I am not admiring the Turks or praising them... but they have done better than us in various sectors including long-term planning and strategic objectives and we need to acknowledge that rather than dismiss it if we are to go forward.
The facts IMHO are as follows:
We are heading on collision course with Turkey regarding:
i) Oil exploitation (Aegean sea)
ii) Cyprus question
iii) engineered question of muslims in Thrace
The situation in more detail as far as I am concerned is that Turkey is not satisfied with current situation in Aegean i.e near total control of Aegean shipping lanes/exit to mediterranean + potential aegean sea oil by Greece.
She is trying to creat a de facto denial of current legislation regarding the above: i.e 12nm, lausanne treaty etc.
She wishes to engineer a situation where Greece is brought to the negotiating table. There are various cards she can play including: Theological school of Chalki, Ecumenical patriarchate of COnstantinople etc etc
These of course are bargaining chips to sweeten the deal which of course involves loss of soverignty in AEgean sea in exchange for - looseining the noose around our neck in Thrace, solution for cyprus etc
Greece is playing a game which IMHO is not completely correct. She is playing the game of pacifying Turkey, playing the international card, the EU card, the good boy card.. this is OK if is is short-term and diversionary however it is not. It is the core of our strategy vis a vis Turkey.
Why do I believe this is the wrong strategy? simply put it is because Turkey is developing the appropriate counter-strategy to our strategy and we are not developing and effective counter-countery-strategy.
What do I mean?
Turkey is up-arming and developing independence militarily hence our diplomatic card: veto in EU, UN sanctions etc etc in case of war will be ineffectual inasmuch as Turkey with her superior military force may engineer de facto situations in Aegean such as what we have seen in Cyprus since 1974....
The correct approach may well be diversionary in the short term but needs to be backed-up by long-term strategic goals. I do not see Greece wiht long term strategic milirary planning. This does not mean of course necessarily not buyin off the shelf. However this does mean a certain consideration to military procurement.
For instance the following are unacceptable for the greek military in 2010:
- no U214 TURKISH ANSWER = 6 U-214
- no ammo for LEO TURKISH ANSWER = LEO2A4 WITH AMMO + ALTAY
- no replacmeent for G3 TURKISH ANSWER = DOMESTIC RIFLE
- no modern IFV/APC TURKISH ANSWER = DOMESTIC IFV
- no new generation fighter contract TURKISH ANSWER = F35 (100 UNITS +)
- no maritime patrol aircraft TURKISH ANSWER = 9 CN-25
- deficient/out-dated helicopter fleet TURKISH ANSWER = HUGE HELO FLEET AND MODERN
- deficinecies in integrating russian equipment (S300,Zubr)
- no contract for upgrading F-16 fleet and M2000 fleet yet TURKISH ANSWER = UNIFORM CCIP FLEET
- no contract yet for FREMM or otherwise future frigate TURKISH ANSWER = MILGEM TF2000
- apache fleet not yet upgraded, not enough longbow radar, no radar-guided hellfire missiles TURKISH ANSWER = T129
- insufficient numbers of modern howitzers TURKISH ANSWER = FIRTINA
without answers to the above questions **URGENTLY** I am afraid we are heading for a bad surprise.