They use warnings without sanctions in Turkey, leaving room for the “Erdogan agenda”

Tepid EU reaction against Turkey’s unprecedented provocative unilateral moves against two Member States, on the offensive for the EU. Her stance and expansionist policy, which often runs contrary to the strategic interests of the West, are being “baked into” by the EU institutions. with the support of Berlin and a group of Member States.

It is the reluctance of the EU. as a whole to face the real problem that exists in relations with Turkey as a consequence of the fear of immigration but also of the serious exposure of economies such as the German one in the Turkish market.

It is not a coincidence that, apart from the two almost identical letters from Erdogan to all the leaders except K. Mitsotakis and N. Anastasiadis, Berlin has stayed in Athens to exert additional pressure, which T. Erdogan has told them will react in a very intense and unpredictable way if the EU dares to decide on any sanction against Turkey.

It is noteworthy that Charles Michel, President of the European Council, who together with High Representative Z. Borel have been waging a fight in recent weeks to beautify Turkey’s image, thereby undermining the prospect of a decisive EU reaction, initiative until last night for the first time that there is not even a draft of the Summit Conclusions. Apparently wanting to make the last minute deal and avoid reactions from the Greek and Cypriot parties, but also from Turkey itself, such as the generally lazy Turkish officials, considering that their duty to make one of the usual anti-European statements would spoil them. . design.

And the design that seems to exist is once again in the logic of “carrot and whip” where the second but is completely vague and re-enters the logic of “don’t do it again because we will have to decide … again how to react … ».

However, K. Mitsotakis at yesterday’s meeting of the Council of Ministers reiterated the context of the Greek position: “Unilateral actions cause side effects, aggressive actions bring similar responses, so the challenges must begin to start discussions, on the issue that is separated with Turkey, which is nothing more than the delimitation of maritime zones in the Aegean and the eastern Mediterranean “and added that” … it is in the hands of our neighbors to demonstrate in practice if they really want to de-escalate and dialogue true “. “Otherwise, Europe has other ways to protect its interests, but also the broader security in the Eastern Mediterranean region.”

According to a diplomatic source in Brussels who informed the Summit, there were finally some doubts even as to whether there should be a reference to the Conclusions on Turkey, or whether there should be a Charles Michel Declaration instead, a proposal that was also rejected because it weakened completely the European intervention much more when there will be a special reference to the Conclusions on sanctions against Belarus.

The same source, however, said that the European Council does not impose sanctions but rather gives guidelines and sanctions are not an end in themselves and it seems that the effort is to refer to the possibility of sanctions but without mentioning the specific list of sanctions. To mediate another stage for the imposition of sanctions, the “action” will weaken the gears of the community bureaucracy …

However, it is particularly interesting how the report on Turkey will be recorded in the Summit Conclusions.

And if the last warning is made that the continuation of unilateral actions and the violation of the sovereign rights of two Member States, lead to sanctions and constitute an obstacle to the improvement of the Customs Union and the further development of Euro-Turkish relations , and at the same time the additional Nicosia (based on a previous decision and as long as the violation of its sovereign rights continues).

Ή If the Summit will positively welcome the de-escalation with the withdrawal of Oruc Reis and propose the possibility of adopting another framework through dialogue or with Michel’s controversial proposal for a Conference of the countries of the region, which will give the opportunity to avoiding sanctions and developing the “positive agenda” (abolition of visas, customs union, financing for refugees, etc.)

However, it is of particular importance if the EU will ask Turkey to commit to constant and permanent reduction and to avoid unilateral actions during dialogue processes (exploratory, NATO meetings, Ministry of Education discussions, etc.) linking this position with the imposition of sanctions and the continuation of a positive agenda.

Erdogan in his letter to the leaders of the EU (except Mitsotaki and Anastasiadis) as he demands that the EU “Be impartial and maintain a policy of equal distances” sets its own agenda:

– declares that your country wants a dialogue with Greece without conditions (i.e. a dialogue with an open agenda on all issues)

– sets out the aspirations of your country to demarcate maritime jurisdictions in a fair and equitable manner in the eastern Mediterranean on the basis of “international law and the protection of sovereign rights and jurisdictions on our continental shelf”, to guarantee equal rights and as co-owners of Cyprus with a joint decision-making mechanism, without being a condition for the solution of the Cyprus problem (ss indirect recognition of the pseudo-state and de facto division by degradation of the Republic of Cyprus from a recognized state to an education equivalent to occupation regime) and finally, as Erdogan said, the hope is that “the Mediterranean will become an area where everyone will work together for a fair and equitable distribution of hydrocarbons …”.

The Turkish president insisted that Greece and the Greek Cypriots were responsible for the tension, while reverting to his proposal for “a forum for energy cooperation in the eastern Mediterranean with all parties, including the Turkish Cypriots.” But the Turkish president is careful to send a message to capitals that he knows are sensitive to Turkey, recalling the need to review the 2016 Immigration Declaration, which of course dominates the political planning of many European governments.

In addition, Merkel’s hymns, on the eve of the Synod on Turkey’s contribution to immigration with parallel peaks against Greece for what happened in Moria, of course ignoring that each Moria is the result of the 2016 agreement, are indicative of the climate. …