Greek-Turkish Rapprochement: The Impact of ‘Disaster diplomacy'?* Jasus Ken-Linosay (Coordinator, Greek- Turkish Forum, Royal Unite Services Insitute, London This article challenges the widely held view that the Greek-Turkish ‘rapprochement of 199 was the direct result ofthe collaboration following the earthquakes that hit both countries chat year. The high-level political ‘and diplomatic efforts which form the basis of the improved relations and which preceded the earthquakes are examined. The article goes on 10 provide a detailed account of the efforts at governmental and non. {governmental levels 1 mitigate the effects ofthe disasters and illustrate the {impact of the woo disastrous events on public perceptions ofthe enemy’ ad (on bilateral relations. In this context, the author warns against the simplistic assumption that diplomatic efforts should be causally linked with the occurrence of disasters. Instead, he assert that disasters may have 4 multiplying and legitimising effect on diplomatic rapprocliement, Since the middle ofthe 1950s, relations between Greece and Turkey have been a source of Serious concern for peace and stability in the eastern Mediterranea ‘and have presented the North Adantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) with its most protracted internal division. in addition to the seemingly intractable problem of Cyprus, disputes over territorial sovereignty in the Aegean Sea, and Turkish ‘arguments about the negative role Greece has played in Turkish relations with the European Union (EU), have served to make the relationship between these onsinal allies a source of constant concern for peace and stability in southeast Europe. However, since March 1999, something almost miraculous appears to ‘have happened: Athens and Ankara seem at last to be willing to place theit relations on a cordial footing, At the heat of this new-found relation success of the two-foreign ministers, George Papandreou and Ismail Cem, in identifying areas of mutual concern and agreeing measures for bilaveral cooperation, Yel, im the minds of many, there has been a tendency to altibute this enormous change inthe nature of Greek- Turkish relations to the earthquakes that struck the two countries in August and Septembaee 1999, rather than to focus on the efforts of the two governments. Inthe altermath ofthese tragedies, che world ‘witnessed an outpouring of emotion between the people of the rwo countries and vas amazed 10 see that such feelings seemingly altered the whole pattern of relations between these, often hostile, allies. Selzing upon the events of August {and September 1999, many commentators touk to referring to the change of Felations between Athens and Ankaea as heng a process of Wisaster diplomat ‘White the earthquakes certainly had a major impact in changing public Perceptions of the «lationship, © elaim that the earthquakes hrought about ‘approchement is both factually weong, and indeed weakens the basis for he process. While public opinion is undoubtedly powerful it is also fickle. And a process built solely upon a popular outburst, such 28 that seen atthe ime of the Uisasters, would be unlikely co stand the significant ests that are inevitably placed "upon peace processes n realty, dhe current détente is built upon something far ‘more valuable, Namely, a sincere recognition by two governments that in the contemporary international environment a policy of cooperation is far more advantageous than continued confrontation ‘This is not to say that ‘disaster diplomacy’ has not been important; it has played a fundamental role in the development of the process of rapprochement between Athens and Ankara, However, this impact has been most pronounced not inthe formulation of policies to foster rapprochement but in the creation of a ‘postive environment in which to implement such polices. Rather than start the process, ‘isaster diplomacy’ opencdrthe way forthe develapmnent of yreater ties tween the people ofthe two countries and thus allowed for the srengtheningof We dialogue developed between the two governments in advance of the earthquakes, Therefore, disaster diplomacy isa process of'tizen diplomacy’ that has leitimised, and generated popular suppor fr, an oficial process that had already heen put in place several months earlier. 1.Greek-Turkish disputes For almost filty years, relations between Greece and Turkey have seemingly varied between cold and hostile. Despite the fact thatthe two countries lived peacefully side-by-side throughout the 1930s and 1940! the emergence of the {question of Cyprus asan issue in the mid- 1950s quickly brought the two countries {nto diplomatic conflict and much ofthe goodwill which had developed between the two governments was lost as Athens and Ankara worked to secure a solution fn the basis of the interests of their respective communities on the island Although Cyprus was granted independence in 1960, Greece and Turkey continued, by virtue of the Cypriot constitution? co be involved in the affairs of the island and came close to conflict on several occasions over political developments onthe island. tn July 1974, a major war between the two countries was only narrowly averted after Turkey staged an invasion of the (sland in response o @ coup against the Cypriot resident svchbishop Makarivs, instigated by the Greek military government ofthe day ‘while Cyprus has continued to play @ major part in Greck-Turkish relations since 1974, the two countries have also faced a number of bilateral afferences, 216 CcaMERIOGE seviEW oF HrTERNATIONAG AFeaINS‘most notably over a range of issues In the Aegean. For its part, Ankara has ‘demtitied a number of area of contention, such as trstorial waters and airspace Greece rejects these disputes, and recognises the issue ofthe delimitation of the ‘Aegean continental shelf as the only legitimate point of contention? The ‘aepument chat there ae significant oll reserves in the Aegean Sea has, however, ‘made this issue particularly important, and the dispate lel Athens and Ankara the verge of military engagement in 1976 and 1987, ‘Although there have been attempis io addess these differences over the yes, We has been achieved. While the question of Cypeus continues to remain tthe snds ofthe United Nations (UN), andis essentially regarded as being a matte to besolved bythe Greek and Turkish Cypriot political leadership, and therefore not a direct Greek-Turish issue, Ht nevertheless has a significant cole in shaping Greek-Turkish relations. As far as bilateral disputes are concerned, a number of attempts have been made to find solutions, all of which have met with lie success. Prior to the current process of rapprochement, the most noteworthy ‘attempt by the governments of Greece and Turkey 0 improve relations was the Davos process intited in January 1988, asa direct result ofthe 1967 Aegean etisi. The most notable success of this process was the signing of the ‘Memorandum of Understanding, which set out a framework of interaction inthe Aegean. At the same time, it ed othe iitation of regulat contacts between the Prime Ministers of Greece and Turkey, Andteas Papanureou (he father of George Papandreou) and Turgut Ozal. However, the Davos process was brought toned {1 1991, when a new government led by Constandinus Misotaki in Greece stated {that Cyprus, rather than bilateral diferences, shoul be the primary focus of tention in bilateral relations, and that no oveall improvement could take place Without a solution othe islands continued division? Even in the ligt of almost five decades of poor relations beween Greece and Turkey. the years 1996-1999 were shrouded in particular tension and mistrust In Jenuary 1996, a major cisis developed between the two counties when Turkey laid claim to the small iste of lia (known as Kardak in Tukish) inthe eastern Aegean, Athens rejected the claim, and a military standoff rapidly developed. On {his occasion, a direct confit was averted a the last minute by the intervention ‘ofthe United States, which managed to broker an agreement forthe two sides to disengage their military forces from around the islet and effectively ‘agree to Lisagree’ over the status of Imia® Over the course of the following eighteen ‘months, relations improved a litte, helped by a meeting of the Greek Prime Minister Costas Simits and the Turkish President Suleyman Demicel athe NATO summit meeting in Madrid in July 1897. However, just six months later, a train of events began which brought any hope of an improvement of Greck-turkish relations to a grinding halt The decision ofthe EU, atthe European Council summit in Luxembourg in December 1997, 10 set as a condition for Turkish entry an improvement of Ankara’ relations with Athens, did not lead to more cordial ties, as many had hoped, but, in fact. only served to heighten tensions between the neighbours, Steadastly insisting that it would not accept consitons that were mote stringent, or wide angng than those ppd to oer potential candaes for EU ent, Ankara made lear hat it woo fal in ine a ake what conse tobecuncestonstois nego During ti period pete tha Tey was conscous tying ater rulings tebe seen obs making concessions bytaing an even songer stance than ural vi- Alene so a8 o ensue ha stu note seen oe igi 1 demands Concurrent with he Lerbourg Summit, the question of the deployment of Rusan made 200 missles in Gypoe generated anew more dangerous and miliaris dimension tothe GreekTushreaonship, Amos mmedaely Aer the anary 197 decison ofthe (reek Cpa) gorerment of Cyprus to Oder the Russian made anit mises ws part offi Defence Done seh reece? Turey responded by stating that wouldnt allow the presence of these nee in Gjprus and would take all measures, tary necessary. 0 ensure tha they woul ot be deployed Ove Ihe next months thee were replat bouts of speculation sbout what would happen the mses ved and thee vere number fears mae by ie international community to petsiae al the Parties concerned o step back he especie positon By Angst 980 he Station was ready t come to # head Tiley reststement te poston led o sci dn fh ab he ces of cnn pa se ypriot governments decision to buy the mises, Following considerable internal deat, the government o Prime Minster Smis made lear tha thatthe destbisaton of the rans between Greece and Turkey woul serious ham to Greces ellos to enter te singe Earopean errncy an that fren the ilar ica of defending the and nt event af anata the Insts shoul, stad be deployed in cee, Despite thei easing tenons following te decison bythe government of pruste acep the Grek place he misses in ee things we sil to ger wore Thue the enue flor tstainy was the lender of the Karsan Werks Party (PRR, Abia Ocalan Following explin from yi inthe ator of 198, de to milary posure fom Try, the PRK. leader had rope looking or sum Wh the spor of «number of Grek sympathise the PRK lender avd in Green Janvary 199 easing the penal disso situation that it ad on isan the Greek government removed him rm the country and placed hin in ite Embasy in Rea white to were made tnd ste haven obi i en Aca stat The Turkish secu force nly captured Ocalan in February a het the security ofthe Gres Ebay compound in Nob Th hh rte cpt of he PR else ; Gece of beng tsa sponer of tevrom, ant Alen respnaed By bigging what so Tskys uman igs as gata te ard omit A the level ofthe two peoples te elle were st drama Turkey there were public demonstrations ar thousands took fo the sects stain Gece and desaing ian cera neyo the Tarksh people Mth Sametime, he media fanned public feng pblishingatles stung kang wandered arounhheld ties’ between the PKK and the Greck government, tn addition, several newspapers published accounts of meetings between Ocalan and other senior PAK officals with Greek politicians and military officers. 1m Greece, popular feling was no less strong than tha in Turkey. Anti-Turkish feeling reached a peak as public demonstrations of support for Ocalan were staged around the country and the media took to proclaiming Turkey as a barbarian state chat amped the rights of its citizens. Asa result of the Ocalan alla, hostility between the wo counties, at both the official and the populat level, was greater than at any time since 1974 IL.The path torapprochement “The tensions between the two governments proved to be relatively short-lived ‘The roots of rapprochement came jus six weeks after the Ocalan incident with the Star ofthe NATO airstrikes n Kosovo and Yugoslavia in March 1999, For both Greece and Tutkey the war in Yugoslavia cepresented both a substantial threat to ‘egional security as well asa real danger to theie internal stability In particular, the vast exodus of refugees became a source of cancern for both Athens and Ankara, For the Greck government, the main fear was that many fleeing the region would seek to cross inta Greece and join the large number of legal Albanian immigrants already within the country. For Turkey, the question was more a financial concern, {As a policy, the Turkish government did not worry about taking the displaced Kosovars, seeing it more asa duty ta people with whom they Tet they had an historical te. Ankara did nonetheless fear thatit would not be able either to house (rto feed all the retugees. Another factor of the conflict that concerned both countries was the possibility of «redrawing of the borders inthe Balkans. While most Greeks may have supported the Serbian cause, and most Tueks the Kosovo Albanians, both {governments were united in thie opposition to any changes tothe frontiers ofthe region and the dangers that such a precedent could set in theit relations with their various neighbours as well asat the levelof bilateral relations with one another, I fact, twas this fear that led the United States and the United Kingdom to state that fone of the key reasons for taking action was to prevent the threat of a wat developing between Greece and Turkey - a comment that drew heavy criticism {rom both the Greek and Turkish governments. ‘Thus, ieritation at being presented asa cause for conic, coupled with mutual coneems over the fate ofthe large number of refugees seaming out of Yugoslavia and shared fears about any redrawing of territorial boundaries in the Balkans forced the two counties (0 take action. Rather than approaching the matter {hough diplomatic channels, the two foreign ministers, tsmail Cem and the newly sppointed George Papandieou, took the direct route and spoke to each othet iretly over the telephone to discuss the matter of Kosovo. Recognising that they could communicate well with one another and that they shared similar views on regional mattes, the two held a number of further telephone calls heoughout the following weeks, all of which further cemented the development of personal ties between the wo men, However, for Turkey, the question of Greek involvement with the PKK still remained a significant issue affecting the bilateral relations between the two countries. To ths extent, on 24 May 1999, Cem sate a his Greek counterpart and proposed tha the two countries discuss the problem af ertorsm and that the two “Ministries examine waysin which to initiate a plan of eeconelition between their ‘uso countries. In early June, Papandreou wrote back congratulating Cem on his reappointment as Foreign Minister. Accepting the need for discussions, the Greek Minister proposed a number of areas of mutual concern such as tourism, the environment, and organised crime that he felt should form the bass of dialogue ® Soon thereafter, the wo ministers met at the UN in New York and, during their subsequent discussions, decided to establish a working group composed of senior diplomats [rom the two Forelgn Ministries that would look into practical measures that could be formulated to promote greater bilateral cooperation in ‘The fist of these meetings took place in July 1999. And while ttle overt progress was made, there was a feeling tha the actual effort made by the two ‘countries to promote dislogue was a remarkable achievement, Thus as the talks adjourned forthe traditional August break, tobe reconvened in early September, most observers welcomed the process but remained sceptical about the chances of concrete results. uch caution was, nonetheles, swept away in the early hours of 17 August, when a massive eacfiquake, measuring 7.5 on the Richter scale, steack the industeal city of amit in northwestern Turkey. IIL-The lzmit earthquake and the Greek reaction Fifteen minutes after the earthquake, the Greek Embassy in Ankara received a call from the Turkish Foreign Ministry requesting Greek assistance. Immediately, a message was sent 10 Athens, and just half an hour after the earthquake, Cem received a cal from Papandreou, the fist he received from any country, offering whatever assistance was necessary. Cem informed Papandeou that Turkey would Given its own experiences of earthquakes, the Grecks had established an emergency rescue team, EMAK, and without hesitation the services of the eam. were offeed tothe Turkish government to assist in whatever way possible. Thus, within hours, the Greek government had assembled a team to depart to Turkey under the guidance of the Civilian Protection Secretary General, Dimitris Katrivanos. In addition oa twenty-five strong eam of EMAK rescue workers, fully equipped and complete with sniffer dogs specially trained to locate people trapped in debris and wreckage, the group also included Greck eismologiss, sent to assist their Turkish counterparts In trying to ascertain the extent and whereabouts of possible aftershocks and two mobile hospital units that had been ‘made available witha team of eleven doctors. Later that afternoon, the group was ‘own to Istanbul on three C-130 transport planes of the Greek Air Force. Soon ‘hereafter further teams went tothe region including a delegation of ilteen Greek nurses and, following a decision taken by the Parliament, a six-member delegation of Greek MPs with medical training. ACthe same time. Athens sent twofie fighting planes to tani wo help the local authorities in the efforts to put out a ‘major blaze that had occutred atone of Turkey's largest ol efineres ™ While the tremendous efforts of the rescue teams continued, the Greek public also got to work raising money and collecting food, medicines, and other desperately needed items to help the vitims of the earthquake. In Athens, the “Mayor Dimitris Avramopoulos appealed to all Athenians to give generously to the efforts. At the same time, the Greck media, which had also taken the Kad in Promoting nationalist, anti-Tutkish feelings over the years, tok a sudden interest in the situation and most of the major Greek media organisations. sent representatives tothe region to cover the unfolding events Indeed, on most ofthe ‘major television stations, the tragedy of the Turkish earthquakes received round the clock coverage, Particular attention was pad tothe efforts of EMAK and few ‘in Greece, or Turkey, wil ever forget the Image ofa Greck rescue worker ling a nine-year-old survivor trom the rubble ofa collapsed apartment block Asa reset ‘ofthe positive media coverage the solidarity thatthe Greek people had started (0 feel with their neighbours served to increase stil further the donations offered from around the county. ‘Within twenty-four hours of the start of the fund-raising effort, the Greek People had donated 24 million Drachmas (66 billion Turkish Lita, or Approximately GHPS0,000) At the same time, a number of groups launched ‘appeals of their own, including the Greek Women’s Association and the Greek Municipalities’ Association, which presented a cheque of USS100,000 to the ‘Turkish Ambassador in Greece. Peshaps most surprising inthe view ofthe Turkish, ‘people was the fact chat even the Orthodox Church, which had long been seen as & bastion of ant-Turkish sentiment in Greece, launched a fund-raising drive and that collections were taken after Sunday services in churches throughout the county, Realising the need to coordinate the efforts, the mayors of Athens, Thessaloniki, Pracus, Patras, and frakleon met on 24 August in onder to discuss the best means by which to coordinate the distribution of humanitarian aldo ‘Turkey. AC a news conference held after the meeting, Mayor Avramopoulos explained that, following the discussion, the mayors had established. a coordinating body, ented Operation Solidarity, in Athens and that this body would oversee the common effort ofthe five cities to gather and dispatch the hhumanitatian aid already ctalling 10 containers worth of material? norder to ensure that these elforts being made by the municipalities were put to best use, Mayor Avramopoulos informed the journalists chat he was departing that same day for ftanbul, where he would meet with his counterpart Al Mane Gurtuna and discuss the setting-up of a 1000-tent settlement for people made homeless by the sastr, which would Inchde a hospital and playground On his atrial few hours later, Mayor Avramopoulos expressed his hope that this wil ‘bea step to bring together the Greek and Turkish people. The ditches formed by the quake could turn into a passage-way between (wo nations!” For his part Mayor Gartuna stated that he hoped that the events could lead to lasting peace ‘nd added that all the people of Turkey were grateful forthe eons being mde Groeee to help them ‘To a country that had long believed that Greece and the Greeks sought 10 estailse the Turkish state, the pictures of massive amounts of aid now being colleced fo thet benefit a a time of weekness proved to be a watershed in thelt perceptions oftheir neighbours. While one might have assumed that there may hhave been a tendency to regard such moves with suspicion, thie reaction could not Ihave ben further frorn the minds of the people of Turkey. Instead, most people welcomed the help with open arms and praised the Greek people for the ‘generosity a such atime. Nowhere was this feeling of gratitude mote pronounced than in the Turkish media, which had for so long been the vanguards of ant-Greek sentinient. Ie was not long before the newspapers took Lo proclaiming the ever lasting gratitude of all Tucks tothe Greek ‘brethren: tn the days that followed, the significant changes that had occurred in lations became even more pronounced 1s the Greek SKAL television station teamed up with TGHT, a Turkish television channel, to conde joint ive broadcasts NeDissenting voices There wre dating voces in both counts about te eve cooperation and gd that had been developing between Giese a Turkey For example in Turkey the Minster af Heath Osman Drm,» member of the MI he baton prinere of he Trish goverment, was reore to have sl that hele Grek nor Armenian sistas wa eure or wanted. Furthermore the Minster formed US hota ship, which ha aed to prove med tease that ita not seule, as ee was no oe to HansferW The Comments provoked + major ou) In Tukey and were soon being repred Sntrnatnly-Poughou the lining days he aice of Huy, oe of he Imajor Tk newspapers, wee inundated with fates an el om tenes pulled the comments and ang the eigaton ofthe inter Such as the bale hate inter wa fred Co poole sying tha he ad een Insqoted and tha al ep was welcome fram never sources. ew weet Inter rms gave aero Geek Newspaper ich he respond thealegaons made gsint im’ stating sss dese ose pene Cereap berween is country and Greece and noting hiswllngnes lo meet ih his Grek In iets, thee were a hase who dsenie rom he ne feng being exqressed between the wo counties, For enampl, ina arcle published under thei ‘De ot extend helping hand fo blod-sained Al, Georgie one tthe Greek people are polite, sensitive, benevolent, and unbelievably ciuilized, They were very distressed and deeply moved and instantly hastened (o the side oftheir Turkish neighbour to lend ita hand in the disaster that strucit..whet is happening wo the Grecks then? Are we going to do damage to ourselves to show our'kind heats Are we oing to Forget the Atsila 2% which during the samve time in 1978 occupied hal of Cypeusand obliged uso leave the rltary structure of NATO - an error we are stil paying for (| The earthquakes in Turkey eft ood and teaes and vast 'sery. Perhaps thisis the opportunity for an opposition movement 0 rise ‘up in that country too, which would bring about changes. And only then ‘would a rapprochement between the twa peoples be weleome, beneficial and useful. tm spite of minority views such as this, effors to support Turkey were continuing throughout Greece and there were numerous meetings now taking, place between local officials coordinating micro-humanitarian elforis, On 7 September 1999, the Greek Ambassador in Ankara, oannis Korants, received & {delegation from the Womens Commission ofthe True ath Part (DYP). Speaking to the group, the Greek Ambassador explained the reasons for the emotional Greek reaction: Many people wonder what happened to the Greek people in the earthquake. The answer isso simple, Greece is in the same seismic zone and faced serious quakes in the past. Some cides were levelled, The ‘earthquake in our neighbour was percelved as a disaster in Greece the ‘earthquake has destroyed our taboos. From now on, we wil follow the path of peace and cooperation. !© U.TheAthensearthquakeand the Turkish reaction Just hours after these words were said, at three eelock in the afternoon, an ‘earthquake hit Athens. Despite the fact that Turkey was stil reeling frm the blow ofits own earthquake, Ankara was the Mist country to respond to the news Within ‘minutes of the news of the earthquake in Athens having been received in Anat ‘a member of the AKUTsearch and rescue team called Koran to inform him that an earthquake had been recorded in Athens and that they were prepated to offer their assistance. Recalling the conversation later, the Greek Ambassador remembered telling the AKUT representative o stay on the line white We tried (0 find out more information. The offer was accepted and within two hours the team Wwete ready to depart. For the firs ime ever, AKUT would be carrying out an ‘operation ina foreign country. ‘As wells thecal fom AKUT, the Ambassador soon received a call fom Prime [Minister Ecevit’ advisor on foreign policy to convey the Prime Ministers best wishes tothe Greck government, He also tld Koranti that Ecevit had wid to cat Prime Minister Simits diectly, but the ines had been busy indeed, President Demirel and Speaker Yildirim Akbulut had also met with the same problem when they had tied to telephone theie counterparts to wish Gresce well! AQ the same ‘ime, the Greek Consulate in istanbul reported tha its switchboard was being ‘verelnied by calls from people wishing Greece a speedy recovery and offering, help in whatever way they could.” The presence of the Turkish growing relationship that was d am came to be Seen as farther evidence of dhe ‘loping between the two counties. and thus Avra wivren vousny wos 229 {urtor cemented the feelings that had becomeso apparent in the previous weeks. Upon their return to Istanbul on $ September 1999, Nasuh Mahruki, the head of ‘the AKUT team, noted that he had been pleased to be able o fulfil his duty in ‘athens and that they had worked non-stop fortwo days. Another member ofthe team insisted that they had put just as much effort in thei operation to help the GGrovks as the team had exerted helping their own people just a coupe of weeks ‘earlier? Speaking about Turkish suppor for Greece, Prime Minister Ecevit noted that the news ofthe disaster in Greece had met with immediate reaction in Turkey and the government had worked round the clock to coondinate its efforts to assist Greece = While the scale of the earthquake in Greece was far smaller than the one in Turkey and resulted in around 94 deaths, as opposed to the 15,000 (the most widely accepted estimate) in Turkey, the offer of support was received with sgratinide in Greece, By now, the spirit of friendship that had been developing between the people was becoming a tidal force. Even those in Grovce and Turkey unused, and unviling, to see the good in each other started to speak about the Dbenefits that the earthquakes had brought about for both countries. In a statement, Ismail Kose, the Whip ofthe nationalist MIIP, adopted the language of the past 0 express the spirit of the future, when he state ‘here has been hostility between Turkey and Greece because ofthe latter’ side dating back to the Ottoman peri, an attitude that was recently manifested by Greece's support for the PKK, which engages in activities syainst Turkey... However, the aid extended by Greeve after the earthquake iy the Marmara region and Turkey's attitude regarding the quake experienced in Greece some time after that brought about a rapprochement between the two nations. This is a historic {sie} opportunity This opportunity must be well utlsed and the problems bbetween the wo countries must be resolved?» In Ankara, Greek Ambassador Korantis gave an interview to ane of Turkeys leading newspapers in which he thanked all the Turkish people and the Turkish government for all that they had done for his country since the Athens ‘carthquake. He recalled that, over the previous week, he had received hundreds of calls ftom people offering words of sympathy for Greece und that the Embassy had received gifts of flowers and offers to donate blood, money, and other necessary items - even refering to one caller who hau offered to donate a kidney toa victim in Greece alter remembering that a Greek, fora Turkish victim, had madea similar folfer. When asked about whether or not the felings of goodwill that had been ‘penevated would ast, Korantis answered that the co sides had wanted to improve {her relations before the earthquakes occurred. Infact, he noted that they had taken positive initiatives for that purpose even before the disasters but that the ‘earthquakes had strengthened the postions of the two governments with regard to the dialogue as the people and the media are now watching the behaviour ofthe ‘ovo governments In conclusion, Korantis noted that he hoped that there wouldno be eta the previous sate of bilea eons and ha here were such an adverse change it would bedlificult to explain to the people why that hed sucha aes charg plain tothe people why that had ‘This spirit ofthe people was caught well nan editorial. appeating inthe Greek daily newspaper Eletherotypia on 14 September 199 in which the paper sessed the extent to which the earthquakes had managed to bving the people together ‘and had served to break down prejudices between the two nations. Calling onthe PoltcaIeaders of both courites to respond to this new atmosphere, the paper called for a non-aggression pact to be signed, without the use of « mediator between Greece and Turkey » a move that the eaitocal considered to be the obligation of the leaders because It was, ‘dictated by the sentiments and immediate needs of the two peoples, who have been tied and tested by Vt Post-disaster diplomacy The pul reaction noth cote toes evens ws velning Ove the flowing ests and mons he evel of cmtcs Beton nee ot Iwo counties rose dramatically Wheres in pros tines tse Geeks na Turks who tad ted to promote grsterunestnding and comoneang beoveen hina counties ha eed hee afay lm pe long Giastr there was 2 proleraon of groups essed tha ma ie togeter thet ple No longer pain sch yond ae suiln. nat groups sta spgig up allen the wos aad Polson an mea communes inthe to countess el an number of municalie A the same tine a tage nee hola as Propo to promote mproved aon eteen het counins forsee {ne newspaper are, writen by twa eminent poles one Geek eat ne other sh called forthe deetomen of lana beeen ie cos Sovig ses dea cooperation between ties hag eel confidence ing meses” m sewer By the time the oi reo-Tuish commie of eral tom ihe wp ines of orcgn Ais reconvened meal Speer tian ns Poul ptis to achive ets ints The reo eaton ea the login the minds othe pic abot counuteshad becnshed as sie and thee wos nt only ad supp forthe als bat abe he se ferns fa hemsees und spun peste te eee achiev ess The wrk fhe wo oegn Mites a legitimise inthe Populations. Indeod, the whole atmosphere of {he talks had now changed and a new spirit of fiendship and work replaced the *uspicion that marked the July discussions, I was even reported that among, dhe decisions the two groups had taken, and which would be discussed further the third round of talks due to be held in October, were the development oft neve ‘allway tink between Thessaloniki and Istanbul, via Alexandroupolis with the introduction of a high-speed tain and the ways in which to modernise the «customs procedures between the two counties Additionally, questions concerning tourii were brought up and the Turkish delegation suggested that this could form the subject of a Forum in October raving together the public and private sectors, Other areas of focus that were reportedly tacked were cooperation in the energy sector, involving technology exchanges and the inter-connection of ciccuit systems af the Greek and Turkish electricity networks, and education, although questions of minority education were not included # However, the subject that undoubtedly sparked the most inerest at the time was the decision of Foreign Minister Cem, in a speech made before the UN's General Assembly, o put forward the idea af the establishment of 8 joint Greek and Turkish disaster relief force (Over the folowing months, relations bewween the wo countries Nowered Perhaps the most remarkable event of the whole process came in December 1999 ‘when. at the European Councit meeting of EU heads of sate and government in Helsinki, Greece supported Turkey’ bid to become a candidate for EU ‘membership, & move that finally laid (0 rest the il-eelings caused by the Luxembourg decision, It should be noted, however, that Turkey’ acceptance of the deal came about only as result of some quick, but delicate, manoeuvring on the part ofthe EU to persuade Ankara that the terms of the agreement were no -more onerous than terms placed on other candidate fr EU membership. ‘Although many felt that this decision on the part of Athens was a foregone ‘onehision in the ight ofthe earthquakes ofthe summer, was by no means an «easy decision for Athens to take. The acceptance of Turkey’ eandidacy involved Uolicate negotiations with the government of Cyprus, which regarded Greek moves with a certain amount of suspicion.” In addition, the decision also ‘equited the Simitis government to persuade the Greek public that accepting the Turkish candidacy without a prior show of goodwill om Ankara did not represent 4 loss to Greek national interests, but was, in fact, a vitory insofar a it reconstituied Greek Turkish issues as EU-Turlish matters, a reformulation that presented Turkey with some concern, Inthe period since the Helsinki Summit, there has been a steady improvement of relations In January and February 2000, the rapprochement between the two countries was further cemented when the two Foreign Ministers visited each ‘other’ capitals in order to signa package of nine inital agreements that had been formulated by the committees of the two Foreign Ministries and which coveted areas such as the development of tourism, the protection ofthe enviconment and the combating of organised crime. In May and June 2000, forthe fist time in over twenty-five years the two countries staged joint military exercises in Greece, ‘under the aegis of NATO, which saw Turkish miliary aigraft arriving atm Greek airbase and Tuthish soldiers landing na Greek beach, © VII.The current popular reactions to rapprochement Since September 1999, there has somewhat naturally been a gradual ailing ‘ofthe impact of he earthquakes on public Feling towards rapprochement. lst asthe iags af the earthquakes are becoming a memory. the inal exberace of the two peoples fs starting to fade Despite th ffs To promote cont betwen te two couse ate tl unetway and heres mae requ Me visors between the we aunties the same me, the passage a in asso alowed the tis of tapprorement who tock cover taught he pei to become veal once more However ss preice by some sberver these ben lie eplotaion af mutua enemy mes by polices" Despite he inevitable, polars, thre doubt tate wider popula reno to ‘epprochementin both Greece andthe snow oe a arpa Atceo ‘0ups promoting raprochomens between ie we couse ake og bated andl or mo suspicion exis towards tose nh engage seh activity? For both supporters and ccs alike there 1s @ palpable sense of Aisusionmendevlopinginsotr asthe hasbeen no movement toward ea Iain improvement of lations In Greece, peopl aes wang or of Takis god In Turkey thre ea elng tha Greee Isnt seg wh fnough commitment is ewaingdicusons on cane sos owas Solon ofthe Aegean dps, and is tying to ui engaging dale miliary confidence bung messes to preven confit inthe Aegean eon For the supporters ofthe proces the ned to dal with these sues sent way of caialising on the positive stmsphere in eer to brng abot fll proces of confit eslation, eather than sly roeeing leg = pth ot "enson rection. ews forthe scepts, the warn feng met nh i thoy cannot resin saan these oustanding pis file Ios seers certain tat in spite the fat that the bast the ‘peace poses wre ‘ecogiion of mutual terse an the dese for eaoperatio, flor to eal with the major sues ofthe Aegean and Cpt wil now eresen the new calle inthe proces of appochement Forti reason, there ae good ressons to argue that the proces ofisaste Aintomacy’ 35 opposed the fngstnding ella of ome groups ch have played an important rae i laying the. groundwork ovr the yrs for ‘epprochement has actually been athe othe proces tensed by the ‘0 frign minis, and bythe two minis n paula & sow process, unaleted bythe eahaakes would have allowed the wo govetamens te sae discretely the course of events and would hae alowed fo ral ea ot tenslons. sea, the earthquakes forced the pace ef events a have how sa ‘el eit the wo governments in ic postion wih tear poplar opinion, "etin defence ofthe two goverment isle the case that whilethere ae sino mete rods tp or aston ote yes ney ts indication ef a move to reo the Aegean dsotes tsa oundwen of operate lations snow pico eri ote erent amos in Aihns and ara. the two counties se now cose towards Poel Ceeustence thn hey have en fo aot ety years VIII. Conclusion Lefore drawing conclusions about the impact of ‘disaster diplomacy’ in the case of Greece and Turkey, it is worth examining the basis ofthe euerent process ‘of rapprochement and its potential for further development. Although t is stil too carly judge with any certainty the outcome of the dialogue between Greece and “Turkey, we can say that for the fist time in almost forty years, there does appear to be a real chance for a sustainable and meaninglul peace to be established ‘between the evo countries. While pessimists venture that similar moves have been ‘made in the past, and have all fale, the current process offers greater reasons for hope than the false starts made in the past. In particular, previous efforts have centred upon addressing areas of difference - elther directly or by establishing parameters t reduce the lkelhood of conflict, The approach on this occasion, however is a radical departure from previous practice ‘The innovation of the Cem-Papandreou process is that itis based upon recognition of mutual interests and centres on trying o find concrete measures to strengthen contact and cooperation in non-contentious areas. More paticulatly, \ve can identify the basis for rapprochement as being the recognition that they share the following regional and European aims: the desire for a stable and peaceful Balkans; the wish fo ensure the preservation of borders between states (although, in the case of Turkey, this specifically efers to the land borders in ‘Thrace rather than to either the Aegean or Cyprus; the need for the successful integration of ther region into the EU; a deste ta increase resources available through the EU, so that income differentials with northwestern and central European counties should be reduced as rapidly as possible; the requirement thatthe EU promote a broad and diverse interpretation of European identity; and the unimpeded and improved land communications with centeal Europe. At the same time, the two governments have recognised that at the more specifically bilateral level although in the case of terrorism, drugs, and Immigration there is also a wider regional impact - the following, by no means exhaustive, Hist of mutual imerests exist: the development of bilateral trade; combating organised crime, such as cetrorism, drug waficking, and legal Immigration; increasing tourism, particularly marine tourism, (0 the region; ensuring the protection ofthe environment and the promotion and protection of hhuman rights, especially within the context of the obligations of membership of the EU. \While many in both countries have criticised this approach on the basis that it ‘does not deal with the main points of diference, such eities miss the point of the process, The dialogue currently undertaken by Athens and Ankara recognises that for there to be any hope of resolution tothe disputes, there must be an underlying recognition that cooperation, and nat competition, between the two countries is Imperative for their mutual benefit in the future. The old pattern of zero sum {inking i gradually being replaced by a realisation that their foreign policies ‘must now increasingly be governed by their potentially important gions oles in the Balkans and the eastern Mediterranean, and their position, real orProspective, within NATO an he EU These new roles are, howewr, dependent upon their ably 1 shove both NATO andthe EU that they an behave responsibly Up unl ecenly, eather tae being seen as importac alles, shey were often regaed as alma chile by {heir parmers and, consequently, vere not accorded the importance that they each fet they were due. More than any ideniable internal pressure to address the difficulties between dhe two couniies, the extra imperative of beng taken seriously as forces for stability ina turbulent region brougit about a change tthe oficial evel. As a result o this change of thinking, itis aleay possible to Toresee real movement in those area of substantial difference. To return (othe eric, itis posible o counter ther claims by stating that for the two governments to have tried to approach discussions of substance in the atmosphere that previously existed would have been almost useles, perhaps even worse than useless. The eventual purpose, as stated by the wo government, ito Aevelop an atmosphere within which areas of difference wil, eventually, become eisier to resolve, As the process develops further, this wil become increasingly apparent. ‘Wha, therefore, hasbeen the impact of disaster diplomacy in bringing about {his postive development of relations In this study, the frst conclsien that clearly emerges is that there has been fat (00 much emphasis on the eee of disaster diplomacy. This is not to say that disaster diplomacy has been unimportant in the development of tes between the two counties it has had an {enormous inspact. Me problem is that im both Greece ai Turkey as mil ashe ‘outside world therehave been far too many people who have aibuted the ene process of riprochement between Athens and Ankara othe earthquakes, Sach a Popular analysis is both facusly wrong ands also damaging. W is factually weong because, as has been shown, the process of ‘approchement clearly predated the events of August ani September I i damaging insofar as to accord legacy to this thesis would substantially ‘weaken the process of rapprochement should events lead to a renewal of hostility betseen theo countces and result ina hostile public eactionin both counties agains the other While such an occurrence would weaken rapprochement in.any case, it would prove dsastous fora process that many see as being bul solely ‘pon popula Feeling - wht the people have given directly the people can take away The tucimpact of disaster diplomacy shoul, thevefove, be seen in terms of the development, and not the ination, of ties between the two governments Importantly. as we have seen. these tes are based ona whally more substantial set of propositions centred on mutval incest rather than on fllowing 4 pp will expresed aa particular tie "Thus, the tue impact ofthe earthquakes in Greece snd Turkey hs to be see a the level of the ordinary clizens of bath countries. As a result of the ‘earthquakes, previously hel fears sented to pale onsignificance and a bend of lundertanding developed. The result ws the rp formation of entts bet '20ps ad individu the Ww courte. Many Greeks ad Turks ut past prejudices aside, and sch waste power of the sit elation teen Auton Wires, sous xa 229 thet, that those who had peisly been athe fein fet ofthe other country became stanly slr Wl they have stared become mae vocal once agin, the hak they have in society in bath counties Is cerany weaker than at anytime the pst ee dead “hs nthe ase of Greece and Turkey. the ter “aster diplomacy should norte wed aa bron rush deribe te tpprochemen tha as ken place between Ales and Antara, nstead shoul be een as 4 wai WEN peoples came to pont which they wished co udestand ane anote fat Bette and put ede pat pices. ndlng x ths muta eon among Ges nd the gy Hume heh alone ho erent to stengten, and deepen, aoe iat hat aay been pun Place ‘Dantes diplomacy inthe cae of Geek Trish rapprochement aul therefore be seen aa process that allowed fra popular leimisavon ool Giplomacybasdon mutual intrest rer hanbeseenasa tem o describe the intaton ota poe. Aho set eplomacy canna therfore be sen asthe oo cause of rapprochement, there canbe dou shat the popula for apprshement that ceveloped at a esu of “saver diplomacy wile a mportant contig actor nthe further development o any process between the wo eunivies The question now facing ens and Ankara, and nore special ema apres whether ts popular wl for prove elton ail be tough io overcome any deapolimens, even ie thet sos etal wai arise ne couse othe develagmen of asin peace ewes Greece and Tuto The author would ke wo hank she many people in Greece and Tukey who ated in he cparation of thisaricleby contributing views The pions expressed in this aric areihse 5 Fatowing the end ofthe Turkish War of Independeace and he igi of the Testy of \ausanne, 9 1525, relatons betmeen the governments of Greece and Tuthey sated to myo In 1990, eat of ership was signed between he Tush Presiden Mustapha ena fats andthe Gree Prime Miniter Eerie Vier which subsequent ed to ‘he formation oa detesiveaianceBeween the wo counties. Ahough relations sufered Someta a suit of Tunish neural for much of Wel Wa which Greece sad was Coney th tems ofthe alan eos icy improved ale 15. Is the e350 bath rece sn uty contd oot the Unie ans inthe Koren a nd were ‘evade ih HATO menbersipin 1982 nee hat as sen the peak fs ea 2 Unde etm he eyo Gai ie te ne of Cypriot independence Gee Ture and he United Eegsom were penn exp gh neve hea ttinenevste nore mln sig nips evi eyo the nape pe 230Im parca one can ey December 196 ven the ial oubrk of ing Detween [tek and Turkish Cyrios occured, August 164, and November 1967 fou which wee ‘he est ataks bythe Greek Cpt National Gurdon Trish Cypriot enclaves abeng times neghened sion. For he Grek an Tush offical posi, se the webs th wo Folgn Minis a newfie grand wine fa gt Sua Bolutbas, “The Tuco-Greek Disputes in Cement H. Doe kh eign Pie ‘New rospes Hung, The Ethen Pes 192, 9 48 ‘An aralysis ofthe competing legal views of Grete ad Tukey ove Ina can be found in rangelos Hattpoutos “The Cri over the Inia Rocks andthe Aegean Sea Regine Invrntiona Law 25» Langage of Camon ntres n Al Ciscop, Ande Geroatos {doin Iaties. es, The Aegon Se aie he Cold War Serna Law te Snr Basogstke Macmilan, 2009 Prime Minster Andreas apne inte the i Defence Dating in 1988 asa means hc formalise the secur telaonshp between Greece andthe Repub Cys, Under ‘he teams of te Doctine Greece would eat any aack on Cyprint etory aan attack 0 ‘cieece and would respond acorn. For it par. he goverment of Cyprus sate! to upgrades mitaryhartware ang consrute anatase nest Paphos onthe weer coast of "Theodor Couloumtis and Thanos Veremis Gece an the Blane A Cia Review, The “ernie Secu Review 200 Royal Une Sere tut, London, 198.13, ‘The at of the two leer can be found a wungrekarkiiforun or "athens Agency, 2 gus 198 “Ans ee Agency. Ag 1998. "menu Agen, 2 ga 1509. 2 Anarotan agency. 25 Aut 199 ria Eeheonpa, 1 September 1988 Exper Typos 20 August 199. Elephers Typos ig wing atonal newspaper dst as atinaly taken a pastel song and olen agressive, an Tarksh positon " anmetan agency. epee 188, uy. 10 September 1998. nmolian apne. 7 Sepemder 96, Mate. 10 September 198 8 urge 9 September 1989, Anta Age September 1998, 2 hurry 9 September 1988, 2 nvolian gency 10 Septmber 1998, sages, 10Sepembe 98, 2% Experoypi, Sees 199, Soneindeaianf he range of cts undertaken between thew counisiesin te moths Foowing the earthquake can be fund within the news report seton ofthe Greek Tekh Forums website at wasn grerturkiorunorg, 7 See Thanos eremis nd Duygu Ste, “Geeh-Tuhiah Peace: Fantasy or Possbiliy? Kathinerii 11 September 193 2% Expertypia, 2 Setenbe 199. 2 "The eaonship betwen Athens ae Nicosia was made more die ove issue lowing ‘edeath ofthe Gree lemate Minster or Foreign ats Yanos Kraidlas. nanalrcrash 1 September 1989. Kani ypror by bith ha played key role saint tbeownen the to governments nd a been oft titel appended, js samen ois pote othe process, upn ews hit death, the Trish ‘venga sent is condolences wo the Grech goverment and pase the mists Fer his ‘ws fo inpowe resins Degen the Gwe counties. Fr a Secount of is ews Of the vss of Creu eppchement ei commentary 9 TeV Aik, 1 aly > For eample see Eeheroypla, 20 May 200, 1 Thanos Veemis and Duygu Sezer "Greek Tish Peace: Fantasy o Poss, Kaimeri 1 Seprember 538, This was made ear to the autor Gang cavestons with individuals fom Greece and Tukey who have hada ng sanding invaemet eth such groups eal ‘cranince nevitw OF INTEAQATIONAL arvaina