Lately, Greece, as a member state of the European Union (EU) and NATO, with a firm orientation towards the West and a strategic relationship with the USA, France and Israel has been geopolitically upgraded.
Specifically, its latest strategic moves on the ground have shown that it plays a key role as a pillar of stability and security in the wider Eastern Mediterranean region.
In this context, Greece has chosen to move proactively, before any fait accompli emerges in the region, demonstrating speed and strategic acumen in dealing with potential threats.
In this perspective, the decision of the Prime Minister, Mr. Kyriakos Mitsotakis, to send two Navy frigates and four F16 aircraft to Cyprus, contributing to the deterrence of possible threats against the military and critical infrastructure of the island, proved to be of particular strategic importance.
At the same time, the deployment of Patriot batteries in Karpathos and Didymoteicho to reinforce Bulgaria's air defence, following a request from the neighbouring country, strengthens the overall deterrent framework in the region and protects national and allied interests.
These initiatives demonstrate that Greece is an essential guarantor of the security of Cyprus and its allies and send a clear signal that it has both the will and the operational capacity to play an active role in security issues that go beyond the narrow confines of its national territory, contributing to regional security and stability in the Eastern Mediterranean.
The immediate convening of the competent institutions (KYSEA), combined with Greece's targeted diplomatic mobility towards partners and allies, also highlighted that the country is facing the crisis in terms of a national strategy, not a conjunctural management, while confirming its credibility and its ability to define the security framework in the Eastern Mediterranean.
Of particular importance is also the fact that Greece exploited the obvious strategic gap of the EU, which once again appeared without a unified and coherent strategy in the face of a major international crisis.
In this environment of uncertainty and European institutional inertia, Athens did not limit itself to a passive stance, but took direct and targeted action, covering in practice the leadership vacuum of the EU.
At the same time, pushed its European partners to align themselves with developments and to support, even after the fact, its strategy to protect Cyprus adopting a more proactive approach to security in the region.
These proactive and multi-level strategic initiatives by Greece have reversed the previous situation in the Aegean and the Eastern Mediterranean, causing Turkey's surprise and embarrassment.
Specifically, Ankara reacted with a long delay (after 48 hours), initially expressing its strong annoyance through a statement accusing Athens of attempting to create a fait accompli by violating the demilitarization regime of the East Aegean islands.
In the same statement, he also turned against Greece's European partners who have offered to provide military support to Cyprus.
Indicative of Ankara's embarrassment and surprise was the fact that, immediately after the Greek government's initiatives for the protection of Cyprus, Turkish aircraft attempted to violate Greek airspace in the Northeast and Southeast Aegean, while President Erdogan ordered the deployment of six F-16 fighters and air defence systems to the occupied territories to strengthen the security of the «Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus».
These actions constitute an obvious attempt to restore Ankara's image of power and to appease internal criticism of «inaction» or «retreat».
However, reveal Turkey's doubly exposed position: operationally, due to its inability to establish an effective presence in the region, and diplomatically, due to its delayed and ineffective reaction to Greece's targeted initiatives.
Assessing the above attitude of Turkey, it becomes clear that Ankara no longer shapes developments in the region, but is limited to knee-jerk reactions, while Greece has now taken the initiative and is defining the developments and the framework of regional security in the Eastern Mediterranean.
At the same time, Greece's recent strategic initiatives in combination with its strategic alliances (USA, France, Israel) and its institutional role as a member of the EU and NATO, constitute a structural reversal of the balance of power in the Eastern Mediterranean, making the country a major shaper of geopolitical developments and a pillar of regional security and stability.
In short, in this new geopolitical environment, Greece no longer follows or observes developments, but determines and co-shapes them together with its allies.
In fact, its strategic relationship with the US, France and Israel acts as a force multiplier, enhances its deterrent capacity, safeguards its national interests and consolidates its position as a pillar of stability and security in the Eastern Mediterranean.
At the same time, through targeted options such as the country's participation in critical energy and transit networks that strengthen Europe's autonomy, the upgrading of its defence capabilities and the provision of strategic infrastructure such as Souda and Alexandroupolis to its allies, Greece is becoming a geopolitical player of particular importance.
Finally, its active presence in NATO and EU mechanisms, its continuous operational interconnection with allied forces and its ability to support operations, protect sea lanes and contribute to the air defence of third countries confirm that it does not operate as a passive recipient, but as a force that shapes the security framework in the wider region.
Indicative of this upgraded strategy is the example of the Greek Patriot artillery, which is deployed in Saudi Arabia from 2021 under a bilateral agreement and an international air defence mission..
The fact that this artillery division intercepted two Iranian ballistic missiles targeting energy infrastructure proves the operational readiness and high training of the Greek Armed Forces, as well as the international role of Greece as a reliable security provider in the Middle East.
Through such missions, Greece transcends its geographical borders and establishes itself as a critical pillar of stability, while strengthening the deterrence capacity of its allies.
In conclusion, Greece has now emerged as a reliable partner of the West, which does not just ask for security guarantees, but contributes actively and consistently to the shaping of regional security and stability.
Unlike Greece, Turkey appears as an increasingly ambiguous and unreliable ally for the West.
Despite its membership of NATO, pursues an autonomous and often competitive role vis-à-vis its allies, acting in many cases as Russia's Trojan Horse within the Alliance, while pursuing a multidimensional strategy that distances it from the Western security framework.
Ankara also maintains relations and channels of communication with actors that directly oppose the interests of the West., such as Iran, but also with organisations such as Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis, in many cases adopting their rhetoric and claiming a role as their protector.
At the same time, the Turkish leadership's association with political Islam and its influence from the Muslim Brotherhood, reinforce the image of a country that does not seek cooperation and peaceful coexistence between East and West, but the formation of a distinct, alternative pole of power, aiming to become a representative of the Muslim world.
At the same time, Turkey's interventions in Syria, Libya, the South Caucasus, the Balkans and the Middle East, as well as its attempt to penetrate Africa, reflect regional power ambitions and a constant revisionism.
This is not just a tactical move of power, but a coherent strategy to claim a leading role in the Muslim world.
In this light, Turkey is not acting as an agent of stability, but as an agent of revisionism and geopolitical instability.
Therefore, this contradictory and in many cases antagonistic attitude towards the interests of its Western allies undermines its credibility and limits its geopolitical influence.
In conclusion, Turkey's embarrassment by Greece's strategic initiatives, combined with its desire to remain deftly neutral and play a peacemaking role in the Middle East, make it an observer of developments rather than a protagonist, as it has been trying to project for many years through its Turkish propaganda narrative.
Its rivalry also with Israel and the possible end of the war with Iran, either through a change of leadership or through the weakening of the country, do not favour it.
On the contrary, they make it vulnerable and exposed to regional conflicts, undermining its position as a strategic player in the Eastern Mediterranean.
Turkey seems to be caught between its ambitious geopolitical ambitions and its lack of real international credibility, while Greece is using its geopolitical position, its alliances and the strategic initiatives of its political leadership to consolidate its role as a credible and useful strategic partner and a dynamic player in the region.
The importance of its geographical location and infrastructure, its operational readiness and its ability to cooperate effectively with major powers, combined with the will of its political leadership to implement a dynamic and strategically targeted national strategy, create a new context that makes it a critical pillar of stability and security in one of the most volatile regions of the world.
Finally, Greece, taking advantage of the context of the war against Iran and its strategic initiatives for the protection of Cyprus, as well as the strengthening of its air defence, can further advance in the strategic exploitation of the new data that have emerged on the ground.
For example, Athens' initiatives for the protection of Cyprus, invalidated on the ground Turkey's revisionist narrative towards Greece and the doctrine of the Blue Homeland, while Ankara's non-reaction despite the validity of the Casus Belli and its claims for the demilitarization of the East Aegean islands, prove that Turkey's long-standing aggression is only at a rhetorical level and does not become real.
The fact that Turkey was unable to intercept the three ballistic missiles launched by Iran towards its territory confirms the truth of the matter.
The need to seek NATO's assistance in dealing with them proves that Turkey does not have the necessary equipment and operational capabilities that it claims and that «the King is naked».
Given that Greece's initiatives received international recognition and support from the US and European allies, setting a precedent for international law and consolidates Greece's position as a credible, decisive and institutional pillar of stability in the Eastern Mediterranean.
Therefore, the continued presence of Greek frigates and aircraft in Cyprus, as well as the maintenance of the Patriot batteries in Karpathos after the end of the war, will keep Greece in a position of strategic superiority, holding the initiative.
At the same time, it consolidates its ability to decisively shape developments in the Eastern Mediterranean and act as a stable and reliable pillar of security for its allies.
With its strategic presence in the Eastern Mediterranean and its proactive initiatives, Greece has shown that it does not follow developments, but determines them.
With a targeted and coherent strategy that safeguards its national interests, determination and credibility, Greece sends a clear message to all: the Eastern Mediterranean is no longer a field of revisionism and irredentist aspirations, but a region where Greece has a voice and plays a decisive role in shaping its security and stability framework.
Author of the article:
Political Scientist – International Relations Specialist
Former Director General - Directorate General
National Defense and International Relations Policy (GDPAAD)
Ministry of National Defense (YPETHA)
