Ankara’s fears that the deepening of Greek-American cooperation reduces Turkey’s geopolitical footprint are described in “K” by the neighbor’s analysts. Serhat Güvents, a professor of international relations at Kadir Has University, and Yoruk Isik, a strategist at the Middle East Institute, explain how the balance sheets in the Athens-Washington-Ankara triangle have shifted in recent years to the point that Erdogan is concerned about the American “encirclement” through Greece.

“Greece has not had particularly warm relations with the US in the past, mainly on the issue of the deployment of their troops and their weapons systems. This is how the US organized its operations in the Balkans or the Middle East through Turkey. Having their bases there, they took advantage of the geographical position of Turkey,” explains Professor Guvents. He notes that things have changed since 2013. “After the Arab Spring, the priorities of the two countries have changed. Greece filled the resulting void. Turkey’s decision-making centers are losing an asset that could be used against the US. There is anger about it.”

Mr. Guvans argues that in the Alexandroupolis and Souda bases, “Turkey sees a US military presence, even if it has nothing to do with the size of the Middle East. It’s annoying. And this question is especially raised in anti-American and anti-Hellenist circles inside Turkey. And they reach the “syndrome of the Treaty of Sevres”.

Regarding the threats to transfer American weapons systems and the issue of the sovereignty of the Greek islands, University professor Kadir Has emphasizes that “this does not happen! This is a capricious reading of international law. Devlet Bahçeli (President of the Nationalist Action Party) showed how far the Blue Homeland concept can go. Extreme point.

He himself explains to us that in previous years there was not much tension in Greek-Turkish relations, since, as he emphasizes, “in Turkey, most of those who supported a tough attitude towards Greece were purged and silence was imposed on them by lawsuits” . Variopula and Ergenekon. Now he points out that this anti-Greece rhetoric and narrative is coming back again from the same circles.

Mr. Guventz tells us his own opinion that Greece has replaced Israel in the list of Turkey’s enemies. “In the previous period, Israel took the position of Greece as a threat. For Turkey, Israel has become the number one threat. I must say that Israel, in the worldview of Erdogan and Davutoglu, is perhaps a more serious threat. Because they don’t see Turkey only as a nation state, they see it from a universal point of view.” He himself tells us that the Turkish President does not engage in politics only with a national perception, he does not define enemies only with this logic and emphasizes that “after the end of the” Arab Spring “and when the cost of hostility towards Israel was considered mainly in relations with the United States, then the question of Greece returned.

Regarding the issue of the sovereignty of the islands, professor of international relations Serhat Guvents emphasizes that “this is a capricious reading of international law.”

Mr. Guvents claims that the positions of the extreme circles are slowly and steadily returning, but emphasizes that Ankara does not have stability in its positions. “Erdogan one day says that 19 islands are under occupation, the next day he talks about the Dodecanese islands, the next he talks about demilitarization. Many times this weakens the strength of the arguments. He especially liked “we’ll come suddenly one night” and after that he says everything else. He claims that “Erdogan really wanted to carry out some kind of operation in Syria. Because he saw that military success brings success at home, but the door to Syria was closed,” he says. “Then he turned his attention to Greece, escalated the situation there a little. But it’s a big risk.”

As for the Turkish President’s personal attacks on Kyriakos Mitsotakis, Mr. Juvends explains Mr. Erdogan’s mindset.

“One day, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert came to Istanbul and met with Erdogan. As soon as Olmert returned to his country, the “Hard Pencil” military operation began, and Erdogan then said that he “deceived me.” This worried him. He also sees Mitsotakis. He gives importance to relations between leaders, not between states. He says he “cheated me” and that plays a role. Of course, he might change his mind later.”

Yoruk Isik, a strategic analyst at the Middle East Institute, argues that “the deterioration of US-Turkish relations began with Syria. Syria is the biggest poison in Turkish-American relations. So perhaps Alexandroupolis is a victim of this process. US support for the Kurds and some of the CENTCOM decisions were unacceptable to Turkey, without going into the details of this reaction, right or wrong. Perhaps, given the way decisions are made in Washington, they probably didn’t even think about what was going to happen.”

Mr. Isik tells us that Turkey, like many other large countries, does not properly monitor its neighboring countries. “I mean, what is happening in Greece is not being watched very closely. Because Greece is not the Greece that was ten years ago, 20 years, 30 years ago. Greece has been perhaps the most controversial member of NATO. But it has developed and today it is successfully establishing new relations with the United States. This is how Alexandroupolis gained importance when Turkey hesitated. I think Turkey was for Ukraine, but did not want to oppose Russia. He defended Russia in some matters in order to be more severely punished for such an attitude.

As for the Turkish leadership’s statements about the islands, Mr. Isik notes that “they are unnecessary and full of audacity. It just doesn’t make sense. I mean, peoples just settled here, I mean like Greece and Turkey today.” However, he warns that “the situation in Turkey at the moment is not optimistic. Even oppositionists or secularists have the same amount of anti-Hellenic rhetoric.”