At the final press conference, President Tusk presented the main results of the EU-Western Balkans summit and the Leaders' agenda dinner held in Sofia.

Good afternoon. Before anything else, let me thank Prime Minister Borissov and his whole team; you did something excellent and I am really impressed when it comes to your effectiveness, determination, and mainly because of your engagement we can say today that the summit was successful, and of course thank you for the wonderful Bulgarian hospitality. Blagodaria Boyko, blagodaria prelestna Bulgaria (thank you Boyko, thank you beautiful Bulgaria).

We have just concluded a very good and fruitful EU-Western Balkans summit. I believe that it took us too long since our last meeting in Thessaloniki fifteen years ago, and this is why we decided to meet again in two years in Croatia. This is the best illustration that the integration with the Western Balkans is a top priority for the EU.

Today we reaffirmed our mutual commitment to the European perspective for the whole region. As I said during my recent visit to the region, the European Union is and will remain the most reliable partner of the entire Western Balkans. 

And in very concrete terms we discussed how to improve connections with and within the Western Balkans region. We are speaking about human, economic, digital and infrastructure connections. The package of measures we signed a while ago - the so-called "Sofia Priority Agenda" - adds new initiatives to our current cooperation. For example, we agreed to double the Erasmus+ to allow more youth to study in the EU. We agreed to work towards the lowering of roaming charges and we agreed to create more favourable conditions for private investments by providing better bank guarantees.

And to avoid any confusion, let me be very clear: The connectivity agenda is neither an alternative nor a substitute for enlargement. It is a way to use the time between today and tomorrow more effectively than before, so that our citizens and businesses are not waiting for all the benefits of EU integration. Because I don’t see any other future for the Western Balkans than the EU. There is no other alternative, there is no plan B. The Western Balkans are an integral part of Europe and they belong to our community.

Before concluding let me very briefly comment on EU leaders’ meeting yesterday evening.

We agreed that the EU will step up its efforts on digital and innovation in order to rise to the challenge of technological revolution. You should expect very concrete decisions when we formally meet in June. They will include elements like the establishment of a European Innovation Council in the next MFF, pilot projects including for Artificial Intelligence and more funds for investments. All this will be based on our European values, including full respect of citizens’ privacy, also online.

As to the Iran Nuclear Deal we agreed unanimously that the EU will stay in the agreement as long as Iran remains fully committed to it. Additionally the Commission was given a green light to be ready to act whenever European interest are affected. Finally on EU-US trade. Also here, we have achieved a united approach that will strengthen the Commission in its ongoing negotiations with the United States. The EU is even ready to talk about trade liberalisation with our American friends but only if the US decides an unlimited exemption from steel and aluminium tariffs. President Juncker will present our approach in more detail. Thank you.

Source: European Commission - Council of the European Union​

Agenda highlights

The EU-Western Balkans summit will take place in Sofia, Bulgaria, on 17 May 2018.

What are the summit's objectives?

The summit will aim to inject new energy in the EU-Western Balkans relationship. It will seek to:

• reaffirm the EU's commitment towards its Western Balkans partners and reiterate the region's belonging to the European family
• strengthen links between the EU and the Western Balkans in infrastructure, digital and human connectivity
• work more closely together to tackle common challenges, such as security, migration, geopolitical developments and good neighbourly relations

The summit will be centred on the theme of connectivity with a view to improve the links with the Western Balkans and within the region.
​

Who will attend the summit?

The EU-Western Balkans summit will bring together:

• heads of state or government from EU member states
• leaders from the 6 Western Balkans partners: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) and Kosovo*

The meeting will be hosted by Boyko Borissov, Prime Minister of Bulgaria, which currently holds the Presidency of the Council.

The President of the European Council, Donald Tusk, will chair the meeting. He will represent the EU together with the President of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker.

The President of the European Parliament, Antonio Tajani, the EU High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Federica Mogherini, and the Commissioner for European Neighbourhood Policy and Enlargement Negotiations, Johannes Hahn, will also attend the summit.
Representatives of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the World Bank, the European investment Bank and the Regional Cooperation Council will also participate.

​President Tusk's visit the region ahead of the summit

From 24 to 27 April President Tusk travelled to Tirana, Podgorica, Belgrade, Pristina, Sarajevo and Skopje. He met with the leaders of each Western Balkans partner to prepare for the upcoming summit and to discuss bilateral relations with the EU. At the end of his tour in the region, President Tusk participated in the Brdo-Brijuni process summit in Skopje.
​

​Side events

President Tusk has invited EU leaders to an informal dinner ahead of the summit. This dinner is part of the Leader's Agenda and it will focus on digital Europe, research, and innovation. EU leaders are also expected to use this occasion to exchange views on the Iran nuclear deal and trade with the US. Boyko Borissov, Prime Minister of Bulgaria, will host the dinner at the Sofia Tech Park. A Leader's Agenda note was issued ahead of the dinner outlining the key issues that will be discussed.

The Bulgarian Presidency of the Council has also scheduled several side events around the summit. They will provide an opportunity to showcase the breadth of EU-Western Balkans relations beyond intergovernmental aspects.

On 16 May, the European Council on Foreign Relations and the Wilfried Martens Centre for European Studies are organising the conference 'In dialogue with the Western Balkans: creating a region of growth, security and connectivity on the path to Europe'.

Also on 16 May, the Bulgarian Forum for Business Leaders is organising the event 'Investment prospective: Western Balkans'. It will focus on economic potential of the Western Balkans as well as investment horizons in the region.

On 17 May, the World Economic Forum is co-hosting a strategic dialogue on the Western Balkans together with the Bulgarian presidency. The objective will be to advance private public partnerships to support investment in the region.

On 18 May, the Vienna Economic Forum will host the 'Sofia Talks 2018' focusing on regional economic cooperation.

On the same day, an event on the circular economy and clean technologies will be organised by the Bulgarian Ministry of Environment and Waters and Cleatech Bulgaria.

In addition, the European External Action Service (EEAS) launched the EU-Western Balkans cultural heritage route. Several initiatives and events will be organised to promote the rich cultural heritage of the Western Balkans, as part of the European year of cultural heritage.

Source: European Commission - Council of the European Union

First and foremost, I want to thank you for inviting me to such an important commemoration. This invitation carries symbolic meaning not only on an individual level; but the fact that a Turk was invited to speak to you here today conveys a meaningful message. With this invitation, the Swedish Parliament and my Armenian friends have made a clear statement: That the resolution of Armenian-Turkish tension can be achieved through human decency; that our place of birth and ethnicity are not central—rather, what counts most is our attitude toward facing the crimes committed in the past. Taking a stand defines who we are. Speaking out about historical crimes, especially genocide, is the responsibility of all humanity. This is not an issue for Armenians and Turks or Jews and Germans, alone.

​Therefore, I would like to offer my sincerest gratitude once again for offering me this distinguished podium and the opportunity to enumerate the historical crimes for which Ottoman-Muslims (Turks, Kurds, Circassians, Alevites, etc.) bear responsibility. The central issues that Turks must confront, is our inability or refusal to acknowledge the massacres and genocide carried out against Ottoman Christian citizens—the Armenians, Assyrians, and Greeks. While mass violence is not unique to Turkey, it is a major feature of the turmoil that characterizes the Middle East.

It is difficult to determine the beginning- and end-dates for historical processes; however, between the 1878 Berlin Congress and the founding of the Turkish Republic in 1923, the Ottoman-Turkish lands experienced waves of earthquakes comprised of a series of massacres that constitute a genocidal process. The 1894-6 massacres of Armenians and Assyrians; the 1904 Sasun and 1908 Adana massacres of Armenians; the 1913-4 ethnic cleansing and massacres of Greeks; the 1915-18 genocide of Armenians and Assyrians; and the 1921-22 Pontus Genocide represent the most significant tremors of this earthquake.

The 45-year long (1878-1923) earthquake, which can be characterized as the Ottoman genocide of Christians, continued during the Republican era at various intervals. The Anti-Jewish pogroms in 1934 in Trace; the 1937-38 Dersim Genocide; the 1942 Wealth-Tax; the pogrom of 6-7 September 1955; the slaughter of intellectual youth during 1960, 71 and 80 military coups; and the never-ending suppressions of the Kurds, including their systematic torture and killings in the 1990s and 2015 represent some examples of this continuation.

If, today, Turkey struggles to establish a regime that respects human rights and continues to face significant hurdles in its democratization, it is due to the refusal to confront and face the crimes committed in the past. Moreover, the challenges are not limited to Turkey’s internal affairs, but also extend to the wider region. The military operations in Syria and the war with the Kurds are also manifestations of this inability to face the past.
​
This state of affairs raises a central question: Why must we face our history? Why must we memorialize and remember past crimes? Allow me to present five fundamental and interconnected reasons.

The first important reason why we should remember and commemorate past atrocities is because we have to remember the victims, pay our respects to their memory and re-humanize them. Dehumanization is essential to the perpetration of mass atrocities. The most effective way to inspire perpetrators to kill is to make their victims inhuman. This is how individuals overcome their normal human revulsion toward murder. Nazis classified the Jews as bacteria or microbe/germs; in Rwanda, the Hutus called the Tutsis cockroaches. The Ottoman Turkish rulers described Armenians as a tumor in the Turkish body that had to be excised. This term was used very often by the leaders of Teshkilati Mahsusa. By depriving the victim group of its humanity, perpetrators pave the way for mass-atrocities.

Commemoration is, if nothing else, an act of protest against this repulsive phenomenon. Re–humanizing the victims by honoring them and restoring their dignity is one of the most important steps in denouncing the perpetrator.

The second reason for remembrance is that it creates the foundations for co-existence. Communities that have experienced a painful past filled with violent acts, can only reconcile and live together peacefully if they “talk” about this common past with each other. Failing to do so, they will continue to regard each other with doubt and suspicion and ultimately get crushed under the burdens of the past. If Turks cannot engage in an honest reckoning of their crimes, enter into serious dialogue with Armenians, Greeks and Assyrians, and listen to the deeply painful histories of these communities, the victim groups will never feel any measure of trust for Turks. The only way for Turks to achieve peaceful coexistence at home, and with their neighbors, is for the Turkish government and its people (including Turks, Kurds, Alevites, Sunnis, etc.) to acknowledge historic wrongs honestly and to accept responsibility for their actions. Without genuinely confronting and accepting this painful history, a common future will never be constructed.

The third reason why we must face our history is as follows: We remember the past and commemorate mass atrocities because this is a basic prerequisite for a democratic society. In order to establish a democracy that respects human rights, it is essential to first confront human rights violations. Failure to do so, and impunity for past crimes, inhibit a nation’s commitment to respect present day human rights. How you view and regard your past will also determine how you construct your future.

In the late Ottoman period, all Christians living on Ottoman soil were stripped of citizenship and their most basic human rights were violated. The government viewed Christian demands for equality and justice as grave threats to national security. Kurds experience the same undemocratic abuses today. Their basic demands for freedom and justice are judged as threats to Turkish security and the government violently suppresses them. It should not, therefore, surprise us that those who, in the past, met the Christian populations’ demands with repeated violations of their human rights employ the same strategy toward Kurds and their demands today. Recognition of historic injustices is essential to establishing a democratic environment that values human rights.

The fourth important reason for remembering and honoring the past is to raise our voices to say, “Never again.” In order to avoid mass atrocities, we must remember! But remembering, alone, may not be enough to prevent the repetition of past injustices; however, it is an important pre-condition. Denying historic wrongs, leaves the door wide open for the potential risk of repeating the same crimes, the same mistakes over again. By denying massacres and crimes, Turkey sends the message that it would perpetrate the same crimes again, if threatened. For this reason, it is not an exaggeration to claim that Turkey represents a potential threat to the entire region.

The last important reason to commemorate past atrocities is to fight denial and overcome obstructions in the quest for truth and justice. This core principle is crucial, for it effectively demonstrates that acknowledging a historic crime is not limited to remembering an event of the past, but that it constitutes a prerequisite for the consolidation of peace, security and stability today.

Thus, the fight against denial is crucial and we should decide how best to fight it. There are two basic misunderstandings regarding genocide denial and, especially, Turkish denial. Firstly, denialism is often regarded as a mistaken but tolerable ideological attitude toward mass atrocities. The second misunderstanding is related to the first and assumes that confronting denial is about establishing a “moral” attitude towards a single crime that remains forgotten in the pages of history. Any connection with the present is effectively walled off.

Both of these misperceptions are a logical consequence of what I call temporal compartmentalization: Namely, the tendency to place the past and present into different boxes and to ignore their interconnectedness. It is enormously problematic to sever the ties between denial and contemporary political problems. Denial is not only about an ideological attitude towards the past and the demand for recognition of historical crimes is not confined to a moral conviction [or conduction Sunday Church services] regarding past events.

Denialism is a structure that cannot be simply relegated to past atrocities. The denialist structure produced and continues to carry out policies in the present day. In this regard, it would be appropriate and reasonable to compare Turkish denialism with the racist apartheid regime of South Africa. The system, mindset and institutions of apartheid were constructed upon racial differences; denial of the Armenian genocide has similar roots. It was manufactured upon the discrimination and exclusion of ethnic-religious minorities and considers the democratic demands of these groups a national security threat that has to be eliminated.

In the past, the emergence of the so-called “Armenian question” was the result of Armenian demands for equality and social reform, which arguably would have led to a better and stronger Ottoman society. Nevertheless, their demands and the Armenians themselves were considered a security threat, which caused them to become targets for massacres and genocide. Denying this truth constitutes the foundation of the Turkish concept of security, which is not only based on the denial of crimes but also on the perception that the promotion of basic democratic rights, such as equality under the law, social reform and freedom of speech threaten national security.

The irony is that denying genocide and criminalizing demands for a more democratic and just society because of national security are the real obstacles to democracy. The violent Turkish response to calls for human rights is counterproductive. In fact, they lead directly to real security problems. This “self-fulfilling prophecy” was a root cause of the Armenian genocide and it shapes the Kurdish problem today.

Instead of solving Kurdish problems by seeking solutions that would lead to a more democratic society, institutionalized denial resurrects the same security concept and declares that Kurdish demands are an essential security problem for the nation. This is the short story of the invasion of Syria by the Turkish Army.

The picture is very clear. By denying what happened in 1915, Turkey reproduces the institutions, social relations, and mindset that created the events of 1915 in the first place. Denial is not simply a defense of an old regime (Ottoman Empire). Denial also fuels the politics of continuing aggression, both inside and outside Turkey today.

It is not hard to show the strong interconnection between Turkey’s denial of the Armenian Genocide and Turkey’s domestic and regional policies today. Without addressing in detail the ongoing dark developments in Turkey today, particularly since the attempted coup of July 2016, allow me to express the current situation in numbers. Currently, more than 10 parliamentary representatives and around 150 journalists are incarcerated; approximately 4,000 academic intellectuals have been forced to step down from the university positions, and Kurdish cities have been destroyed and burned to the ground. According to a Freedom House Report in 2017, a total of 162 media companies have been closed down; these include 48 newspapers, 60 television and radio stations, 19 periodicals, 29 publishing houses and six press agencies.

In addition to these realities, Turkey is experiencing a mass exodus of its intellectual elite – perhaps the largest one in its history. More than 1,000 academics, journalists, and literary intellectuals have already fled to Europe. Turkey is galloping towards – if it has not already arrived at—a totalitarian regime. Turkish Government used the coup attempt as an excuse to crash the democratic opposition. And their primary argument in support of these policies is that the demand for more democracy and respect for human rights is a threat to its national security and must be crushed before it spreads.

Aggression towards Syria is another part of this Turkish national security policy. Perceiving Kurdish demands for a democratic structure in Syria or in Turkey as a national security treat, Turkey invaded Syria. Ziya Gökalp, one of the ideologues of the Young Turks and an architect of late Ottoman policies, described Ottoman aggression towards the East during the First World War through the analogy of the “Red Apple.”

The “Red Apple” exemplifies a belief that dates back to old Turkish lore and is meant to reflect Turkish sovereignty over the universe. When talking about battles and victory, Ottoman Turks would characterize their triumph as having reached the “Red Apple” and the “Red Apple” has come to symbolize the idea of pan-Turkism, the uniting of all Turkish peoples. Knowledge of this mythology is crucial to understanding the Armenian genocide. It is extremely revealing that Tayyip Erdoğan referenced this legendary symbol just before the 2018 Afrin operation in Syria. In a speech delivered on Jan. 22, Erdoğan answered the question “Where are we going?” with the response “Towards the Red Apple… yes, towards the Red Apple”.

All of these policies are conceptualized, decided, and implemented by the highest constitutional institution in Turkey: The National Security Council. In 2001, this supreme constitutional authority established a “Coordinating Committee for the Fight Against Baseless Claims of Genocide.” All of the important ministries, including the Armed Forces, are represented on this committee, which is chaired by the Vice Prime Minister. The sole mission of this institution is to fight those who demand recognition of mass-atrocities, including the Armenian Genocide, committed by successive Ottoman-Turkish governments in the past. It is not a coincidence that it is the same institution that considers the democratic demands of Kurds and other minorities and regional developments in Syria to be a national security threat.

The picture is clear. As long as Turkey continues to regard facing historic injustice with honesty and acknowledgment of wrongdoings as a national security threat and refuses to come to terms with its past for national security reasons, further security problems will ensue. Recognition of the Armenian genocide is not a thing of the past that can be forgotten when confronted with the seemingly more pressing issues of today. On the contrary, it is the key to solving contemporary security problems.

This brings me to my next point. There is a widely accepted opinion, which contends that while resisting denial and demanding the recognition of a historic crime might be a meaningful and amiable moral attitude, however, we must be realistic and prioritize the more crucial and compelling security and national interests of contemporary states. Accordingly, in situations where the recognition of an historic crime is in conflict with the national interests and security of today, it is meaningless and nonsensical to maintain the demand for recognition because the event in question has long passed. To insist on it, represents a fundamentalist moralist attitude.

The discussions within the West, and especially in the United States, regarding the 1915 genocide and relations with Turkey are generally conducted within this framework of realpolitik. According to this perspective, the “national security concerns” of the West (the U.S., Great Britain, France, Germany, etc.) in the Middle East are placed on one side, while the recognition of a 100-year-old genocide is placed on the other. And for this reason, instead of pressuring Turkey into changing its denialist policies towards 1915, for decades these countries have opted to support Turkey. Today, it is hard to find any member of the American Congress who contests the fact of the Armenian genocide. But this very same congress still—to this day—denies recognition of the Armenian genocide, solely because they pit “national interest” against “morality” as two mutually exclusive positions. This is plain wrong.

As I illustrated in the Turkish case, and as recent developments clearly demonstrate, there is a strong interconnection between security, democracy and facing history in the Middle East. Even a passing glance at the region makes it clear that historical injustices and the persistent denial of these injustices by one or another state or ethnic-religious group is a major stumbling block, not only for the democratization of the region, but also for the establishment of stable relations between different ethnic and religious groups. You cannot solve any problem in the Middle East today without addressing historic wrongs because history is not something in the past; in the Middle East, the past is the present.

Putting it another way, one of the main problems in the region is the insecurity felt by different groups and states towards each other as a result of events that have occurred in history. When persistent denial of these pain-filled acts is fundamental to your security policy, feelings of insecurity towards the other become inevitable. This is what we call the security dilemma: What one does to enhance one’s own security causes a reaction that, in the end, can make one even less secure. For this reason, any security concept, any policies of realpolitik in and for the region that obfuscates past atrocities and ignores addressing these historic wrongs is doomed to fail in the end.

We must cease this senseless distinction and compartmentalization between the recognition of 1915 and contemporary realpolitik. Until today, the West has either failed to recognize 1915 for reasons of “security” and “national interest” or, even in cases where it adopted some affectatious parliamentary decisions, continued to carry out policies that gave support and political cover to Turkey. If democracy, peace and security is the objective—the end-goal—of the policy of the West towards Middle East, this type of behavior must be terminated.

For it is this attitude and behavior of the West that emboldens Turkey to continue its denial of 1915 and encourages it to persist with its policies that threaten democracy, peace and security in the region today.

Let us not forget—denialism is not a problem exclusive to Turkey and its history. It is the collective and fundamental problem of Europe with regard to its future and regional peace and security. If we do not place the struggle to face our past and fight against denialism at the center of our politics, we fail not only today, but we also risk losing our future. There is no difference between fighting Turkish Denialism and fighting the South African Apartheid regime. Apartheid did not collapse from internal pressure alone. The support of the international community was also extremely important. I appeal to you from this podium today to end this detrimental compartmentalization between past and present and to grasp the severity and magnitude of Denialism’s impact.

A thorough and honest commemoration of a heinous crime perpetrated in the past cannot be accomplished in a Sunday church service. If we want to respect the dignity of victims; to establish justice, to create democracy, peace and stability in the region and to stop mass-atrocities in the future, we must fight denialism not only as an attitude towards a past crime but also as a crime against human dignity today…

Thank you for listening.

Source: Armenian Weekly

Turkey’s tendency to question Greek national sovereignty is the biggest problem facing Greece in its relations with its neighbor, a nationwide poll conducted by Public Issue on “Greece and the World 2018” showed this week.

According to the survey, 74 percent of respondents said challenging Greek sovereignty in the Aegean and over islands such as Kastelorizo, Fourni and the Dodecanese is the most important issue, while 16 percent believe it is Turkey's aggression and intransigence.

Asked where Greek-Turkish relations stand today compared to a year go, 81 percent said they have deteriorated, 16 percent said they are the same and just 2 percent believe they have improved.

Concerning the Greek government’s handling of bilateral relations with Turkey, 54 percent of the respondents said it was “probably wrong,” versus 37 percent who responded “probably correct.”

At the same time, 56 percent of participants said that the criticism levelled by the opposition against the government on its policy towards Turkey is “probably wrong,” while 32 percent it is “probably correct.”

The same survey found that 67 percent of respondents are “probably against” Turkey's accession to the European Union and 27 percent are “probably in favour.”

However, the vast majority said Greece should continue to engage in dialogue and negotiations with Turkey (70 pct) with only 28 percent being against talks.

Asked whether they believe a war with Turkey is probable in the years to come, 52 percent said it is “improbable,” and 44 percent it is “probable.”

The survey was conducted through telephone interviews between 16-23 April 2018 in a sample of 600 respondents.

Source: Ekathmerini; Poll conducted by: Public Issue

U.S.-Greece Relations

The United States appointed its first Consul to Greece in 1837, following Greece’s independence from the Ottoman Empire, and established diplomatic relations with Greece in 1868. After World War II, the United States contributed hundreds of millions of dollars to rebuild Greece’s buildings, agriculture, and industry as part of the Marshall Plan. Today, an estimated three million Americans resident in the United States claim Greek descent. This large, well-organized community cultivates close political and cultural ties with Greece.

Greece is an important partner of the United States on many policy priorities. As a leader in the region, Greece has been an ally to the U.S. in promoting Balkan stability and economic development, supporting Turkey’s bid for accession to the European Union, and supporting the diversification of Europe’s energy supplies. Greece’s geostrategic position also makes it an important ally in engagement and dialogue with the Muslim world. Greece is the primary entry point into the Schengen visa area for migrants from the Middle East, North and Sub-Saharan Africa, and Southwest Asia.

Greece occupies a strategic location in the Eastern Mediterranean on the southern flank of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). The U.S.-Greece mutual defense cooperation agreement provides for the operation by the United States of a naval support facility at the deep-water port and airfield at Souda Bay in Crete. Greece contributes to NATO operations in Afghanistan and Kosovo, as well as to counterterrorism and counter-piracy maritime efforts.

U.S. Assistance to Greece

U.S. assistance fosters strong bilateral military-to-military relations and contributes toward the interoperability of Greek forces within NATO.

Bilateral Economic Relations

Greece is a member of the European Union and the Eurozone. The United States has expressed consistent strong support for Greece’s ongoing effort to restore fiscal stability, implement structural reforms, recover competitiveness and restart growth. There are no significant non-tariff barriers to U.S. exports. The top U.S. exports to Greece are defense articles, although. U.S. business activity is expected to grow in the tourism development, medical, construction, food processing, specialty agriculture and packaging and franchising sectors. U.S. companies are interested and involved in Greece's ambitious but slow-moving privatization efforts. Further deregulation of Greece's energy sector and the country's central location as a transportation hub for Europe may offer additional opportunities in electricity, gas, refinery, and related sectors. Greece participates in the Visa Waiver Program, which allows nationals of participating countries to travel to the United States for certain business or tourism purposes for stays of 90 days or less without obtaining a visa.

Greece's Membership in International Organizations

Greece and the United States belong to a number of the same international organizations, including the United Nations, North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council, Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, International Monetary Fund, World Bank, and World Trade Organization. Greece also is a permanent observer to the Organization of American States.

Source: U.S. Department of State

Two Greek troops are being held by the Turkish army since Thursday morning for accidentally crossing the Greek-Turkish border on Evros.

​The Hellenic Army General Staff (HAGS) announced on Friday that the two Greek troops were patrolling the border at a forest area at Kastanies, near Evros river, amid stormy conditions. They accidentally stepped into Turkish territory and were detained by the Turkish army.

​The statement noted that the two Greeks, an officer and a soldier, were forwarded to the Turkish city of Edirne for questioning. They are said to be healthy and well.

HAGS stated that the routine procedure for their return to Greece is already underway.

Observers note that usually such an incident would end within minutes, as such an accidental crossing of the border is quite common. However the two Greek troops were forwarded inland for further examination, given also that one of them is a second lieutenant.

Article: Ekathimerini; Video: Proto Thema

During the days when Turkey still hoped to join the European Union, its people were becoming willing to question their ethnic and religious ancestry. Since then, the country has reverted to a time when people were disgraced and denigrated, with the government’s blessings, as “crypto-Armenians."

Hrant Dink was the editor of the Armenian-language newspaper Agos in 2004 when he wrote that
 Sabiha Gokcen, the first female military pilot of the Turkish Republic, was of Armenian parentage. Because of this and other articles he penned, Dink found himself the subject of investigation by the Justice Ministry. He was assassinated in 2007 for reasons thought to be related to his strong support for Armenian causes.

Dink's story illustrates why population registers in Turkey were kept secret until recently. The topic has always been a sensitive issue for the state. The confidentiality of data that identifies people's lineage was considered a national security issue.

There were two main reasons for all this secrecy: to conceal that scores of Armenians, Syriacs, Greeks and Jews had converted to Islam, and to avoid any debate about "Turkishness.” Its definition, “anyone who is attached to the Turkish state as a citizen," was enshrined in the constitution as part of the philosophy of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the founding father of the Turkish Republic and its first president.

For a long time, the official policy was that Turks formed a cohesive ethnic identity in Turkey. But less than two weeks ago, on Feb. 8, population registers were officially opened to the public via an online
genealogy database. The system crashed quickly under the demand. Some people who had always boasted of their "pure" Turkish ancestry were shocked to learn they actually had other ethnic and religious roots.

On the darker side, comments such as “Crypto-Armenians, Greek and Jews in the country will now be exposed” and “Traitors will finally learn their lineage” became commonplace on social media.

Genealogy has always been a popular topic of conversation in Turkish society, but also a tool of social
and political division. Families often acknowledged in private that their lineage was Armenian or that a long-dead relative was a convert to Islam, but those conversations were kept secret. Being a convert in Turkey carried a stigma that could not be erased.

Ethnic Armenian columnist Hayko Bagdat told Al-Monitor, “During the 1915 genocide, along with mass conversions, there were also thousands of children in exile. Those who could reach foreign missionaries were spirited abroad. Some were grabbed by roaming gangs during their escape and made into sex slaves and laborers. The society is not yet ready to deal with this reality. Imagine that a man who had served as the director of religious affairs of this country [Lutfi Dogan] was the brother of someone who was the Armenian patriarch [Sinozk Kalustyan].”

He went on, “Kalustyan, who returned to Turkey from Beirut in 1961, was remembered as a saint in the Turkish Armenian Patriarchate and as someone who had served in the most difficult times after 1915. During the genocide, his mother sent the children away and converted to Islam. Later she married [a man called] Dogan, who was of high social standing, and had two girls and a boy. The boy was Lutfi Dogan. When the mother, who was then with the Nationalist Action Party branch in Malatya province, died, his uncle came in priest garb from Beirut to attend the funeral. Nobody could say anything.”

The mindset of society was starkly clear when President Recep Tayyip Erdogan once complained, “We are accused of being Jews, Armenians or Greeks.”

There were those who feared that data obtained from population registers could be used to stigmatize the famous and used for political lynching campaigns. After the database went down, they spoke out against its restoration. One of them was Tayfun Atay, a columnist for Turkey’s daily Cumhuriyet.

“I was advised in a friendly manner not to admit that I am a Georgian. That was the lightest form of pressure. What about those who risk learning they are of Armenian ancestry or a convert? Just think: You think you are a red-blooded Turk but turn out to be a pure-blood Armenian. Imagine the societal repercussions,” he wrote Feb. 12.

As the debate raged, the system suddenly came back online Feb. 14.

Many Turks are questioning the timing of making this information available.

“If they had done this a few years ago when we were [becoming more tolerant], conspiracy theories would not have been as strong as today, when the state behaves as though we are in a struggle for existence. This is how Turkey reinvigorates the spirit of the Independence War” to inspire patriotism and pro-government thinking, journalist Serdar Korucu told Al-Monitor.

Those who oppose the system fear that a society already in a morass of racism will sink into it even further. Others, however, say that though reality might be shocking, couldn’t it be useful in eradicating racism?

“Yes, definitely. Everyone in Turkey is curious about their ancestry. That is a fact,” Korucu responded.
“Why is facing reality so hard?" He said of the Sabiha Gokcen story, "That turned the country upside down."

Korucu believes data confidentiality is essential to prevent population registers from being misused as instruments of political defamation, but warned, “The state organs already know everything about us."

In 2013, Agos reported that the government was secretly coding minorities in population registers: Greeks were 1, Armenians were 2 and Jews were 3. The covert classification of religious minorities was met with wide outrage.

"What's worse is these facts emerge when it is time for a young man for report to military conscription. In short, there are those who know us better than we do. So why not tell us about it?” Korucu asked.

“Population registers are dangerous. That is why Hrant Dink was murdered," the columnist Bagdat noted. "The director of the Genocide Museum in Yerevan told a delegation from Turkey [about] the three most-discussed issues by those who were able to escape. Armenians first tell us about the Muslims who helped them escape the genocide, then the Armenians who betrayed them and only then do they narrate their catastrophe. If we make public the names of Armenians who were forced to convert to Islam, their grandchildren will be in danger today.” 

He added, “This is how the situation is after 100 years: The Turkish state asked us to accept being Turks. Fine, let me say I am a Turk. Will I be given a public job? No. When I say, ‘No, I am an Armenian,’ I am treated as a terrorist. Nothing has changed. Opening of the population registers means nothing to me. How can we forget Yusuf Halacoglu, the director of the Historical Society of Turkey in 2007, who had bluntly threatened, ‘Don’t make me angry. I have a list of converts I can reveal down to their streets and homes.’ These words, by this man who later became a politician in the Nationalist Action Party, were a threat to Turkish politics.”

Is the information in the now publicly accessible registers complete?

Another ethnic Armenian, journalist Yervant Ozuzun, has doubts. ”We don’t know if anything changed.
We know ethnic origins were marked with different codes in the register. We as Armenians were code No. 2. Has this changed? I don’t think so."

Government officials aren't saying one way or the other.

Source: Al-Monitor

The Commission adopted on Tuesday a strategy for 'A credible enlargement perspective for and enhanced EU engagement with the Western Balkans'.

As President Juncker announced in his 2017 State of the Union address, the Commission adopted today a strategy for 'A credible enlargement perspective for and enhanced EU engagement with the Western Balkans', confirming the European future of the region as a geostrategic investment in a stable, strong and united Europe based on common values. It spells out the priorities and areas of joint reinforced cooperation, addressing the specific challenges the Western Balkans face, in particular the need for fundamental reforms and good neighbourly relations. A credible enlargement perspective requires sustained efforts and irreversible reforms. Progress along the European path is an objective and merit-based process which depends on the concrete results achieved by each individual country.

The European Commission announced six flagship initiatives - specific actions that the EU will take over the next years to support the transformation efforts of the Western Balkans in areas of mutual interest. These range from initiatives to strengthen the rule of law, reinforced cooperation on security and migration through joint investigating teams and the European Border and coast guard, expanding the EU Energy Union to the Western Balkans or lowering roaming charges and rolling out broadband in the region. The Strategy also underlines the need for the EU to be prepared to welcome new members once they have met the criteria.

The President of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker stated: ”Investing in the stability and prosperity of the Western Balkans means investing in the security and future of our Union. Although there will be no further enlargements under this mandate, today the European Commission is charting the European path ahead for the Western Balkans. With strong political will, real and sustained reforms, and definitive solutions to disputes with neighbours, the Western Balkans can move forward on their respective European paths. Whether this is achieved will depend on their objective merits. The European Commission will be rigorous but it will also be fair. I will travel to each of the countries of the Western Balkans at the end of this month with a clear message: keep reforming and we will keep supporting your European future."

High Representative/Vice-President Federica Mogherini commented: "The Western Balkans are part of Europe: we share the same history, the same geography, the same cultural heritage and the same opportunities and challenges today and in the future. We have a common interest in working more and more closely together to guarantee to our people economic and social development, and security. This strategy shows the path that we have ahead of us: for all our six partners to overcome once and for all the past, for all of us together to make the process of the Western Balkans towards the European Union irreversible and keep reuniting the Continent. This Strategy gives all of us a shared, clear, unequivocal, credible and concrete perspective for each and every one of our six partners' EU integration. The next months will be not only intense but also crucial to make sure that this historic and unique opportunity is seized.”

Commissioner for European Neighbourhood Policy and Enlargement Negotiations Johannes Hahn stressed: "Today we confirm that the door of our Union is open for the Western Balkans which is already an enclave surrounded by the EU, and that our offer is sincere. With the new approach, underpinned by concrete measures, we are strengthening the enlargement process which requires credible efforts and reforms in return in particular to strengthen the rule of law. We have to work for the benefit of the citizens."

Focus on convincing reforms and reconciliation

In order to meet the EU membership criteria and in their own interest, the Western Balkans need to implement comprehensive reforms in crucial areas. The rule of law, fundamental rights and governance must be strengthened significantly. Judicial reforms, the fight against corruption and organised crime, and public administration reform need to deliver real results and the functioning of democratic institutions need to be seriously enhanced. Economic reforms must be pursued with vigour so that structural weaknesses, low competitiveness and high unemployment rates are addressed.

All countries must unequivocally commit, in both word and deed, to overcome the legacy of the past, by achieving reconciliation and solving open issues, in particular border disputes, well before accession to the European Union.There needs to be a comprehensive, legally-binding normalisation agreement between Serbia and Kosovo so that they can advance on their respective European paths.

Six flagship initiatives to support the transformation of the Western Balkans

The EU is already the most important donor and investor in the region as well as political partner of the Western Balkans. The EU is also the Western Balkans' largest trading partner with an annual total trade volume of €43 billion (2016). Today, the European Commission set out Six flagship initiatives that will further strengthen our cooperation in a number of areas and support the transformation process in the Western Balkans. These flagship initiatives target specific areas of common interest: rule of law, security and migration, socio-economic development, transport and energy connectivity, digital agenda, reconciliation and good neighbourly relations. Concrete actions in these areas are foreseen between 2018 and 2020.

To deliver on the Western Balkans Strategy and support a seamless transition to membership, adequate funding is indispensable. The European Commission proposes to gradually increase funding under the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA) until 2020 in so far as reallocations within the existing envelope allow. In 2018 alone, €1.07 billion of pre-accession assistance for the Western Balkans is already foreseen, on top of almost €9 billion from the 2007-2017 period.

Next steps on the EU path

The EU's enlargement policy must be part and parcel of the larger strategy to strengthen the Union by 2025 set out by President Juncker in his State of the Union speech of September 2017 and his Roadmap for a More United, Stronger and more Democratic Union. While the EU could become larger than 27 Members, the dynamics of moving forward on their respective EU paths for all Western Balkans is based on their own merits and at their own speed depending on the concrete results achieved. The Strategy explains the steps that need to be taken by Montenegro and Serbia to complete the accession process in a 2025 perspective; while others could catch up, Montenegro and Serbia are the only two countries with which accession talks are already under way. This perspective will ultimately depend on strong political will, the delivery of real and sustained reforms, and definitive solutions to disputes with neighbours.

All Western Balkan countries have the chance to move forward on their respective European paths. The Commission assesses all the countries in a fair and objective manner on the basis of their own merits and at the speed at which they achieve progress. Albania and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia are making significant progress on their European path and the Commission is ready to prepare recommendations to open accession negotiations, on the basis of fulfilled conditions. The Commission will start preparing an Opinion on Bosnia and Herzegovina's membership application following receipt of comprehensive and complete answers to its Questionnaire. With sustained effort and engagement, Bosnia and Herzegovina could become a candidate for accession. Kosovo has an opportunity for sustainable progress through implementation of the Stabilisation and Association Agreement and to advance on its European path once objective circumstances allow.

Political commitment from the regions' leaders

Much work lies ahead for the countries concerned to be in a position to meet the conditions and criteria for EU membership. The Strategy highlights that leaders in the region must leave no doubt as to their strategic orientation and commitment. It is them that ultimately must assume responsibility for making this historical opportunity a reality.

Preparing the EU to welcome new members

The EU itself needs to be ready for new members of the family – once they have met the conditions – including from an institutional and financial perspective. The Union must be stronger, more solid and more efficient before it can be bigger. To ensure effective decision-making, we need to make use of qualified majority voting in the Council in the policy areas where this is already foreseen. In addition, the European Commission will present possibilities to further enhance the use of qualified majority voting in the third quarter of 2018 – as announced by President Juncker in his 2017 State of the Union address.

A more effective system is also needed to tackle systemic threats to or breaches of the rule of law in any EU Member State with a Commission initiative to be expected in October 2018.

Finally, special arrangements must be put in place to ensure that future Member States are not in a position to block the accession of other Western Balkans candidates.

Source: European Commission

WASHINGTON, DC – Congresswoman Carolyn B. Maloney (NY-12), co-chair and co-founder of the Congressional Caucus on Hellenic Issues, urged Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to affirm the United States’ support of the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne following President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s suggestion that it should be renegotiated.

In her letter to the Secretary, Congresswoman Maloney asserts that “the United States should make clear that the territorial terms of the Treaty are non-negotiable and that it will not accept Turkish instigation of border disputes in an area that has been peaceful for nearly 100 years.”

She also states, “In my view, opening a border dispute over territories settled nearly 100 years ago is a provocative and dangerous suggestion, and I hope that the United States will do everything in its power to discourage Turkey from pursuing this line of diplomacy.”

Full text of the letter can be found below and a PDF here.

Dear Secretary Tillerson,

As co-Chair of the Congressional Caucus on Hellenic Issues, I was concerned by news reports that indicate that, during a recent visit to Greece, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan suggested that it would be appropriate to reopen discussions of border issues settled in the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne.  I understand that President Erdogan stated in an interview with the Greek daily Kathimerini and reiterated at a press conference with the Greek president that there should be an ‘update’ to the Lausanne Treaty.  He also reportedly expressed his view that the treaty was unfair because it assigned islands to Greece that are situated close to Turkey’s shores. In my view, opening a border dispute over territories settled nearly 100 years ago is a provocative and dangerous suggestion, and I hope that the United States will do everything in its power to discourage Turkey from pursuing this line of diplomacy.

I represent a large community of Greek-Americans who are deeply unsettled by the possibility that Turkey may claim land that has been recognized as Greek for nearly a century.  As you know, Greece first demanded its independence from Turkey starting on March 25, 1821 after 400 years of Ottoman rule.  While many parts of Greece won independence in 1829, border disputes continued until after World War I. The Treaty of Lausanne, considered the final treaty concluding World War I, established the final borders of Turkey after the fall of the Ottoman Empire and designated the Dodecanese Islands to Greece. Turkey is now insinuating that the Treaty should be reopened and perhaps that some of those islands should be allocated to Turkey. I believe the United States should make clear that the territorial terms of the Treaty are non-negotiable and that it will not accept Turkish instigation of border disputes in an area that has been peaceful for nearly 100 years.

​Thank you for your attention to this important matter. I look forward to hearing your views on this issue.

How can we strengthen ties between Greece and its diaspora, this growing (also as a result of the financial crisis) community that includes politicians, businesspeople, academics, scientists and artists? How can the Greeks who live abroad take a step beyond cost-free, wishful rhetoric and help to tangibly change the situation back home?

The Greek Diaspora Project, launched by South East European Studies at Oxford (SEESOX), a part of the European Studies Center at St Antony’s College, marks a remarkable effort in this direction. The aim of the project is to provide a thorough map of the Greek diaspora around the world and to explore its relationship with the crisis-wracked metropolis.

Kathimerini spoke with the project’s principal investigator, Othon Anastasakis, and Antonis Kamaras, who is coordinator in Greece, on the sidelines of the recent Reload Greece conference in London about progress achieved so far as well as plans for the future. The team has already published online a multimedia map of the Greek diaspora which was produced by SEESOX and the Greek Foreign Ministry. In June next year, Oxford will host the international conference “Homeland-Diaspora Relations in Flux: Greece in Crisis and Greeks Abroad.” Organizers are currently calling for papers on politics, economics and charity. The best papers will be published in a collective volume after the conference.

​Meanwhile, Anastasakis told Kathimerini, “we will carry out a survey about Greeks living in Britain – why they left, to what extent they have integrated into British society, under what circumstances they would move back to Greece… We want to carry out an in-depth study based on an as representative sample as possible.” Researchers expect to have wrapped up the study by the end of the year.

The debate on the Greek diaspora, Kamaras said, “was stagnant, it did not have the comparative dimension, it was not internationalized enough.” The aim of the project, he said, is to show how Greece is benefiting from its relationship with the diaspora, compared to other countries, like India or Israel, which also have significant communities abroad.

Many people, especially those in the field of tech start-ups, believe that Greece will come to look a bit like Israel in terms of the metropolis-diaspora ties. However, the Indian precedent may be closer to Greek standards. The mass emigration of Indians in the early decades following independence, Kamaras said, was due to the failures of the Indian economic model. Today India is still dogged by serious structural problems. However, Kamaras says, after the reforms introduced in the 1990s, the foundations were laid for the mass repatriation of Indians.

Researchers also focus on the attitudes of the homeland – on a state as well as social level – toward the diaspora. Anastasakis stresses the exclusion of expats from elections held in Greece. Exclusion, Kamaras says, feels even more acute in the years of the crisis “as these people were forced to flee because of the failures of a system that now refuses them the right to take part [in elections].”

“Greece has turned its back on the diaspora,” said the former aide of Yiannis Boutaris. Speaking about the issue of charity, for example, he said that “the requirements for making a donation are much stricter than, for example, in the case of EU funding. We do not want to fulfill requirements such as transparency, good governance and so on. We do not want to yield control,” he said.

Source: Ekathimerini

Athens said on Tuesday that it is closely monitoring events in Albania as TV footage in the neighboring country showed some 3,000 police arriving in Himara in the southwest of the country to oversee the demolition of several homes belonging to members of the ethnic Greek minority.

The homes are slated for demolition as part of an urban regeneration plan that critics have denounced as unconstitutional while Greece has warned it could hurt Tirana’s European Union aspirations.

​Greek government spokesman Dimitris Tzanakopoulos said Athens has its eye on developments there and is undertaking the necessary initiatives to safeguard the rights of the Greek minority in the Albanian seaside resort.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Greece released a statement and is "concerned with the fact that the Albanian government continues to promote measures for the demolition of property belonging to members of the Greek National Minority, within the framework of its policy to uproot the historical presence of Hellenism in the region of Himara. The decision of the Albanian authorities confirms that the recently passed law on minorities is a step backwards for the main minority in Albania. There are many who interpret it as an act aimed at distracting Albanian public opinion from the major political issue that has arisen with drug trafficking. We hope this is not the case." ​

Sources: Ekathimerini, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Hellenic Republic | Photo source: Himara News

The Foreign Minister of the 'Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM)' Nikola Dimitrov said his country will do everything to resolve the name dispute with Greece during the two-day Second Ministerial Meeting of Greece, Albania, Bulgaria and FYROM held in Thessaloniki on Thursday.

​"Today I want to stay on 'the larger picture'. In order to resolve the issue of the name – and we will naturally do the best we can to resolve it – it’s important to create a positive framework and climb out of the grooves of history, since we cannot change our history, but we can influence our future, and this future will be both common and European. It is important to invest in this direction. If there is a national interest common to all countries, including ours, it is how to do the best for our citizens’ future. We are on the right path,’’ said Nikola Dimitrov. In earlier comments to the press on the quadrilateral meetings in Thessaloniki, the foreign minister described them as “a very interesting initiative” and “a process from which we are learning how to be closer friends and future allies."

He added that "the atmosphere encouraged me. I believe that we are growing up and maturing as an area. There is still a lot to be done, but we are on the right path."

In his meeting with Greece’s Foreign Minister Nikos Kotzias, he said, "we accepted that there is an issue of the name that divides the two countries (…) and in order to assist in the resolution of this issue, we focused on those areas in which we could achieve progress, and this, in turn, will contribute to resolving the issue that divides us."

Among other things, Dimitrov said, the meeting also focused on "how we may promote and strengthen the positive agenda between the two countries" and included cooperation at the level of civil society (NGOs), the strengthening of cooperation between universities of the two countries, and the organising a business forum.

The two-day Second Ministerial Meeting was an initiative of Greece under the auspices of the Foreign Minister Nikos Kotzias and included foreign ministers from the four states, as well as officials from their respective energy ministries.

The Foreign Minister of Greece, Nikos Kotzias, commenced the 2nd Quadrilateral Ministerial Meeting as follows:

Good morning. We now continue with the second meeting of the four countries of the South as I call it, of southeastern Europe. 

Yesterday we had a very interesting discussion with the Ministers of Foreign Affairs and the other Ministers on the situation in the region, on the future of the region, both as regards the European prospects of the area, and as regards our collaboration. We spoke about the preparation of the next meeting and we exchanged views on the topics that we will be discussing during lunch. 

This morning we have two sessions. The first concerns matters of security; citizens' security and cross border collaboration, as well as new issues, such as fire fighting and fire safety, because in the summer we witnessed the need for collaboration between our countries, in order to combat large (forest) fires. As you are aware, fires know no borders. They are globalised phenomena that exceed borders, which require collaboration in firefighting efforts. 

In the third session we will be discussing issues related to energy. These are issues of great significance to us all. Our region is very central for future energy pipelines. 

In general, I would like to thank all the Ministers from all four countries for coming here, for attending this meeting. We all agreed that this collaboration is beneficial to everyone. These are meetings where we share with great sincerity our thoughts for the future, and discuss issues that need to be resolved and clarified. And this is also an element of our overall policy, namely the building of great schemes of cooperation throughout the region, both in Southeastern Europe and in the Mediterranean, particularly in the Eastern Mediterranean.

I take this opportunity to remind you that on the evening of the 29th of October, and mainly on the 30th, we will be holding the 2nd International Meeting for the Protection of Religious and Cultural Communities in the Middle East, who are the great victims of the wars taking place there. And my colleagues from the other three countries are welcome to attend that meeting also. They have an open invitation. And they have also been invited to the third Rhodes Conference on Security and Stability, to take place in the last week of June of 2018. This demonstrates that our cooperation is not only taking place on a bilateral or a European level, but is multifaceted, covering many aspects of multilateral diplomacy.

Thank you, once again, for attending. Welcome to you all. Thanks to all my colleagues for their cooperation and to all the delegations here. And a good morning to the press.

Source: Greek City Times; Ministry of Foreign Affairs

NEW YORK - Greek Foreign Minister Nikos Kotzias on Tuesday strongly decried moves to delegitimize the State of Israel and called comparison of Israel to Nazism as “an ex post attempt to acquit those who committed the crime of the Holocaust”.  Kotzias was speaking at a reception in his honor hosted by World Jewish Congress President Ronald S. Lauder on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in New York. ​

In a warm welcome of Kotzias, Lauder thanked the minister for his strong support of Israel and personal fight against anti-Semitism in Greece. “Minister Kotzias represents the amazing changes in the improved relations between Israel and Greece over the past two years,” Lauder said.

“As a member of UNESCO’s Executive Board, Greece voted against that outrageous decision that denied any Jewish connection to Jerusalem. That’s like saying the Acropolis isn’t Greek,” Lauder added. “The Greek government has strongly opposed calls for Israel’s destruction, the denial of the Holocaust and all forms of anti-Semitism.  In Greece, Foreign Minister Kotzias has personally fought against the Golden Dawn Party and its anti-Semitic views. He has been a champion of the Greek Jewish community.”

Kotzias spoke strongly against the “hypocrisy and double speak” of Western criticism of Israel. “Each of us needs to respond to a fundamental question: do the Jews have a right to live in a secure, democratic state? The answer is simple, and one word: Yes, they do,” Kotzias said. “Moreover, the rest of us have the obligation to defend this right.”

“This historical and fundamental right does not mean that the State of Israel has the right, even for a second, to ignore the rights of others. But it does not mean that even when the state of Israel makes mistakes, as all of the democratic states in the world do, criticism should take the form of polemic. It cannot be an excuse for denying the state of Israel the right to exist. Or, in the name of this criticism, for one to go so far as to deny the uniqueness of the Holocaust,” Kotzias said.

“When I hear people say that ‘the Jews are doing what was done to them’, when I hear them equate Israel with the Nazi crimes, I do not hear ‘normal’ criticism. What I hear is an ex post attempt to acquit those who committed the crime of the Holocaust,” he added.

Kotzias also spoke of his government’s commitment to combat anti-Semitism and the strong relationship between Israel and Greece. 

​He also urged Israel to “resolve any problems it has in its neighborhood, and not to put it off to a foggy tomorrow…   because the historical trend is now for Israel's powerful friends to be showing signs of decline,” adding that Western countries must stop unjustly condemning Israel and contribute to helping reach a solution to the Middle East conflict. “If they want Israel to promote the two-state solution in the Middle East - the right solution, in my opinion - then they should decide to no longer be part of the protest and instead be part of the solution.”

Source: World Jewish Congress

Situated close to what continues to be an extremely turbulent region such as the Middle East and parts of North Africa, Greece is a pillar of stability, its Foreign Minister stressed today at the United Nations General Assembly, also noting that the country remains committed to the protection of human rights of migrants.

“Our main objective is to develop a positive, manifold agenda of cooperation in international affairs, focusing on synergies and joint activities, especially through culture as one of the main drivers of soft power in international relations, and other areas of cooperation, such as trade, education and research,” said Minister for Foreign Affairs Nikos Kotzias during the annual high-level debate.

He explained that enhancing regional cooperation in the Balkans is the core thinking behind another Greek initiative – dialogue among Greece, Albania, Bulgaria and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia – launched in April 2016.

With a view to responding to the refugee crisis effectively and in line with European democratic values and principles, the four countries will focus, during their upcoming meeting in October, on identifying ways for better interaction on issues such as return operations, exchange of information, tackling smuggling, human trafficking, terrorism, organized crime and energy networks, he added.

Greece has reaffirmed its commitment to ensuring full and effective implementation of the New York Declaration and its annexes adopted last year to address the large movements of migrants.

In parallel, Greece will remain committed to work in the context of the Global Compact for Migration that is to be concluded by 2018, Mr. Kotzias said.

The Greek Foreign Minister's full speech at the United Nations was as follows:​

Mr President,
Mr Secretary General,
Dear Colleagues,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

Mr President,

I would like first of all to wish every success to the new Secretary General Mr. Guterres and to reaffirm our full support to his work.

Allow me also to congratulate you on both your election to the office of President of this 72nd General Assembly and the choice of this year's main topic.

Our world is changing rapidly today. We are going through the second machine era. An era when machines no longer constitute the extension of physical strength, but rather produce spiritual wealth and knowledge. Machines that are faster and smaller, yet have an immense impact on our daily lives. On the way we work and produce, on the way we communicate and interact. This trend can be described as the fourth industrial revolution.

This new era brings with it innovations and advantages, but also challenges, especially for states. Challenges that they need to face effectively if they are to survive in today's complex international reality.

States have to show resilience and meet the needs of their people for more human rights, communication, growth and innovation.

They have to evolve. But their evolution is certainly linked to the evolution of the Organization itself. Will the UN be able to follow these developments and adapt to the new emerging reality?

In the light of this double adaptation, this time is extremely critical and requires the promotion of reforms that will make the UN capable of remaining relevant in an ever changing world, one that is very different from the one that existed in 1945.

If the UN is to keep its capacity to uphold its mandate, it also needs to evolve and meet the challenges before us.

As insecurity and instability still abound in large parts of our world, Greece is formulating a multidimensional foreign policy with a view to actively contributing to peace through putting forward concrete ideas at international fora and regional organizations, stability through political initiatives.

More specifically, we favor the prospect of broadening the agenda of the EU-UN institutionalized dialogue and cooperation to an extensive array of issues of global concern.

As a vision, we all want to see a world free of Weapons of Mass Destruction. In this framework, we strongly condemn this latest test and North Korea's ongoing illegal nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programmes which seriously endanger regional and international peace and security.

Contemplating developments in disarmament and non-proliferation over the past year, I believe that it is imperative, now more than ever, to seek avenues of dialogue with the participation of nuclear states. This could be the vehicle to bridge the gap between the step-by-step approach towards nuclear disarmament and the immediate non-verifiable total ban.

Mr President,

Situated close to what continues to be an extremely turbulent region like the Middle East and parts of North Africa, Greece is a pillar of stability.

In this context, we have recently undertaken many initiatives, such as the Rhodes Conference for Security and Stability and the Athens Conference on Religious and Cultural Pluralism and Peaceful Co-existence in the Middle East, as well as the newly established Ancient Civilizations Forum (AC Forum), which was held the last time only yesterday, here in New York.

The Rhodes Conference focuses on a positive agenda of cooperation between 20 European and Arab countries of the Eastern Mediterranean, with the aim of fostering stability and security in the region.

I would also like to mention that alongside Cyprus, in the framework of promoting peace and stability in the region of the Eastern Mediterranean, we have established a number of trilateral forms of cooperation which include Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon and Palestine.

Our main objective is to develop a positive, manifold agenda of cooperation in international affairs, focusing on synergies and joint activities, especially through culture as one of the main drivers of soft power in international relations, and other areas of cooperation, such as trade, education and research.

Enhancing regional cooperation in the Balkans is the core thinking behind another Greek initiative, namely that of Quadrilateral meetings between Ministers of Greece, Albania, Bulgaria and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, launched in Thessaloniki in April 2016.

The four countries, with a view to responding to the refugee crisis effectively and in line with European democratic values and principles, will focus, during their upcoming meeting in October, on identifying ways for better interaction on issues such as return operations, exchange of information, tackling smuggling, human trafficking, terrorism, organized crime and energy networks.

Mr President,

The Syrian war has taken a great toll in human lives, and millions have been displaced. The cessation of hostilities is sine qua non for progress of political negotiations. Greece sees no alternative other than a political solution to this crisis. We fully support an inclusive political dialogue in Geneva under UN auspices.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict remains a constant threat to regional stability and security. The current situation on the ground is not sustainable. We support the two-State solution, meaning the creation of a sovereign and independent State of Palestine living in peace and security alongside the State of Israel while responding to Israel's longstanding quest for security.

On Libya, Greece attaches particular importance to the international efforts to stabilize the country, Greece strongly believes that there is no military solution to the Libyan crisis. We support all efforts towards peace and security.

Mr President,

Terrorism remains one of the major global challenges we are faced with. The significant progress witnessed recently in the fight against DAESH demands special mention.

Strengthening international cooperation among all relevant actors and improving information exchange constitute key elements in tackling the movement of foreign fighters, while at the same time it is essential to address the root causes of violent extremism.

Greece participates actively in the common anti-terrorism fight.

In the context of our efforts to prevent terrorists from exploiting any resources for their actions, we particularly support international efforts aiming at promoting a concerted international action against illegal trade of antiquities and cultural artifacts.

Mr. President,

We consistently pursue friendly relations and enhanced cooperation with all our neighboring states as a means of promoting stability and prosperity for all.

In the Western Balkans, Greece remains a firm supporter of the EU Enlargement Policy.

​The rise of nationalistic rhetoric in the region raises grave concerns. We wish to underline that actions and statements that undermine good neighborly relations should be avoided by all means.

Greece maintains a friendly approach to the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.

The Greek initiative for designing and implementing the bilateral Confidence Building Measures has strengthened our relations, facilitating efforts for addressing more sensitive matters, such as the pending issue of the name of our neighboring country.

In this respect, Greece will continue to work systematically to reach a mutually acceptable solution to the name issue. Our position is clear: a mutually accepted name, erga omnes.

Accordingly, progress in Greek-Turkish relations can only be built upon the full respect of international law, including the International Law of the Sea. We have repeatedly pointed out that good neighborly relations cannot be served by persistent challenging of Greece's sovereignty and sovereign rights by a neighbor.

Regarding the Cyprus Issue, our objective is summed up in a concept that the UN Secretary General adopted during the International Conference on Cyprus: to make Cyprus a "normal state". A sovereign and independent state, free of foreign occupation troops, external guarantees and intervention "rights".

The International Conference on Cyprus held in Switzerland this year, was unfortunately closed last July, without producing agreement, because the Turkish and Turkish Cypriot sides were the only parties in the Conference who did not share the goal of the "normal state" concept.

We are prepared to continue discussing the key international issue of Security and Guarantees, whenever Turkey demonstrates a clear willingness to resume negotiations on the basis of UN Security Council Resolutions, as well as within the framework of parameters set down by the UN Secretary General in Crans Montana.

Mr President,

In the area of civil and political rights, we actively support the fight against racism and any other forms of discrimination including those based on religious, gender, sexual and any other grounds. In this vein, Greece, prioritizing the safety of journalists and media workers, especially in conflict areas, is going to submit the relevant thematic resolution during the current Third Committee session of the UN General Assembly.

Furthermore, my Country in the framework of Human Rights Council leads an initiative by successfully submitting a resolution on "Promoting Human Rights through sport and the Olympic Ideal".

We remain committed to the protection of human rights in all policies addressing large movements of migrants, with particular attention paid to the specific needs of migrants in vulnerable situations, including children.

We also believe that setting this framework right is more than ever important in order to grant protection to those in need of it, to fight against human trafficking and migrant smuggling and to return people not entitled to international protection, while at the same time tackling the root causes of migration through effective cooperation with countries of origin and transit. Finally, social and economic inclusion of legal migrants is equally important and deserves our fullest attention.

Greece has reaffirmed its commitment to ensuring full and effective implementation of the Political Declaration of New York and its annexes, which were adopted during the High Level Meeting on the margins of the 71st UN General Assembly, and, in parallel, it has stressed its commitment to work in the context of the Global Compact for Migration that is to be concluded by 2018.

Mr President,

I wish to assure you that, as a founding member of this Organization, Greece will lend it its unfailing support as the UN tries to rise up to the task of creating a more peaceful and prosperous future with justice and solidarity for all and especially for the next generations.

Thank you.

Source: United Nations

Greek Foreign Minister Nikos Kotzias convened a meeting of the Ancient Civilizations Forum; also known as GC-10, on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York.

The meeting was a follow-up to the inaugural gathering in April that led to the Athens Declaration for the establishment of the forum.

The Forum seeks to promote cooperation and exchange among countries and global institutions, to protect the cultural heritage of ancient civilizations.

​Culture and civilization are a form of “smart power in the modern world”, said Nikos Kotzias.

The forum was an initiative of Nikos Kotzias with support from his Chinese counterpart Mr. Wang Yi. Ministers, government representatives and scholars from Greece, China, India, Iraq, Iran, Egypt, Italy, Mexico, Peru and Bolivia, attended the forum.

Earlier in the year at the Athens meeting, Greek PM Alexis Tsipras stressed the common responsibility to make use of our past for the benefit of the new generations as well as the importance of international co-operation against those who want to sink humanity into hatred.

​Source: Greek Reporter

The President of the Jewish Community of Karditsa Maki Kapeta, unveiled a monument two weeks ago on Sunday, June 18, 2017 at the village of Amarantos in Karditsa in honour of the residents who saved their Jewish brothers and sisters from Nazi extermination during World War II.

Kapeta thanked the villagers for protecting them during the Nazi Occupation expressing “eternal gratitude and recognition”.

Addressing a crowd of more than 500 attendees, Maki Kapeta said ‘’those residents who are still living and those of you who have passed, have a special place in our hearts, of eternal gratitude. I see around me my family, children, grandchildren, relatives and on behalf of all, I have to thank you with all my heart because we exist thanks to you.”

The residents of Amarantos, called Mastroyianni in the ’40s, offered a safe haven and hospitality to the 62 Greek-Jews of Karditsa and another 20 from Thessaloniki, Volos and Trikala from the autumn of 1943 until the summer of 1944, sharing their scarce food supplies they had in their homes.

Victor Venouziou, a retired civil engineer from Karditsa who lives in Thessaloniki, and a life-long honourary member of the Jewish Community of Thessaloniki, is one of the ten living survivors who were hidden by locals in a house in Amarantos and the one who paid for the creation of the monument.

He thanked the residents of Amarantos and the municipality of Karditsa. “I would like to say it loud, a big ‘well done’ to the Mastroyiannites [and] to the organisations EAM-ELAS a ‘thank you’; they were the ones who saved us. The support of EAM was crucial,” he said.

Visibly moved, the representative of the Central Jewish Board, Solomon Parente, said one of the local families saved the parents and the siblings of his mother. “My uncle, Danny Ezra, is here today with us. He came from Israel where he lives to walk again in the alleys of this beautiful mountain village which back then, amid the uncertainty of the Occupation, offered him the most valuable and elusive gift: safety,” he said.

Source: Greek City Times

The Greek Foreign Ministry condemned the provocatively irresponsible behaviour of the Albanian government, saying it will not tolerate "behaviours that are inconsistent with the European spirit of peaceful coexistence and co-operation, and are grossly violating the fundamental principle of good neighbourly relations, one of the basic conditions for Tirana’s European course".

In particular, according to the announcement, the conviction concerns the placement of stones in the renovated central Tirana Square, which originate from different regions in the Balkans, including the Greek area of ​​Filiates. The name of their area of origin has been marked on each stone and the work as a whole symbolises the "unity of the Albanian lands".

An "obvious act by the state that cultivates and conceals irredentism", stressed the Foreign Ministry in its announcement, pointing out that it is "another challenge on behalf of the Albanian government, which openly undermines good neighbourly relations" since " it supports the central notion of irredentist trends towards Albania’s neighbouring countries as the names of regions from various Balkan states are explicitly mentioned. "

The Foreign Ministry, has “undergone and is performing all necessary actions, by informing friends, partners and international organizations", and notes that “due to respect for the electoral process in the neighbouring country it has not made any public announcements, until today, that could be misinterpreted and distorted as interference in the pre-election process. "

This, it notes, "does not mean that we will tolerate behaviours that are inconsistent with the European spirit of peaceful coexistence" and concludes:

"Unfortunately, even today, dangerous and outdated attitudes of the past century undermine the progress and prosperity of the region and create a barrier to Albania's European future."

​Source: IBNA

Yannis Vasilis Yaylalı, an ethnic Greek peace activist born in Samsun, was recently arrested by Turkish police in the Kurdish city of Şırnak, where he had been living since 2012.

Meral Geylani, his partner and fellow activist, told the Armenian Weekly that four lawsuits have been filed against Yaylalı. Three of them are for “discouraging the public from military service” and one is for “publicly disrespecting Mustafa Kemal Ataturk” through his articles and social media posts about the 1914-1923 massacre of Pontian (Pontic) Greeks by Turkey.

“On April 22, the day he posted his article about the commemoration of the Pontian Greek Genocide, he was arrested by police. He was first jailed in Şırnak and then was placed in a prison in the city of Elazığ. His first trial will be held on July 18,” Geylani said.

Yannis, who was born Ibrahim Yaylalı, is a former Turkish nationalist who was proud of his enmity to Kurds, not to mention to other indigenous peoples of Asia Minor.

In 1994, he voluntarily joined the Turkish military as a commando to fight against the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) in Şırnak and fell captive to the PKK during a clash. If he had died, he would have been declared a “martyr” by the Turkish government. But after he was injured and taken a captive by the PKK, his family sought help from Turkish authorities. Instead, they were told that they were Greek and were threatened. His whole life changed with this new discovery.

In a 2016 interview with the news website Siyasi Haber last year, Yannis introduced himself as follows: “I am Yannis Vasilis. Of course, I have not always been Yannis Vasilis Yaylalı. I was İbrahim Yaylalı before enrolling in the Turkish military. I did not know anything about my Greek [heritage] back then and I engaged in Turkish racism. But of course, this stemmed from where I lived and the education I had received.”

Yannis then learned that his great-grandfather was murdered during the Pontian Greek Genocide and that Yannis’s grandfather was given to a Turkish family and raised as a Muslim Turk. In a 2014 interview with the news website Demokrat Haber, he said, “If they had told me 30 years ago that I was a Greek, I would have sworn at them. In the Bafra town of Samsun where I am from, Kurds are made to do the heaviest and the worst work and there is so much racism in us. We beat up Kurdish youths many times.”

Military Service and Captivity Under the PKK

But his political transformation began during his military service in 1994 when he witnessed how Turkish soldiers persecuted Kurdish villagers in Şırnak. “When we went there, the villages had already been forcibly emptied by the Turkish military. It was the period that the Kurdish villages were raided and burned down by Turkish soldiers the most. The state was applying pressure on the villages to make them accept its power. We saw these things when we went there,” he explained.

He also witnessed outright barbarism of the Turkish soldiers. “I saw them [Turkish soldiers] destroying a dead guerrilla to pieces. When I saw that, I vomited. Then the specialist sergeant said to me: ‘Are you a man? Are you Turkish? Why did you throw up?’ Guerrillas would never end up alive unless they confessed,” he said.

Yannis also described an incident of village burning in the mountain of Gabar, which he saw firsthand. “First military teams raided homes and started beating up people and destroying their properties. Then they set homes ablaze.”

In September 1994, during a clash with the PKK, he was injured and passed out due to heavy bleeding. A group of PKK members then found him and took him to their camp in Iraqi Kurdistan. “They told me I was a prisoner of war and they would treat me in accordance with international agreements. They dressed my wound and gave me an injection. I was expecting them to torture me to get information from me. I was not expecting anything good from them. Because we had not obeyed any law when we dealt with them so I expected them to do the same. I thought they would cut me into pieces,” he explained in the 2016 interview.

Yannis said that his experience as a commando for two-and-a-half months in the Turkish military and as a prisoner of war at the hands of the PKK for two years and three months completely transformed him and his worldview. “I thought about our mistreating people in a way that constituted a war crime and the burning down of villages. Then I became a captive of the guerillas… You say you are good but you burn down villages, torture them and destroy their dead. You call them bad but they take you and treat you well.”

‘We Know You—You Are Greek’

On the third month of his captivity, he contacted his father and asked him to request information from authorities about his situation.

“My father went to Ankara to talk with a military officer who my uncle knew. But instead, another man turned up and told my father: ‘We know you. You are Greek, after all. We can call you ‘Greek members of the PKK’ and if we say that, you will be in a bad situation. So, don’t tamper with this too much.’ My father could not say anything. They [my family members] know they are converts [to Islam] but they feel Turkish. As they see themselves as Turkish, they think the state also sees them as such but the state does not forget,” Yannis explained.

In the eighth or ninth month of his captivity, he received word that his family was told they were Greek. “The journalists learned it while conducting interviews with my family. My mind then changed completely. Whatever the [Turkish] military said turned out to be a lie. Whatever the other side said, life confirmed it true.”

Upon his return to Turkey, he was brought to court and arrested. And when he was jailed, the torture began. “The moment I was put in prison, they jumped on me and started beating me. Because I was beaten up in prison for three-and-a-half months, my chest cage was injured. And they accused me of being a member of a terror organization. Then I was released pending trial. The trial lasted until 2013 and I was acquitted. In the meanwhile, my worldview became even clearer. I learned how the [political] system was enforced through attacks of the state,” he explained.In 2012, he settled in the Kurdish village of Roboski in Şırnak with his partner Geylani to show solidarity as peace activists with the victims of the massacre that took place on Dec. 28, 2011.

How Konstantin’s Son Became ‘Mehmet’

In late 2013, Ibrahim went to court to change his Turkish name and became Yannis Vasilis Yaylalı.  He told Siyasi Haber that changing his name is about “regaining his right and his identity.”

"I went to court to change my name. And this is done with money. In countries such as ours, they create special difficulties for you when you want to embrace a non-Turkish name. They want two witnesses. My friends who know I am Greek became my witnesses. But when you want to investigate your state register of persons, they introduce new obstacles. You can only investigate up to two generations before: You, your father and your grandfather. I applied with my father. We learned that my grandfather’s father’s name was Konstantin. Their village is in Bafra. The state archives also say that the state attacked and killed the Greek people there. Konstantin was also murdered and my grandfather, who was three back then, was given to a Turkish family instead of a Greek orphanage. Similar things were also done during the Dersim and Armenian massacres. Orphans were given to Turkish families."

And the child who was going to be my grandfather was called “Mehmet” by his new family.

This discovery was completely life changing for Yannis, who said that his entire motivation of joining the Turkish military was “the Turkish flag, Turkish homeland and the Turkish nation,” and that grey wolves, or the supporters of the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), were his heroes.

“We thought that that our great-grandfather went to fight in the Turkish Salvation War (Turkey’s name for the war it fought in Asia Minor, Thrace, historic Armenia and Kurdistan between 1919 and 1923 following the Ottoman Empire’s defeat in World War I) and his dead body was never brought back,” said Yannis. “But we then learned that he was murdered alongside his Greek friends in a cave in an area in Bafra, which was heavily populated by Greeks.

“My mother used to joke about my father being a dönme (convert), but when I asked what it meant, she did not respond,” said Yannis. “When [my grandfather] was given to that family, he converted [to Islam] and it was over. No information was shared with us about it. We then learned that our great-aunt told my mother about my father’s situation. Then they covered it up. The underlying reason could be fear or an unwillingness to accept reality. For being a non-Muslim is used as a swearword in our region.”

1914-1923 Pontian Greek Genocide

According to a report by the Pontian Greek Society of Chicago, Pontus (Greek Pontos), an ancient Greek word for “sea,” refers to the Black Sea and the surrounding coastal areas. The presence of Greeks in the area dates back to ancient times some 2,000 years before the migration of Turkic people to this area in the 10th century A.D.

From 1914 to 1923, “out of an approximate 700,000 Pontian Greeks who lived in Turkey at the beginning of World War I, as many as 350,000 were killed, and almost all the rest had been uprooted during the subsequent forced population exchange between Greece and Turkey. This was the end of one of the ancient Greek civilizations in Asia Minor.

During the same period, Armenian and Assyrian Christians were also targeted. Yannis has for years been trying to raise awareness about the Greek Genocide as well as the Armenian Genocide and massacres committed against Kurds in Turkey. According to Yannis, there were two reasons of the genocide of Christian peoples:

Turkish racism against non-Muslims, and the desire to Turkify non-Muslim properties.

Before the genocide, “70 or 80 percent of the country’s capital belonged to non-Muslims,” said Yannis, who added that the genocide aimed to Turkify and Islamize the wealth and property of non-Muslims.

He also referred to a conversation between Rıza Nur, a Turkish Member of Parliament from Sinop, and Topal Osman, an ultra-Turkish nationalist and Islamist who murdered Greek Christians and Armenians in the Pontian region. “Osman tells Nur: ‘I am fighting for Turkishness and I am protecting the buildings (churches, schools) that the state could benefit from.’ Nur responds: ‘No, do not leave anything behind. Destroy everything.’”

According to Yannis, Nur did not want a single stone to be left behind that would remind one of history. “And they really did that. They destroyed everything and left nothing behind so that no one would be able to bring them to account and ask them what happened.”

From a “Turkish” Nationalist Commando to a Greek Activist

“I spent the first 20 years of my life as a Turk; and the next 20 years showing solidarity with the Kurdish people. And I will spend the next 20 years of my life struggling as a Pontian,” said Yannis, who writes and speaks out extensively about the Pontian Greek Genocide in his blog websites. He described the destruction of the Greek and Armenian heritage in his hometown of Bafra:

"There were more than 80 churches and more than 100 [Christian] schools in Bafra. Not even one has been left behind. All were destroyed! There is only one [non-Turkish] signboard and it is in Armenian! If there were no testimonies, requiems, and screams about it, one would not even be able to say such a thing was experienced there. They took our money and properties, not to mention our lives. There are records of these things. One could see these things in the confidential minutes of the proceedings at the parliament. For example, three groups were deported from Bafra, they were taken to a town in Samsun and all were massacred. So, they did not prevent psychical attacks either. Plus, there were geographical circumstances of the time. Beside outright murders, they also left them to [die in] nature."

So during what is called “the war of salvation,” they got rid of us, the Greeks. And they seized our properties. Today, based on the same mentality, they are targeting peoples. They finished off non-Muslims first, now it is the turn of Kurds who are trying to survive. As the saying goes: Kurds are trying to prove they exit and we [Greeks and Armenians] are trying to prove that we have been exterminated.

As to why he chose the name “Yannis Vasilis,” he said, “I love how Yannis is pronounced. And Vasilis was an influential person among Greeks of the Black Sea region who carried out the first self-defense, partisan organization in the face of the attacks against Greeks.”

Yannis also explained that there are a lot of people like him who would like to return to their roots, but live in fear. “People can call me Ibrahim, or they can call me Yannis. But the thing is there are so many people like me. But they cannot come out because they are scared. I want to give them courage. I am not calling on people to be nationalistic but they should embrace their values and identities,” he explained.

According to Yannis, Turkey has never been a democracy because it has a very strict monist ideology. For example, “One state, one language, one religion, one flag,” which opposes pluralism and diversity, is a slogan in Turkey commonly used by state authorities. “The Turkish state structure has a monist mentality. And this mentality can survive only through fascistic, imperious and aggressive rule,” he explained. “If they govern this land through democracy, what they are doing and what the authorities before them have done will be exposed. For the mentality of the current authorities is not different from that of past administrations.”

Source: Armenian Weekly

ELIAMEP Working Paper Nr 79/2017

1. No room for complacency

My personal involvement and engagement with the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) goes back to the early nineties, when I was posted to the Mission of Greece to the United Nations (New York). I was deeply involved in the UN diplomatic fight and marathon that led to the compromise reflected in UNSC Resolutions 817 (April 7 ,1993) and 845 ( June 18, 1993).
​
In April 1994, after Greece closed its border with the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and imposed a series of economic sanctions, I was drinking my coffee in Skopje operating in the white uniform of the Head of the Regional Office for Bulgaria and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia of the European Community Monitor Mission.

In October 1995, a year later, I was crossing the congested by the heavy traffic open border as the first Head of Mission of Greece to Skopje. It was for me a great honor and an important chapter of a long history of personal engagement. So, there is no room for complacency and evasive talk.

2. ”Nemesis and catharsis”

It is appropriate for me to extend my congratulations to the new government in Skopje. In particular to Foreign Minister Ambassador Nikola Dimitrov the best and most successful diplomat in Skopje. I used to work with his father then Minister of Culture of the Ljubco Georgievski VMRO Government (1998). Later, I had several meetings with Nikola Dimitrov then Advisor to the late President Boris Trajkovski. Last but not least, we served simultaneously for some time as Ambassadors to Washington.

I anticipate that he may have some difficulties to be acquainted with the impressive accessories in and around the new edifice of his Ministry that moved from the modest building of Ulica (Street) Dame Gruev to its present premises. From his own window he will see Alexander the Great looking towards Babylon instead of Brussels, Philip the Macedon securing the Petrovac International Airport dedicated to the glory of his son and a fair selection of Gods from Mount Olympus.

This was the dominant official policy in Skopje for the tandem Prime Minister Nikola Gruevski – President Gjorge Ivanov in their strategy for responding to the aspirations of their peoples, joining NATO and the European Union and for conquering the hearts and minds of the Greeks…

During my frequent visits to Skopje, I was somehow surprised to see that in a sustained pace red paint become pretty often the indispensable accessory to the statutes.

This policy of “Antiquisation” (“Antikvizatzija” ) is the nationalistic policy pursued for eleven years (2006-2017) in a row under Prime Minister Nikola Gruevski largely supported by his own party VMRO; it was also supported by an important group of personalities including ambassadors and other top officials. Let’s be clear: Nikola Gruevski was not alone at all in this irrational and costly campaign.

He did so for the purposes of alleged domestic identity-building and for irritating Greece. Antiquisation received also an important endorsement by the slavmacedonian [sic] diaspora in the USA, Canada and Australia. So, I was in vain expecting all those who were on record in supporting Mr.Gruevski to slow down the pace of distancing themselves from his catastrophic policies. He is very much alone now, but he was far from alone for so many years.

Lately, there are some in Skopje arguing that the “Antiquisation” was FYROM’s reaction to the NATO Bucharest Summit (April 3, 2008).

The facts are very different. Indeed. As early as January 2007, many months prior to the Bucharest Summit, the Government in Skopje decided to name the highway linking Skopje to Thessaloniki (part of the Pan-European Corridor X as “Alexander the Great Highway”) and rename the Petrovac International Airport to (“Alexander the Great”). The initial decision for intensifying the “antiquisation” policy was adopted in an early 2007 closed session of Nikola Gruevski’s inner circle.

Notwithstanding the Administration policies, the US Congress swiftly reacted in a by-partisan manner. Over 110 influential House Representatives and key Senators as well took action. As early as 2007 Senate Resolution S.Res.300 and House Resolution H.Res.356 denounced the “nationalistic and hostile propaganda” stemming from Skopje against Greece. They stressed inter alia that Skopje ”… instilled hostility and a rationale for irredentism in portions of the population of FYROM toward Greece and the history of Greece”. Sponsors included Senators Barack Obama, Jo Kerry, Olympia Snow, Robert Menendez and many others. Among 835 issues introduced as a Resolution of the House in 2007, only four regarding foreign issues –including FYROM’s policies toward Greece- got over 100 members of Congress as sponsors or advocates.

So, there is no apparent causality relation between the launching of the “antiquation policy“ and the Bucharest Summit. It well existed and developed at least twelve months prior to the NATO April
2008 Summit.

Zoran Zaev, the newly appointed Prime Minister unequivocally aligned himself to the grievances of Greece publicly acknowledging that “the previous governments of Nikola Gruevski had provoked Greece by erecting many statues of ancient Greek historical figures (Alexander the Great, Philip of Macedon etc), as well as renaming main roads and the airport of the country”. Speaking on state television, Mr. Zaev said “these moves had been one more act that had led to the deterioration of relations with Greece and vowed to stop adopting such policies”. However, asked if he would tear them down Mr. Zaev replied he would not.

This inherent contradiction shows that while distancing himself from former PM Gruevski, Mr.Zaev has no intention to alter the status quo.

3. A bad Constitution

Yet, this line of conduct was consistent with the Constitution of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Its fundamental Charter, the 1991 Constitution, is the root cause of the endemic cyclical troubles, problems and interethnic tension as well as of the problems and irritants arisen with its neighbors, Greece included.

It is a bad Constitution based on the old Yugoslavian principle of nationalities and not on the European principle of citizens. The Preamble created and indeed cemented the discrimination between Slavmacedonians [sic] and Albanians.

Late ethnic Albanian leaders Arben Xjaferi and Abdurahman Aliti were advocating since the early nineties the need to remedy with this situation. The Slavs resisted early warning and advice offered to them. Following the 2001 interethnic conflict and the NLA’s (a.k.a UCK) successful campaign under the leadership of the charismatic Ali Ahmeti, the Preamble was somehow amended in Ohrid under the aegis of the European Union and the United States.

Yet, there are still a couple of extra miles to go.

There is one lesson to draw since 1991. The best way to avoid “radicalization” is to eliminate the root causes of the problem, adapting thus the 1991 Constitution to evolving and present realities. The same axiom stands as far as relations with neighbors – Greece in particular – are concerned.

There are still in Skopje some who prefer to ignore the realities and consider amending the Constitution as an anathema. Well, not surprisingly, within 14 years, from 1991 to 2005, the Constitution has been already amended 30 (thirty amendments) times; the original problematic Constitution was adopted on November 17, 1991and published in the Official Gazette No 52/1991. Amendments I and II were adopted immediately and published in the Of.G. No 1/1992. The latest set of Amendments XX-XXX were published in No 107/2005. It is clear that the fundamental problem lies with the Constitution and not with its amendments. Accordingly, I foresee a difficult yet necessary way to go in order to cement peace, unity and stability. Since 1991 to our days, this remains the fundamental prerequisite for definitely turning the page from being a former Yugoslav republic to a modern democratic state aspiring to join the European Union and NATO as well.

The “Joint Statement of the Albanian Political Parties”, known also under the narrative “Albanian Platform”, addresses seven key areas fundamental for the stability and welfare of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. I would have preferred to see this document signed in Tetovo or in Skopje. Not in Tirana. I understand that though it was negotiated in Tetovo and in Skopje, BESA insisted to have it signed in Tirana. Notwithstanding this observation, it is a positive contribution to the present stability and to the future of the country:

A) It identifies the problems within the country;

B) It also imposes the urgency to reach a lasting solution with Greece on the name issue and to include the Albanians in the direct dialogue with Bulgaria, “unblocking, thus, the country’s path toward full integration in NATO and open negotiations for membership in the European Union”.

I earnestly hope, though without excessive optimism, that the new Government in Skopje will be pragmatic and indeed open-minded in this regard.

4. Stick to realities; not to illusions

A. Notwithstanding the problem over the name, Greece’s stance remains unchanged. Since the outbreak of the 2001 conflict to the recent crises, Greece has been vocal and unequivocal in lending its support to the territorial integrity, sovereignty and unity of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Athens also appealed to and encouraged indeed FYROM’s neighbors to abide by the principle of non-interference in her domestic affairs.

Since 2007-2008, some of us were loudly pointing to the fact that Prime Minister Nikola Gruevski and his cabinet were guided by a peculiar mixture of political primitivism, and unreasonable provocations toward Greece. They also abused the state, the judiciary and the rule of law. They considered the state and the civil service as their property and a political trophy.

B. Nevertheless, for many years, we were indicating that this line will ultimately backfire. We were considered as “tough“. Today, it is hard to find an international analyst not qualifying Nikola Gruevski’s term as authoritarian, corrupted and nationalistic. He ruined his own country, undermined the Euro-Atlantic perspective and damaged the relations with Greece. Today there is much ado in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia to remedy with the leftovers of this mess, including in their relations with Greece.

Prime Minister Zoran Zaev recently distanced himself from the Gruevski’s regime provocative actions admittedly directed against Greece. Yet, he said he was not ready to remove the statues. In other words, he keeps the strong symbols of Gruevski’s provocations.

To start with, renaming the Petrovac Airport and the Corridor X (Skopje -Thessaloniki) would be a good starter. Words should be followed by deeds.

More important compared to the ludicrous message supposedly the statues are there to send, is the irredentist content of the history and geography textbooks. They are one of the root causes of the nationalism. Since the1991 independence, no government in Skopje tackled this serious issue. So, will nationalism and irredentism be continued to be officially taught in school, college and Universities?
Anyway, not surprisingly, this kind of criticism comes now, quite late indeed; particularly from those who for many years in a well-orchestrated “beauty contest“ in Skopje, in Washington and in Brussels as well, were openly or behind closed doors praising and supporting Gruevski's policies, including those meant to undermine Greece. They also bear an important part of responsibility. In vain, Albert Einstein has been warning from Princeton that “The world is in greater peril from those who tolerate or encourage evil than from those who actually commit it.”

C. It is in Greece’s interest to see the territorial integrity, sovereignty and unity of our neighbor preserved and indeed cemented. It is also in Greece’s interest to reach an agreement on the name issue on the basis of a mutually acceptable solution. It is important to engage the new government in Skopje, enhance the process for new Confidence Building Measures and explore in a quiet manner if the change of government implies also a change of policies.

I earnestly hope that Prime Minsier’s Zaev government will not play tactics.

In case both Athens and Skopje raise now too high expectations they may quickly be confronted with dilemmas, setbacks and ultimately with illusions.

Yet, any positive signal coming now from Skopje is welcomed and would be reciprocated.

I humbly propose to the two Governments, their political elites, the media and the civil society to focus their attention to the young generation. Ultimately, a holistic joint effort should improve the relations between the two neighbors, creating thus conditions for a better future for the youngsters. Accordingly, it is of substance to name this campaign “The Next Generation Initiative".

D. It is in the vital interest of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia to realize at last, that the key capital to work with is neither Brussels nor Washington. The new Government in Skopje will soon understand that at this juncture there is not “a deus ex machina”. Unlike November 2004, history will not be repeated; this time the check for interethnic stability and peace will be cashed in Skopje, not in Athens.

A reminder: the November 2004 unilateral recognition of the constitutional name by the United States of America and the full support extended to our northern neighbor was not sufficient to make them join NATO. The Bucharest April 3, 2008 consensus Declaration has been standing for ten years and reiterated during four NATO Summits .The formal and official NATO position reads as follows:

”… Therefore we agreed that an invitation to the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia will be extended as soon as a mutually acceptable solution to the name issue has been reached. We encourage the negotiations to be resumed without delay and expect them to be concluded as soon as possible.”

As the “underdog theory” is omnipresent in Skopje, I already see that the quarter of century old stratagem “Greece is responsible and accountable for our problems” is rebounding. After all, this is exactly in line with the policies so far followed by Nikola Gruevski.

For sure, our friends in Skopje realize that neither Alexander the Great nor his father Philip and the Macedonian phalanx proved to adequately serve the purpose to join NATO and to open accession talks with the European Union.

I am aware that NATO membership is a priority of the new government. Accordingly, solving the name issue on the compromise formula “a composite name with a geographic qualifier for all uses (erga omnes)” should normally be the top priority. This formula proposed by Athens as early as September 2007, is not unanimously accepted in Greece. Indeed the readiness for a compromise has been eroding following Gruevski’s political primitivism and nationalism. Furthermore, the important and powerful Hellenic Macedonian diaspora adamantly opposes this formula.

5 . A fresh look at and a return to the UNSC Resolutions

At this stage, Athens may contemplate with the option to distance itself with the outdated, rather obsolete “Interim Accord” signed on September 13, 1995. This document has been seriously undermined. Furthermore, Greece has no interest to stick to it. The December 5, 2011 Ruling of the International Court of Justice while condemning Greece has also given a negative interpretation of its fundamental provisions detrimental to Greece’s interests and concerns. On paper, the “Interim Accord” is still valid.

The roadmap to the solution of the name lies with two key UN Security Council Resolutions. The first is the UNSC 817 (April, 7 1993).

This unanimous Resolution referring to the application and admission to the UN under the provisional name “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (to be seated between Togo and Thailand) states that: "Noting however that a difference has arisen over the name of the State, which needs to be resolved in the interest of the maintenance of peaceful and good-neighborly relations in the region”. This is exactly how and when the issue became of an international nature. It is always in the Security Council’s agenda.

Following the “Proposal for a Draft Treaty “ tabled in May 1993 by Lord David Owen and the late Cyrus Vance, while taking into account the initial reactions of the respective governments in Athens and Skopje, the Security Council by its unanimous Resolution 845 (of June,18 1993):

1. Expresses its appreciation to the Co-Chairmen of the Steering Committee of the International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia for their efforts and commends to the parties as a sound basis for the settlement of their difference the proposals set forth in annex V to the report of the Secretary-General;

2. Urges the parties to continue their efforts under the auspices of the Secretary-General to arrive at a speedy settlement of the remaining issues between them;”

By doing so, the United Nations Security Council “commended” to Greece and to the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia draft Treaty with the proposed composite name “Nova Makedonija” for all uses. The need and aim for a composite name stems directly from the UN Security Council.

6. Establishing the Rule of Law

There are also many critical issues at stake for the new government. The Department of State’s Spoke-person in her May 31, 2017 statement congratulated Prime Minister Zoran Zaev and the parliamentary majority on the formation of a new government stressing inter alia that ”As a friend and partner the United States looks forward to working with the new government as it strives to fulfill the country’s Euro-Atlantic aspirations by implementing urgent reforms that strengthen rule of law and judicial independence, media freedom, and government accountability.”

Athens should feel comfortable with this Statement. Indeed these elements precisely were always included in the Greek analysis and rationale though often questioned by some partners and allies. Time and timing are of essence.

The enumeration of the existing fundamental deficiencies and shortcomings in the Former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia that need to be addressed is impressive. The list is long and hard to achieve without a change in the mentality and priorities.

Wishful thinking will not be sufficient per se to move the country ahead.

I hope that all those in Skopje, including Prime Minister Zoran Zaev, who preferred for a decade to close their eyes and their ears to Prime Minister Nikola Gruevski’s policies toward Greece, realize now that they were also wrong. We need deeds, not words. While words will evaporate positive deeds will be reciprocated. Abraham Lincoln was absolutely right. He insisted that: “Passion has helped us, but can do so no more. It will in future be our enemy. Reason, cold calculating, unimpassioned reason, must furnish all the materials for our future support and defense.”

​Source: ELIAMEP | Alexandros P. Mallias

Federica Mogherini, High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy/Vice-President of the European Commission, hosted an informal gathering with the Prime Ministers of the Western Balkans partners, Prime Minister of Montenegro Duško Marković, Prime Minister of Kosovo Isa Mustafa, Prime Minister of Albania Edi Rama, Prime Minister of Serbia Aleksandar Vučić, Prime Minister-designate of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Zoran Zaev, and Bosnia and Herzegovina Council of Ministers Chairman Denis Zvizdić to discuss the way forward for the region's EU membership perspective.

All present confirmed their full commitment to continue working for the European Union integration process, as confirmed by the EU at the March 2017 European Council. They reiterated their determination and strong shared interest in strengthening cooperation and bringing about tangible results for the lives of the citizens of the region. They emphasised their commitment to good neighbourly relations and deepening regional understanding, through mutual respect and cooperation.

​High Representative/Vice-President Mogherini encouraged the six Prime Ministers to accelerate the necessary work in order to meet their citizens' expectations and move closer to their European Union future.

Source: European Union

On Sunday May, 21, 2017, the Jewish Holocaust Centre together with the Coordinating Committee of Pontian Associations for the Commemoration of the Genocide of Greeks of Pontos held a Commemoration of the Pontic Greek Genocide.

The keynote speaker was Professor Paul Bartrop, Professor of History and Director for Judaic, Holocaust and Genocide Studies, Florida Gulf Coast University, USA who gave a lecture on "Combating the Defeat of Memory".

Welcoming remarks and Introduction was given by Constantinos Antoniadis, President of the Coordinating Committee of Pontian Associations for the Commemoration of the Genocide of Greeks of Pontos and Asia Minor.

The highlight of the event was the lighting of a Memorial Candle to honour the memory of the 353,000 Greeks who were exterminated in Pontus by successive governments of the Ottoman Empire; the Committee of Union and Progress Party (C.U.P), and the Turkish Nationalist Movement of Mustafa Kemal.

Source: Jewish Holocaust Centre, Greek Genocide Resource Centre

"Macedonians have every right to call their country Macedonia," was the statement made by Member for Hughes (NSW) Craig Kelly at a rally he attended in Sydney on Sunday 23 April, causing a stir within the Greek Australian community.

In response, Peter Jasonides, the National Co-Chair of the Australian Hellenic Council, wrote a letter of complaint to bring Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull's attention to the matter.

This month the PM issued a reply in which he said that the federal government's longstanding policy of using the name 'former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia' "remains unchanged".

"Our consistent position follows United Nations' practice, and strives to remain impartial pending a mutually agreed solution among governments in Athens and Skopje," said Mr Turnbull.

"I regret any offence caused to the Hellenic Republic and Greek Australians."

The PM went on to acknowledge the contribution of Greek Australians in making Australia the highly successful multicultural country it is today and said that the government "remains mindful of the sensitivity and the depth of feeling regarding Australia's use of the name 'Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia'".

"I'm satisfied with the federal government's position on the issue, as underlined once again by Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull," Mr Jasonides told Neos Kosmos.

"I'm also satisfied that the Prime Minister 'regrets any offence caused'. Prime Minister Turnbull is clearly and explicitly distancing Australia's position on the 'Macedonian' issue from the bile that was dished out by the member for Hughes (NSW) Craig Kelly, a few weeks ago at a Skopjan rally in Sydney."

The ACH Co-Chair noted that there have been questions in the NSW media since 2015 about the 'membership' activities in the electorate of Hughes, where the electorate borders have been redrawn, thus taking away a portion of the blue ribbon voters.

"And Mr Kelly, in the spirit of 'political opportunism', has flirted with the FYROM community, by luring them as members, in order to secure local branch support. He clearly does not understand the issue. He's [ignorant] of the intricacies as well as the international protocols. And he shows a gross disrespect for Australia's bipartisan approach to this issue," Jasonides concludes.

Member for Hindemarsh, Steve Georganas, also reached out to the government, and received a letter of response from both the PM and Minister for Foreign Affairs Julie Bishop who expressed similar sentiments to Mr Turnbull.

"The government's policy on the nomenclature is unchanged, and, as you note in your correspondence has remained so under successive Australian Governments since 1994.

"The government again considered the issue closely during 2014, and concluded Australia will continue its long-held practice."

Ms Bishop concluded that while Mr Kelly's views do not reflect the Australian Government's policy, that all Australians are free to express their opinions, inclusive of government policy.

Meanwhile Mr Georganas praised the Greek Australian community for taking charge over the matter, and encouraged them to continue to do so.

"I would like to thank the Greek community for being so vigilant and proactive on this issue. The community has also written directly to the Prime Minister and the Foreign Affairs Minister, and such action needs to continue every time this issue is raised," Mr Georganas told Neos Kosmos.

Source: Neos Kosmos

Staff reporter | Greek City Times

Greece’s Foreign Minister Nikos Kotzias met with the Foreign Minister of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Nikola Poposki, within the framework of Friday’s informal ‘Gynmich’ Meeting of EU Foreign Ministers, in which the Foreign Ministers of countries that are candidates for accession to the EU also participated.

During the meeting, the two foreign ministers discussed European and regional affairs and briefed each other on recent developments in the two countries.

The meeting took place the day after nationalists stormed FYROM’s parliament and violently attacked legislators injuring over 70 people including the leader of the opposition.

The incident has sparked concern for Greece and the region, given the political crisis has been brewing for many years over ethnic tensions with the local Albanian population in FYROM.

FYROM has been in the grip of a political stalemate since December as ethnic Slav nationalists object to the formation of a new government by Social Democrats and parties representing ethnic Albanians.

Athens, which has been locked in a name dispute with FYROM since the 1990s, has opted to keep its distance, wary that nationalists in the neighbouring country will want to exploit any comments coming out of Greece.

US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Hoyt Brian Yee visited the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and urged for an end the political stalemate and allow the formation of a new government.

​With regard to Albania and the claims of Cham community vis-a-vis Greece, Athens’s concerns are somewhat alleviated by the moderate stance of new Albanian President Ilir Meta who has helped establish channels of communication with the Greek government after the more hostile stance of Prime Minister Edi Rama.

Source: Greek City Times