Why Is Athens Condemning Itself to a War Agenda? Are You Willing to Discuss the Unification of Greece with Turkey?

French President Emmanuel Macron, speaking at a public session on April 25 alongside Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis, stated—without directly naming Turkey—that if Greece’s sovereignty in the Aegean were to be threatened, France would stand by Athens. While these remarks drew a strong reaction from Ankara, the Greek press interpreted them as a “clear message to Turkey.” Following the backlash from Ankara, the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement claiming that Macron’s words were not directed at any specific country, effectively making a U-turn.

The Greek state was largely shaped through diplomatic and military interventions led by Britain. First, the Greek uprising against the Ottoman Empire in 1821 was encouraged. Then, with the intervention of Britain, France, and Russia, it was transformed into an independent state. However, each country supporting Greece had its own agenda. We will not go into excessive detail.

Britain’s primary objective, within the context of the “Eastern Question,” was to prevent Russia from expanding southward toward the Mediterranean and the Straits. It wanted to keep the Ottoman Empire standing—albeit weak—as a buffer against Russia. It preferred controlled weakening rather than total collapse. By establishing a Greek state under its influence, Britain sought to prevent Russia from gaining naval bases or direct influence in the Mediterranean (especially the Aegean). By keeping Greece “small and controlled,” it both restrained Russia and secured Mediterranean trade routes for itself.

In other words, for Britain, the goal was not for the Greek people to be “free and independent,” but to serve as a buffer and balancing instrument against Russia.

In the 1827 Battle of Navarino, Britain, France, and Russia sent a joint fleet and destroyed the Ottoman-Egyptian navy. This marked a turning point in the uprising. Although the intervention was presented as an effort to “prevent massacres of Christians,” the real motive was the balance of power.

With the 1832 London Conference, the Kingdom of Greece was established. A 17-year-old Bavarian prince, Otto, was brought in and made king. Greece was not formed as a “republic,” but as a “monarchy.” In its early years, the country was governed by Bavarian regents and advisors. Loans were extended to Greece, making it easier for the Great Powers to deepen and maintain control.

For a long time, Greece remained a “protected” small state. Its borders were kept narrow, and its internal affairs were interfered with. For instance, during the Crimean War in 1854, Britain and France occupied Piraeus.

In 1919, Britain once again used Greece as a tool by facilitating the occupation of İzmir, positioning it against both the Ottoman Empire and Italy in Anatolia.

In short, Greece was designed not as a truly “independent” state, but as a pawn that could be used in line with the interests of Great Powers. This is a typical example of 19th-century Great Power diplomacy: using nationalist uprisings as instruments in geopolitical games.

Although Greece may appear to have found its own path over time, this “external determination” present at its founding continues today.

Just as Greece was established as a “buffer state” project in Western Anatolia, Armenia in the East and Israel in the South were also established as similar “buffer state” projects. The main objective was to control the Turks and regional countries that remained after the fragmentation of the Ottoman Empire.

Renowned Greek scholar Prof. Dimitris Kicikis explains this issue very succinctly during a live broadcast on a television program in Athens:

“The political level in Greece is very low. We lack analytical capacity; we simply get carried along by events. We do not try to access real information. Unless we understand the major mistake we have made regarding Turkey, there is no chance of solving our problems. In fact, it was not us—Western powers set this trap by establishing this small state (Greece) in 1821. This may sound crazy. Because we are stuck in elementary school narratives about heroes like Kolokotronis. We cannot understand that this revolution of March 25 was a project of Western ‘Greek parapolitical groups’ and Freemasons aimed at destroying and dividing the Ottoman Empire. This fragmentation and separation of nations continues to this day. And in the end, only a very small piece will remain of Greece. Because the plan is to divide Greece, Turkey, and the entire Balkans into smaller parts. For instance, aren’t you aware that they are now preparing to separate Northern Greece?”

When explaining how the Aegean dispute could be resolved, Prof. Kicikis puts forward a striking proposal:

“The solution is not to give some islands to them (the Turks). The solution is to reach an agreement where both sides of the Aegean come together.”

When people call this unrealistic, he responds:

“We have a generation with the wrong leaders, and that is why we all say, ‘This will never happen; it’s a utopia.’ Give me proper leadership, and I can achieve this tomorrow without betraying my country.”

When objections persist, he continues:

“Fine, don’t extend your hand to your enemy. Don’t shake hands—then what? Let’s see. Remember, in 1923 we had 7 million people, while the Turks had 11 million. Today we are 11 million, and Turkey is 85 million—I have said this countless times. What do you expect? Are we in a position to fight again? We are completely weakened. Fine, let’s say I hate the opponent too, because I cannot tolerate these injustices anymore. But what will be the end? Don’t you know chess? Chess works with logic, not emotion.”

When confronted with claims that this would mean “surrender,” he replies meaningfully:

“You said sharing—this is not sharing. There is no sharing. This is about expanding boundaries. Not division, but a joint venture, coming together. There is no meaning in merely dividing things without producing something together.”

While explaining how a union between Turkey and Greece might be possible, Kicikis offers a path:

“I believe we should start with Cyprus. We did everything wrong, and the island was divided. We should begin there. We must find a solution for both communities and initiate a joint venture from there.”

Some in Turkey may also find this idea unrealistic. Yes, it is a dream. But we should never forget: everything begins with a dream. The Greek professor’s words are a sincere proposal. Let us reflect on it. If there are better ideas, let us start with those. But let us imagine peace, not war; unity, not hostility.

So what happens if Greece does not pursue this path? The Greek academic answers this clearly as well. After discussing what Britain did in India and how Greece was misled, he says:

“‘Divide and rule’ is what the British have always done. That is what great powers do.”

This observation also provides a clear understanding of what the United States aims to achieve by establishing military bases and deployments in Greece.

Did Britain, France, and the United States—who did this to Greece—act as friends to Turkey? Absolutely not. They carried out the same manipulations against Turkey. Just like the Greek people, the Turkish people are also unaware of many truths. If we do not awaken, they will do the same things again.

We can provide dozens of examples, but a few will suffice:

European states, the US, Russia, and even Iran provoked Armenia against Turkey for their own interests. They accused Turkey of genocide. Trusting these powers, Yerevan occupied Karabakh. As a result of these mistakes, Armenia became isolated and one of the poorest countries in the world. With Turkey’s support, Azerbaijan reclaimed its territories. The same states that had provoked and encouraged Yerevan up until that point disappeared the moment they faced the barrel of a gun, leaving Armenia alone. They offered no support and did not stand by it.

In 2004, the ‘Orange Revolution’ in Ukraine was carried out with the support of the United States and European countries. Supposedly, measures were being taken to prevent the country from falling under Russia’s influence! Ten years after the Orange Revolution, Russia annexed Crimea, one of Ukraine’s most critical territories. None of those Western ‘masters’ who had supposedly orchestrated the revolution were anywhere to be seen. In 2022, Russia began invading the rest of Ukraine’s territory. Today, approximately one-fifth of Ukraine is under Moscow’s control. Hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians have been killed, and millions have been displaced from their homes. Yet those Western ‘masters’ who staged the so-called color revolution in Ukraine seem largely unconcerned. They merely sell weapons and offer advice.

Last year, U.S. President Trump gathered his team at the White House and, before the eyes of the entire world watching live, treated President Zelensky worse than a beating on camera, collectively blaming Ukraine. Nowadays, the United States appears closer to Russia than to Ukraine.

The United States used Ukraine to weaken Russia and sacrificed it without hesitation.

In 2004, once again under the leadership of the United States, the ‘Rose Revolution’ was carried out in Georgia. The stated justification was ‘to stop the Russians.’ Promises were made to Tbilisi: ‘We will take you into the European Union,’ ‘We will ensure your security by making you a member of NATO.’ In 2008, Russia intervened from the north, and everything fell apart. Since then, Georgia’s territories of Abkhazia and South Ossetia have remained under Moscow’s de facto occupation. These occupied areas constitute about one-fifth of Georgia’s territory. Those Western ‘masters’ who once filled Georgia with enthusiasm are nowhere to be found. Moreover, they have now begun saying, ‘We cannot admit you to the EU; we cannot make you a member of NATO.’ In other words, they abandoned Georgia.

Look at the Iraqi Kurds. They were told, ‘We support Kurdish independence.’ The Iraqi Kurds believed this. On September 25, 2017, an independence referendum was held, and the people voted for ‘independence.’ When Turkey and other regional countries reacted strongly and made it clear they would not allow this, the situation quickly unraveled. Masoud Barzani lost his position. Those ‘masters’ who had once pumped courage and enthusiasm into Erbil disappeared from the scene.

This time they said, ‘It didn’t work in Iraq, but we will make the Kurds in Syria independent.’ They supported and provoked the YPG/PKK. They delivered tens of thousands of truckloads of weapons. The result: Syrian groups backed by Turkey took control of the entire country. Groups supported by the United States, Europe, Iran, and Israel submitted to Damascus. The ‘masters’ who had backed these groups were forced to withdraw from the country quietly.

The same things happened in Libya. Turkey supported the legitimate government, while the United States and Europe backed the insurgents led by Khalifa Haftar. In the end, the insurgents lost, and their foreign supporters disappeared. Just last week, two rival groups in Libya conducted a joint naval military exercise under Turkey’s leadership in an area very close to Greek territorial waters, sending a striking message to Athens and its Western ‘masters.

We could list more examples. But this should be enough for those in Athens to understand.

If they do not find this sufficient, we recommend that they have sincere, one-on-one conversations with Pashinyan in Armenia, Zelensky in Ukraine, government officials in Georgia, the Barzanis in Erbil, Mazlum Abdi in Syria, and Khalifa Haftar in Libya.

To our Greek friends: if you believe that narcissistic Trump—who sold out Ukraine and abandoned the YPG—or obsessive Macron—who you claim was humiliated on camera—will save you, then by all means, continue. But one day, you too will understand.

Ankara does not prefer war. It says that we can once again live together under fair conditions with the societies we have shared centuries with. If you choose to remain stuck in past wars and conflicts, that is up to you. The members of the European Union you are proud to belong to once turned on each other during World War II, and 50 million Europeans died. Today, they act as if none of it ever happened. You seem to have forgotten this as well, yet you remain fixated on events involving Turks from centuries ago.

The choice is yours. If you say let us live together in peace, why not? If you say let us fight, we do not prefer it—but we are ready for that as well.

As you wish!

Alper Tan
May 3, 2026