκαθιδρύσεως καθορισμένων Περιοχών Βάσεων, από το 1959 και έκτοτε, έχουν προσδώσει και διατηρήσει απαράλλακτες κρατικές δομές στις Περιοχές των Βάσεων τους. Η ‘ΔΚΠΒ’ είναι δηλαδή στην πράξη προτεκτοράτο του Ηνωμένου Βασιλείου. Άλλωστε οι ίδιοι οι Βρετανοί ονομάζουν την διοίκηση αυτή και λοιπά άλλα απομεινάρια της άλλωτε κραταιάς τους Αυτοκρατορίας (δεκαεπτά στο σύνολο), ‘υπερπόντιες εξαρτώμενες περιοχές’.

Το ζήτημα των ηθικών, οικονομικών αλλά και ιστορικών ευθυνών των Βρετανών για το παραστράτημα από την οδό της εφαρμογής της γνήσιας αυτοδιάθεσης στην περίπτωση της Κύπρου είναι τεράστιο.

Στο παρών σύντομο σημείωμα αρκεί να αναφέρουμε ότι η πρόθεση των Βρετανών να συνδράμουν οικονομικά την ΚΔ ως αντίδωρο στην απρόσκοπτη λειτουργία των Βάσεων τους – η οποία κατά καιρούς μπορεί να μην συμπίπτει με τα καλώς νοούμενα Κυπριακά συμφέροντα –  έχει παραμείνει γράμμα κενό εδώ και πενήντα τρία χρόνια.

Καταλήγοντας να ευχαριστήσουμε την εφημερίδα Ο Φιλελεύθερος για την δημοσίευση των συντετμημένων αναλύσεων μας και να υπενθυμίσουμε ότι άρθρο της αρχισυνταξίας επί του θέματος, εννέα χρόνια πριν (Οκτώβριος 2007), υπό τον τίτλο Το Δεύτερο Μέτωπο Έχει Ήδη Ανοίξει κατέληγε με την εξής σοφή φράση: όπως υποδείξαμε πολλές φορές, δεν θα ανοίξουμε δεύτερο μέτωπο γιατί από δεκαετίες αυτό υπάρχει ως Βρετανική επιλογή.»

However, since the NPT entry into force, fifty years ago, the world moved in the wrong direction: India, Pakistan and North Korea joined the list of recognized NWS. In addition, Israel is widely believed to possess 90 plutonium-based nuclear warheads and to have produced enough plutonium for somewhere in the region of one hundred to two hundred more weapons. Further, Israel’s possession of NW has triggered a serious response from Middle East arch-rival Iran. Tehran’s nuclear programme has sparked a huge international controversy. In the summer of 2015 the UN Security Council (Resolution 2231: 20 July 2015) endorsed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) reached between the P5+1 (the five permanent UNSC members plus Germany) and the regime in Tehran that placed Iran’s nuclear programme under the monitoring conditions of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). As Donald Trump withdrew the US from the deal, Iran resumed its programme unchecked. For what is worth, Joe Biden, the new US president committed the US to re-engage with Iran re-entering the JCPOA that his predecessor called a bad deal. However, at the end of February Tehran clearly indicated it is unwilling to resume talks with either the US or the Europeans unless the former lifts all sanctions imposed, crippling its economy over the last few years.

In the run-up to the 50^th anniversary NPT Review Conference tentatively scheduled to meet 2–27 August 2021 in New York (postponed from its original dates 27 April–22 May 2020 due to the covid-19 pandemic measures the noble cause of nuclear disarmament received another blow: this time from the UK. The British government in its Integrated Review announced it will increase its nuclear weapon stockpile cap to 260 nuclear warheads. On March 16th, the United Kingdom announced that it would increase its limit on its nuclear arsenal for the first time in decades. Instead of decreasing its nuclear stockpile to 180 warheads – which is still a far cry from zero – in the mid-2020s, the UK will increase its stockpile cap to 260 warheads which represents a 40% increase.

The Geneva-based International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) deplored the British government’s colossal reversal of its decades old policy of reducing its nuclear arsenal, calling it ‘shocking’ and ‘unacceptable’. The Nobel Peace Prize Laureate (2017) organization stresses in its relevant statement:

While most of the world’s countries have declared that nuclear weapons are illegal, the United Kingdom is moving in the wrong direction to increase its stockpile of weapons of mass destruction. The United Kingdom is currently engaged in a costly and lengthy project to build new nuclear-capable submarines, which it bases off the coast of Scotland, despite Scottish resistance to the bomb. In 2019 alone, the United Kingdom spent $8.9 billion on its nuclear weapons. This decision to increase its nuclear weapons stockpile, announced as part of its Integrated Review, flies in the face of UK promises under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to disarm.

In what concerns Cyprus, the UK’s Integrated Review envisages an upgraded role for the British military bases and other surveillance installations on the island: Significant investment in the Sovereign Base Areas in Cyprus will assure our ability to contribute to security, with allies, in the Eastern Mediterranean, the 100 plus page strategy, Global Britain in a Competitive Age, states.

Indeed, Ajaria has presently been turned into a geopolitical battlefield between Ankara and Tbilisi, in which Recep Tayyip Erdogan, dreamer of the revival of the Ottoman Empire, wins without exercising much effort. The Turkish leader’s ambitions on Ajaria are fed by the fact that the Georgian region is the birthplace of his ancestors who lived there early in the 20^th century.

In fact, the Southern half of the Batumi region (modern Ajaria) was ceded to Turkey under the terms of the Treaty of Kars, Soviet-Turkish Treaty of 1921. However, under the terms of the same treaty, the strategic port city of Batumi, would become part of Soviet Georgia as the Ajar ASSR (Autonomous Socialist Soviet Republic).

Moreover, Batumi was designated as a free port city for the Black Sea littoral states. Indeed, till the dawn of the 21^st century Ajaria enjoyed broad powers: tax revenue was kept for local development while the region run its own military and border police. All this dramatically changed with the rise of Mikhail Saakashvili to power in Tbilisi (2004). As Ajaria sought complete independence from Tbilisi, Saakashvili retaliated with economic blockade of the autonomous region. In the short-lived confrontation with the government in Tbilisi, the rebellious Ajarians blew up bridges, dismantled railways lines and destroyed other parts of infrastructure whilst the Ajar Army took up defensive positions on the border. Aslan Abashidze, the local strongman, heir of a princely dynasty idolized by the local population, who was leading the confrontation with Tbilisi was forced to resign as his resources were not sufficient to take on Saakashvili. The latter sent off his political proteges to run Batumi while many of the region’s autonomy powers were removed.

What is interesting is the Islamic-Turkish angle to the whole Saakashvili affair: through his mother, who was closely connected with Turkish businessmen and Islamic preachers, he allowed such Islamic-oriented Turkish business interests to gain foothold on the Georgian Black Sea coast. In the pursuit of his own personal gain, Saakashvili’s plan was to turn his Batumi’s coastal area into the ‘Las Vegas of the Black Sea’. As he aspired to join NATO, the former Georgian President’s deal with Erdogan included the expectation for the latter’s aid in pushing for Georgia’s accession to the Euro-Atlantic defence structures.

Unsurprisingly, under the favourable regime afforded by Saakashvili, within a few years Erdogan’s army of Islam-rooted entrepreneurs have dominated the region. Consequently, not only local business interests but also wage workers have been pushed into the background as the Turkish businessmen unobstructed brought their compatriot workforce with them.

In fact, Turkish investments in Ajaria work exclusively for the benefit of themselves: all financial flows in the Georgian autonomous region are under the strict control of Ankara. For example, Batumi’s international airport, built by a Turkish construction company, practically functions as a Turkish airport for domestic flights, as the only operated flights originate from Ankara and Istanbul. Moreover, according to the relevant Georgian-Turkish bilateral agreement Turkish nationals are exempt from passport and customs control!

The ‘soft squeeze’ of the indigenous Georgian population has been the order of the day in Ajaria: Islam-rooted Turkish business leaders not only discriminate against the locals in hiring workers but intrude also the religious sphere: desecration of Christian churches comes with a creeping imposition of Islamic faith and traditions. In those fifteen years, these Turkish businessmen have been acting as if they are the absolute rulers of Ajaria, feeling that the iron shadow of powerful Muslim Brother Erdogan will thwart any attempt by the Georgian authorities at protesting the anti-Georgian state of affairs.

The current situation in Ajaria bears much resemblance to the fate of Northern Cyprus, where in the past forty-six years, the majority Greek Orthodox population has been expelled. In both cases, the long-term expansionist design of Ankara has been premised on the use of the Turkish minorities in order to alienate parts of neighbouring states. After the expulsion following the double Turkish invasion of 1974, more than a third of the island’s territory was unilaterally declared the ‘Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus’, a secessionist act condemned immediately by a UN Security Council resolution in 1983. Despite the lack of international recognition ‘TRNC’’s ‘unilateral declaration of independence’ UDI was never revoked. If anything, the self-styled ‘TRNC’ as a puppet state of Ankara, lays claim in the hydrocarbon-rich sea shelf around the island.

Parliamentary elections are due in Georgia next October. Under the above described circumstances, a possible comeback to power of Saakashvili’s United National Movement Party would spell disaster for the country. Many Ajarians as well as Georgians see the possible re-rise of Saakashvili as the final act in the process of Ajaria’s annexation by Greater Turkey. The fear appears that the re-emergence of Saakashvili in the political arena as the Head of the Executive Committee of the National Reform Council of Ukraine will allow him to resume the role of Erdogan’s lackey.

The last striking example of the consequences of
‘alliance’ with the United States is undoubtedly the plight of the Syrian Kurds. Much ink has been shed about the American betrayal in the entire world’s mass media. Why does the US destroy the self-confidence of its allies giving rise to serious doubts? Nothing is strange: Washington pursues the policy considered appropriate in each case and moment in time. In this regard, Washington has increasingly abandoned its allies as soon as its goals are achieved. This is the spirit of US policy.

Take for example the treatment afforded by the United States to Japan, its main Asian ally. Washington has persistently been engaged in Tokyo’s arms twisting, projecting the threat from China and North Korea. Thus forcing Japan to follow Washington’s quest for supremacy in East Asia. In this case, the US refer to the bilateral treaty on mutual cooperation and the 1960 security guarantees, according to which they have the right to station armed forces and establish military bases on Japanese territory. However, as Bloomberg recently reported, the White House is seriously considering withdrawing from the Treaty, leaving Tokyo alone to worry about Japan’s security.

Is the Treaty signed by the United States and Greece during Pompeo’s recent visit to Athens, not of a similar nature? The transfer of American troops to Greek territory continues in full swing.

The White House employs the same scenario in the development of relations with the countries of the Persian Gulf: the looming ‘threat’ in the Gulf scenario is Iran. Furthermore, in the case of the Baltic and Eastern European states, Russia is the projected ‘threat’. It is not a far-fetched scenario the leadership of these countries wakes up one day and find themselves in the position the Syrian Kurds are today: that is to say a bargaining chip in American foreign and domestic policy.

The US ‘friendship’ with Armenia, one of Cyprus’ main partners, is also indicative. The government of Armenia, which has made a bet on the development of relations with the West, is likely to be abandoned by its American patrons by direct analogy to the Kurdish case. It is possible that the Armenian friends of George Soros, who consistently put the fate of Armenia in the hands of the OSCE Minsk Group and NATO officials, will face a very sad fate. If the Armenians are led to believe that the United States are the guarantor of Nagorno-Karabakh’s independence, they are seriously mistaken.

Oil Interests Guide US Foreign Policy

Last week Washington threw off its mask openly stating the true purpose of stationing US troops in Syria: oil! The war on terrorism on the territory of this unfortunate country was only
a smokescreen. Washington cares only about Syrian oil. The United States in order to maintain control over the oil fields in northeastern Syria, will apparently, stop at nothing.

The US administration estimates revenues from Syrian oil smuggling to the tune of $45 million per month. At the same time, the Syrians will not have any profit at all from the production of their own oil by the Americans. What else than an outright robbery of Syria by the United States? Part of the money from oil is returned to Syria exclusively in the form of new armed terrorists, while, in fact, all this oil belongs to the Syrian people and no one else.

Moreover, the White House recently expressed interest in a deal with oil giant ExxonMobil to ‘use’ Syrian oil assets. Yes, it is ExxonMobil, on which so many hopes are pinned by the Cypriot government. We wonder how our government and public will react to the potential participation of this company in the plunder of the natural resources of a sovereign state. Silence and indifference have always been the easiest way out of difficult situations. But then all our reproaches of Ankara with illegal activities in the Exclusive Economic Zone of Cyprus would pale.

It is not easy to choose allies and partners. Even worse when “chosen” as ally, the US pursue their narrowly defined national interest. We can continue to pretend that nothing is happening, to entertain illusions and hopes about a happy future in the American embrace. However, common sense suggests that now it is necessary to wake up and seriously think about whether we are on the right path. A range of countries, including seemingly powerful blocs such as the European Union, are increasingly realizing how they have been used by the Americans and hastily trying to get rid of this dependence. Doing so whilst the neck is in the loop is not so easy. It is much easier not to get to this point at all …

Navel gazers and insular islanders as we mostly are, we tend to forget that neighbours civilians – citizens of Syria – including a baby were killed. Many cynically noticed that the Syrian authorities needed to be more careful when using their anti-aircraft missile systems. Is this is possible when we speak about the lives of innocent people? Apparently, the crew of the Syrian Air Defense systems defended their own people from the missile attacks of the Israeli Air Force. Had they not reacted, there could probably be more civilian casualties. Shouldn’t those who use lethal weapons causing inadvertently collateral damage of unnecessary human suffering, be more humane and considerate? As the Israeli authorities offered no comments, the international community apparently followed suit.

It is noteworthy that the air raid of the Israeli Air Force was carried out from the airspace of Cyprus and Lebanon. It is rather odd in this respect that the Israeli Air Force should use the Cyprus airspace to launch an attack on the soil of a third friendly country and not the national airspace of Israel. The Cypriot leadership considers Israel a friendly country, the main regional partner and protector of Cyprus interests. But let us stop for a moment and ponder: in the worst case scenario of a further Turkish advance, will Israel really come to our rescue? We are of the humble opinion that the strategic alliance with Israel, however expedient it may be at the current juncture, has to be more balanced in order to avoid unpleasant consequences which potentially damage Cyprus’ friendly relations with other immediate neighbours to the east.

Faisal Al-Mikdad, Syrian Deputy Foreign Minister declared his country’s readiness to change its response to Israeli aggression. In other words, it looks like that the era of Syrian restraint in the face of Israeli Air Force raids on Syrian territory is coming to an end. In the light of the new Syrian assertiveness, no one can guarantee that in the course of repelling the next attacks of the Israeli Air Force, another load of lethal ammunition will not land on our island. Nobody, in his right mind, wants chance to become a regularity.

Like any other unilateral actions, such Israeli air attacks carry the danger of regional destabilisation. In such conditions, the national security interests of none of the Eastern Mediterranean states can be reliably ensured. We are in dire need of a truly comprehensive and multilateral approach to be adopted by all parties in order to achieve stability and security in the region.