Minister of Foreign Affairs, George Gerapetritis’ interview on ERT Radio’s First Programme, on “Nai men, Alla…”, with journalist Evagelia Baltatzi (16.10.2024)

Minister of Foreign Affairs, George Gerapetritis’ interview on ERT Radio’s First Programme, on “Nai men, Alla…”, with journalist Evagelia Baltatzi (16.10.2024)

JOURNALIST: I welcome the Minister of Foreign Affairs to ERT’s First Programme. Good morning, Mr. Gerapetritis.

G. GERAPETRITIS: Good morning, Ms. Baltatzi. Thank you for your invitation.

JOURNALIST: And I thank you very much for honouring public broadcasting. Let us start, because I know your time is limited. I will try to get as many answers and as much accurate information as possible. So, you will be meeting with your Turkish counterpart, Mr. Fidan, on November 8. In the good climate that seems to have been established by statements made by Mr. Erdogan, which are also very interesting – with responses that I won’t go into now, but I will mention them later on in our conversation. The first thing I want to ask Minister, is, given that, firstly, there is this very good climate and, secondly, there is the political will to address our issues with neighbouring Türkiye, it seems to me that, where we are right now, at this stage, there should be what we call a “roadmap”. And I ask directly: What is the roadmap from here on in, Mr. Gerapetritis?

G. GERAPETRITIS: I think things are pretty clear, as I have already had the opportunity to explain in Parliament. We are at the point where we – the two Ministers of Foreign Affairs – have been instructed to explore whether there can be a common framework for taking the discussion to the next stage, to a stage that concerns the delimitation of the continental shelf and the Exclusive Economic Zone. We are not there yet. We are also discussing the scope of the talks, the principles that will govern these talks. So, actually, we are at a preliminary stage.

JOURNALIST: You said in your interview in Kathimerini that – and correct me if I’m wrong – the exploratory talks are essentially outdated. So, I wonder what this next step might look like. Will it be the political dialogue team that explores these next steps? In essence, what issues will be up for negotiation? Is that where we stand?

G. GERAPETRITIS: You spoke correctly, Ms. Baltatzi, about the next stages in the Greek-Turkish dialogue. Right now, as you know, a framework of relatively good understanding has been established, a relative mutual trust has developed so that we can prevent further tensions and crises. We have the opportunity, if there is common ground on the fundamental issues, to proceed with the issue of delimitation. If such a common understanding arises – which I can’t predict before the talks begin – then the discussion will take place on the level of Foreign Ministers and the level of political dialogue. The exploratory talks you referred to, took place over a long historical period – approximately over 20 years – during which, mainly on the level of ministry officials and experts, there was a discussion that did not yield any results. We had 64 rounds of exploratory talks, which, unfortunately, did not produce the anticipated outcomes. In fact, I think they set us further back than when we started. Right now, what we need is strong political will. And then, provided there is this strong political will, which will be reflected in a common position on how we should proceed, we will look at the technical and legal issues of delimitation.

JOURNALIST: Will the delimitation of the territorial sea be settled, or will we leave it for later, Mr. Gerapetritis?

G. GERAPETRITIS: This is a matter exclusively of Greek sovereignty. It is not being raised in any dialogue. It is not being raised in the context of any special agreement. So it solely and exclusively concerns our country. The precise timing of the extension of our territorial sea is a solely domestic issue. It is very critical. What I can tell you with certainty is that Greece has the right, fully conferred upon it by international law, to extend its territorial sea whenever the country itself sees fit, in the manner provided for by international law. And it will do so.

JOURNALIST: Allow me to ask: Concern has been expressed in the media and public discourse, Mr. Gerapetritis, that essentially Greece is preparing to give up the 12 nautical miles once and for all, and some people are even talking about the general rule of 6 nautical miles. Just two or three days ago, we read about a senior government source saying that 6 miles is unthinkable. So, where exactly are we? How will we approach this?

G. GERAPETRITIS: Ms. Baltatzi, this is an extremely complex issue. The provisions of international law are well-known. There is prudence in the way we deal with things, and above all there is strong diplomatic capital. What we are saying is that Greece will never relinquish its sovereignty, its right to extend its territorial sea to 12 nautical miles. We reserve this right. Obviously, it has never been exercised since the restoration of democracy, but this in no way means that we relinquish our right to do so, which derives independently from international law. Therefore, the whole discussion around remaining at 6 nautical miles is obviously pointless.

JOURNALIST: You say it is pointless but, on the other hand, you know very well – especially you, Mr. Gerapetritis, as the person handling this critical phase – that domestic public opinion expresses itself. And at the same time, you have personally stated that what interests you is securing peace in the region. You said this in a recent interview.

G. GERAPETRITIS: I want to be very, very clear. Right now we find ourselves in an extremely complex and volatile international geopolitical environment. This is, in my view, the most difficult geopolitical environment we have seen since the Second World War, with two major wars in our wider region, with two wars that have an immense impact on our neighbourhood as well. And conditions exist that give rise to probable further tensions related to, for example, migration flows, which are and will become even more intense. The situation in Africa, and especially in Sub-Saharan Africa, is an extremely difficult geopolitical environment. It is very important for Greece to constantly develop its own strong diplomatic position, its own diplomatic footprint. And I would say that we have done this, to the extend possible.

Today, Greece is stronger than ever before internationally. It is at the core of the EU, it is a non-permanent member of the UN Security Council for the next two years, it co-decides global policies on the level of international law, and therefore we are currently at the highest level that we could be. We are not afraid, we have strong confidence and thus, we can discuss the difficult matters. Right now, there are two paths. There is the path to try to preserve for as long as possible the current calmness in our neighbourhood through the understanding we have developed…

JOURNALIST: Yes, but until when?

G. GERAPETRITIS: The truth is, given that there is always the underlying dispute of the non-delimitation of the continental shelf and EEZ, there is constantly a potential risk. This risk would disappear, or in any case be substantially mitigated, minimised, if we could achieve this delimitation. In my opinion, this delimitation is a condition for long-term peace and prosperity for our region. Of course, I want to be clear: There will be no such conclusion if national interests are not fully safeguarded and if we don’t have political and societal consensus.

JOURNALIST: Allow me, since we are coming back to this. If this thing moves ahead, I have a question. Will it concern all three maritime areas, namely northern, southern Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean?

G. GERAPETRITIS: The long-term goal is for there to be delimitation everywhere, in the sense that international law itself requires this. So, I think it would be in the interest of long-term peace and security in our region for us to have delimitation wherever Greece holds sovereign rights. But I repeat, this does not necessarily mean that if we come to an agreement we will proceed with delimitation everywhere. This is something in the very early stages.

I repeat, because I want to be clear – and I am addressing the public through your programme – that we are still a long way from there. We are still at the stage of examining what we are going to discuss. And what we are going to discuss is very clear for the Greek side. I have repeatedly stated before Parliament that we have only one dispute that can be brought before international jurisdiction: the delimitation of the EEZ and the continental shelf. Therefore, if we reach an understanding on the scope of the discussion and the principles on which this discussion will take place, then and only then will we proceed to the technical issues.

JOURNALIST: And to the matter of referral to The Hague, if that is an option.

G. GERAPETRITIS: A referral to The Hague would be the final stage, which could potentially happen if there was an agreement between the two countries on the extent of the dispute to be brought before the International Court of Justice. I repeat that, for Greece, it can only be the matter of delimitation of the EEZ and the continental shelf. That would be the conclusion of a discussion, but that is also the limit of our negotiations. What I want to say, Ms. Baltatzi, is that we really are at an important crossroads in Greek-Turkish relations. And of course, it is good to remember that calm periods were not always a given. In the relatively recent past, we had major tensions with Türkiye. I don’t think anyone doubts that.

JOURNALIST: I think the momentum, Mr. Gerapetritis, is more favorable than ever, or so it seems.

G. GERAPETRITIS: I feel that both these conditions are met; namely, there is a positive, favourable state of affairs, to the point where we can resolve disputes, so as not to create additional pillars of instability. And on the other hand, Greece is stronger than ever before. And when you are strong, you talk in terms that are much more favorable.

JOURNALIST: That's a takeaway, in a nutshell. We’ll see how all this turns out. We had developments, in New York yesterday, and I would like to ask a question about that. We’ll look at it; we’ll hear what you have to say on the Cyprus issue. We had the informal trilateral meeting yesterday between Christodoulides, Tatar and Guterres. What can we expect? What are the scenarios essentially for any developments in the Cyprus issue? We’ve learned that there will be a five-sided meeting with the guarantor powers. What can we expect, Mr. Gerapetritis?

G. GERAPETRITIS: First of all, I would like to express the satisfaction of the Greek government and myself personally at the resumption of the direct talks on the Cyprus issue. A year and a half ago, the Cyprus issue was at a complete standstill and we invested heavily on upgrading this issue, and today it has become a major priority for the UN. It is very important that the Secretary-General himself has undertaken this as a personal project, and we have succeeded – and allow me to say that the improvement in Greek-Turkish relations has contributed decisively to this – in bringing the Cyprus issue to the fore again.

JOURNALIST: However, Türkiye’s position is clear. I mean, yes, it has contributed, but its stance is inflexible. Its position on the resolution of the Cyprus issue is a given.

G. GERAPETRITIS: For a long time, the Turkish Cypriot leadership has raised the issue of sovereign equality – in practical terms, the existence of two states. This is obviously nothing new. What I want to say is that this matter is outside the framework of international law. The resolutions of the UN Security Council are very clear and refer to a Bizonal Bicommunal Federation. The Secretary-General, who speaks for and represents the United Nations, could not deviate from that. Our position is crystal clear, always in agreement with the Republic of Cyprus. There should be a solution within the framework of the UN. It is useful for the communities to talk to each other. You can’t solve a problem without constructive discussion. And we hope these talks continue so that we can exhaust all possibilities for a viable solution.

JOURNALIST: Right. In closing this conversation, for which I thank you very much, Mr. Gerapetritis, I would like to return to your meeting with Mr. Fidan and the announcement we’ll be expecting. That’s when we will decode the positive aspects of this meeting.

G. GERAPETRITIS: We will wait and see.

JOURNALIST: Are you optimistic? Is the glass half full, Mr. Gerapetritis?

G. GERAPETRITIS: I am a proponent of consultative democracy. I believe that democracy is either consultative or non-existent. We have to discuss things because the value of our culture is precisely that we can find solutions to our problems through discussion. If the other side is willing to find a solution through consultations to our major problem, I think there is room for optimism. And it is our duty to do this. It is our duty to the society of today and the society of tomorrow, to future generations, to exhaust every possibility that exists so that we can fully safeguard our national interests – so that we can safeguard peace, security and prosperity in the long term.

JOURNALIST: That’s very clear, Mr. Gerapetritis. Thank you very much for our talk today. I wish you strength and courage moving forward, Mr. Gerapetritis.

G. GERAPETRITIS: Thank you. I’ll certainly need that.

October 16, 2024