The primary body within the United Nations that deals with policy-making is the General Assembly. With participation from every Member State, it offers a singular platform for multilateral dialogue on the full range of global concerns addressed by the UN Charter.
Through specialized agenda items or sub-items, it addresses specific topics and ultimately adopts resolutions.
In the recent 78th session of the UNGA, Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis gave a speech in which he addressed a number of topics and pertinent issues regarding Greek foreign policy.
Climate Change
He declared that tackling climate change and managing migration will be at the heart of Greece’s Security Council candidacy for 2025/2026. He pledged that, if successful, Greece would make climate and migration the central tenets of its time on the Security Council.
Mitsotakis also addressed the long-standing geopolitical tensions between Greece and Turkey, yet he did so in an optimistic tone which promoted collaboration between the two nations.
Natural Disasters
Given the climate catastrophes that Greece has faced over the past year, it only makes sense that Mistotakis would make an emphasis on climate policy.
The northeast region of Evros recently faced the largest blaze ever recorded in the European Union with a wildfire that burnt continuously for almost two weeks.
Not long after, Storm Daniel affected Greece with severe rainfall that led to extensive flooding, causing billions of euros in damage. It was the worst storm to hit Greece in over a century.
Climate Mitigation Programmes
In his speech, Mitsotakis emphasised the hundreds of millions of euros that Greece has poured into the mitigation of climate change.
While this may initially seem like a leader’s way of falsely promoting a sense of national exceptionalism, an analysis of Greek policy on climate change over the years will show that the Prime Minister is in fact not exaggerating.
Greece’s National Climate Change Programme is one that was first adopted in 1995.
A second programme was then adopted in 2002, which was later revised in 2007.
Despite being a small country, and having faced a major financial crisis post-2008, Greece began to adopt renewable energy sources quite early on (Chatzizacharia, Benekis & Hatziavramidis, 2015).
In fact, Greece saw a large increase in solar energy in the late 2000s.
Proactive government policy, in conjunction with subsidy programs and advertising tactics that highlighted the advantages of solar thermal energy, played a major role in the advancement of such (Dimitroulopoulou & Ziomas, 2011).
Protecting Cultural Heritage
For Greece, it is not just the prevention of natural disasters which is the driving force behind climate policy, but also the protection of its historical landmarks.
Greek’s unique cultural heritage is the foundation of its large tourism industry, and it also fosters a sense of national pride.
A policy document on the effects of climate change on World Heritage properties was adopted by the General Assembly of States Parties to the World Heritage Convention in 2007.
The 44th World Heritage Committee session in 2021 saw the presentation of a new policy statement that had been updated to include all of the findings from previous research and experience.
One of the 14 main elements listed that impact World Heritage’s values is climate change, and as such, it is taken into account in the organization’s periodic reporting and reactive monitoring processes.
Greece acknowledged the impact of climate change in four cases of World Heritage properties – the Acropolis, the archaeological sites of Olympia and Epidaurus, and the Temple of Apollo Epicurius – during its participation in the second periodic reporting exercise in 2014 (Kountouri, Benissi & Spyropoulou, 2022).
This creates another strong incentive for Greece to focus its resources and energy on the mitigation of climate change.
In his speech, Mitsotakis mentions the introduction of Greece’s “first ever climate law”.
This refers to the National Climate Law adopted in May 2022, which seeks to reach a 55% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 and net zero emissions by 2050.
This law reflects Greece’s commitment towards decarbonization and the pursuit of green technology.
Migration
Mitsotakis then turned his attention towards the issue of migration.
He emphasized how critical it is that the international community come together to develop a thorough and well-coordinated strategy to address migrant flows.
The three major objectives of the strategy he presented were to address the underlying causes of migration, to counter human trafficking and migrant smuggling, and to promote legal avenues to mobility.
However, while Greece can be applauded for its efforts to mitigate climate change, the same cannot really be said for its migration policies.
Greece’s historically deficient asylum and reception procedures are a reflection of the conflict between ethical commitments to refugee protection and a securitization logic.
Human rights organizations have widely criticized Greek policies and practices for not meeting European normative and legal standards.
Greece has served as a point of entry into the EU as a member state with exterior borders.
In the context of the EU Migration System of Governance (EUMSG), this has led to further duties being assigned to Greece in terms of managing migration (Karamanidou, 2020).
While EU protection standards and legal frameworks were incorporated into Greek law, indicating a continuous Europeanization process in the area of human rights, Greek migration policies gave priority to border checks and entry prohibitions over asylum requests, indicating a securitization logic that has framed migrants as a danger to public safety, domestic security, and Greek identity.
Human rights norms and the full implementation of the provisions of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) were weakened by administrative and economic constraints.
Greece has particularly struggled to cope with migrant flows from the Syrian civil war, which has left millions of migrants scattered across Europe since 2011.
The Third Economic Adjustment Programme for Greece, or the so-called third bailout package, was negotiated with European creditors under the direction of the Syriza-ANEL coalition in 2015.
The coalition employed issue-linkage tactics to tie interstate negotiations over economic aid to Greece’s asylum-seeker policy.
According to Tsourapas and Zartaloudis (2022), “blackmailing” and “backscratching” were key components of this issue-linkage technique.
Greece implemented a coercive foreign policy technique of “blackmailing” based on threats between 2015 and 2016.
They were able to do this due to the nation’s geopolitically advantageous location at the starting point of the Balkan corridor.
In addition, the suspension of refugee transfers to Greece under the Dublin Regulation reinforced Greece’s status as a ‘transit’ state as opposed to a ‘host’ state.
Another advantage Greece had in this regard was the large number of asylum seekers who were present on Greek soil.
However, in 2016 Greece changed its approach to that of non-coercive negotiation through “backscratching,” hoping to obtain financial rewards in exchange for cooperation.
This change was brought about by the state’s inability to maintain its coercive tactics as its geopolitical influence declined.
The 2016 EU-Turkey Statement resulted in a sharp decline in the number of refugees, making the issue less of a pertinent one for the EU, and Greece was once again forced to accept migrants once the Balkan corridor was closed and Dublin transfers were resumed.
Since Greece is in such an unfavourable position in this regard, it makes for Mitsotakis to pledge to make this issue a priority and to request cooperation from the international community.
Relations with Turkey
The Greek Prime Minister then addressed the country’s relations with its Eastern neighbour, Turkey.
He acknowledged that there are definitely long-standing geopolitical issues between the two nations.
Tensions have been high in the Mediterranean since the summer of 2020 because Greece and Turkey cannot agree on how to fairly delimit maritime zones and offshore oil resources.
Based on the parameters of relative coastal length, proportionality, distance, and non-encroachment, Turkey claims an exclusive economic zone (EEZ) spanning 189,000 square kilometres in the Mediterranean Sea (Cubukcuoglu, 2021).
Greece’s potential EEZ, which stretches from Cyprus to Egypt to the Greek island of Crete, overlaps with this area.
To support their respective positions, both nations refer to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
Despite not being a signatory, Turkey abides by the treaty’s provisions as common law in practice.
The countries have decided to hold exploratory negotiations in an effort to identify points of agreement that will result in a solution that works for both of them.
Turkey anticipates that the discussions will cover every bilateral issue, including ownership rights over “grey zones” in the Aegean Sea, territorial waters, and the demilitarization of the Greek islands.
Greece, on the other hand, wants to limit the discussions to the Aegean and Mediterranean EEZ delimitation problem.
Any military conflict over marine zones has the potential to rapidly spread to other domains and turn into a full-scale war, which is why both parties are determined to settle the tensions in a peaceful manner.
In his speech, Mitsotakis claimed that the two nations have made good progress over the past months in terms of normalizing their relationship, and that it is within their mutual interest to continue down this path.
Cyprus
Another geopolitical tension between Greece and Turkey is that of Turkey’s invasion and occupation of Cyprus.
Even prior to Cyprus gaining independence in 1960, Turkey had long supported the island’s partition or geographic federation.
Partition would allow Turkey to prevent the unification of Cyprus with Greece, thus preventing Greek forces being stationed near Turkey’s shore on its southeast flank (Fravel, 2010).
Mitsotakis was more stern and confrontational with this issue, indicating higher tensions than that of the maritime zones.
He emphasized that the invasion and occupation violated the core tenets of the UN Charter and reiterated Greece’s commitment to Cyprus’ territorial integrity and sovereignty.
Finding a just, workable, and mutually acceptable solution to the Cyprus problem continues to be a top priority for Greece, and this will surely be relevant in its candidacy for the UN Security Council.
Greece has traditionally supported the rights of the Greek Cypriot community and the
stability of the Eastern Mediterranean region, and its foreign policy has long prioritized finding a solution to the Cyprus issue.
The Prime Minister’s remarks also demonstrate Greece’s credibility in sustaining these ideals and demonstrate its determination to preserve the fundamental principles of the UN.
This could be interpreted as a more widespread dedication to the UN system and the international rule of law.
Conclusion
Greece’s diplomatic landscape is quite complex, as Prime Minister Mitsotakis’ speech very clearly illustrates.
While the country’s commitment to the National Climate Law highlights the commendable progress made in climate policy, Mitsotakis recognizes the urgent need for an international strategy to address migration, an area in which Greece has come under fire for its inadequate asylum and reception protocols.
The long-standing hostilities between Greece and Turkey over the disputed maritime zones and Cyprus’ occupation serve to emphasize the fine line Greece must walk in order to preserve regional stability.
Mitsotakis’ optimistic assessment of the developments with Turkey points to a dedication to peaceful settlement, which is essential for averting broader hostilities.
Greece’s dedication to maintaining Cyprus’ territorial integrity and its emphasis on following UN principles establish it as a staunch protector of international law.
With Greece aiming for a Security Council seat, Mitsotakis’ balanced approach suggests that the country is facing a variety of issues while also promising to make a positive contribution to global governance.
Bibliography
Chatzizacharia, K., Benekis, V. and Hatziavramidis, D. (2016) “A blueprint for an energy policy in Greece with considerations of climate change,” Applied energy, 162, pp. 382–389.
Cubukcuoglu, S.S. (2021) “A Maritime Dispute In the Mediterranean: Assessing the Greece-Turkey Relationship Through the Lens of Neorealism,” The Fletcher forum of world affairs, 45(2), pp. 65–74.
Dimitroulopoulou, C. and Ziomas, I. (2011) “Update of indicators for climate change mitigation in Greece,” Energy policy, 39(10), pp. 6495–6504.
Fravel, M.T. (2010) “The Limits of Diversion: Rethinking Internal and External Conflict,” Security studies, 19(2), pp. 307–341.
Karamanidou, L. (2020) “Migration, Asylum Policy and Global Justice in Greece,” The EU Migration System of Governance. Cham: Springer International Publishing (The European Union in International Affairs), pp. 89–117.
Kountouri, E., Benissi, C. and Spyropoulou, S. (2022) “Integrating Climate Change into Protection Policies in Greece”, Internet Archaeology, 60.
Tsourapas, G. and Zartaloudis, S. (2022) “Leveraging the European Refugee Crisis: Forced Displacement and Bargaining in Greece’s Bailout Negotiations,” Journal of common market studies, 60(2), pp. 245–263