The Aegean Crisis
Presentation on the issue of Turkish Aggression in the Aegean,
to the Government of Canada
ministry of foreign affairs
by the Hellenic Canadian Congress
The recent confrontation between Greece and Turkey in the Aegean is the
latest in a series of crises initiated by the Ankara government which are
destabilizing the security of southeastern Europe. Although both countries
are members of NATO, Turkey for the past three decades has attempted to
undermine the status quo in the Aegean and in the Balkans.
Turkey's foreign policy objectives in this region have been to challenge
Greek territorial sovereignty in the Aegean Sea and maintain a climate of
hostility by refusing to withdraw its occupation forces from northern
Cyprus. In both instances Turkey has acted neither with just cause nor in
conformity with international law.
Furthermore, by invading Cyprus, and continuing the occupation of almost
forty percent of the island, the Turkish government has been universally
condemned by all international bodies. The Ankara regime has refused to
consider all mediation by the international community, including a
resolution by the United States House of Representatives and the Australian
Parliament to demilitarize Cyprus and the removal of all foreign troops.
More significantly, succeeding Turkish administrations have clearly
indicated by their refusal to respect the sovereignty of Cyprus and the
belligerent policy displayed during the recent Aegean crisis that they are
prepared to ignore the rule of law and resort to force in order to achieve
foreign policy objectives.
This approach was made evident by the buildup of Turkish military forces in
Cyprus one month prior to the incident over the Imia islets in the
southeastern Aegean. Such actions also indicate that despite Greece's
concurrence to the Customs Union between the EU and Turkey, the Turkish
Government had no intention of resuming talks for the withdrawal of its
occupation forces and ending the partition of Cyprus.
The current tension in the Aegean is but one manifestation of Turkey's
aggressive policy which if not contained will undermine the security of
southeastern Europe. In this respect, Turkey has questioned Greek
sovereignty not only with regards to the islets but also the air and
territorial boundaries, as well as Greek rights concerning minerals and the
continental shelf of the islands in the Aegean.
Although Greece, like Canada and most countries, adhered to the Law of the
Sea Convention (1982), Turkey has refused to become a signatory to the
international agreement and is threatening Greece with military force if the
Greek government implements the provisions of this landmark treaty in the
Aegean. Specifically the Turkish Parliament has authorized the government
to go to war if Greece extends her water boundaries to twelve miles.
However, this has not prevented the Turkish Government from adopting a
twelve mile limit in the Black Sea and in the southeastern Mediterranean.
These provocative policies have been backed up with the establishment of the
Turkish army of the Aegean, equipped with the largest number of landing
craft in the Mediterranean, and by frequent violations of Greek air space.
It was evident during the recent crisis that the Turkish Government was
prepared to use military force to impose a de facto adjustment to the
territorial borders of the southeastern Aegean.
War was prevented thanks in part to American intervention and the
responsible reaction of the Greek Government in resorting to international
law rather than military force. Indeed the recent crisis has underlined the
fact that Turkey's demand for a reconsideration of the boundaries in the
Aegean and the sovereignty of the Greek islets near the Anatolian coast have
no basis whatsoever in international law, treaties, or conventions.
The legal instruments that have established the Greek and Turkish
territorial waters in the Aegean Sea are the result of the provisions in the
following treaties:
1) the Treaty of Lausanne, Article 15 (July 24, 1924)
This article specifies that: "Turkey renounces in favor of Italy all rights
and title over the following islands: (Stampalia (Astrapalia), Rhodes
(Rhodos), Calki (Kharki), Scarpanto, Casos (Casso), Piscopis (Tilos),
Misiros (Nisyros), Calimnos (Kalymnos), Leros, Patmos, Lipsos (Lipso), Simi
(Symi), and Cos (Kos), which are now occupied by Italy, and the islets
dependent thereon, and also over the island of Castellorizzo (italics added).
2) the Convention between Italy and Turkey for the Delimitation of the
Territorial Waters between the Coast of Anatolia and the Island of
Kastellorizo (signed at Ankara, January 4, 1932)
The agreement concluded by the two states was in response over the
interpretation of the provision of the Treaty of Lausanne regarding the
islets and rocks between Kastellorizo and the Turkish coast. The convention
reiterated Italian sovereignty over the Dodecannese Islands and the Turkish
government also recognized Italian sovereignty over the islets situated
within a circular zone delimited by a designated distance between
Kastellorizo and the Anatolian coast.
Under the terms of this agreement a few of the islets came under Turkish
jurisdiction but the majority of these islets and rocks remained under
Italian sovereignty.
3) the Protocol between Italy and Turkey,
(December 28, 1932)
The current tension in the Aegean is but one manifestation of Turkey's
aggressive policy which if not contained will undermine the security of
southeastern Europe. In this respect, Turkey has questioned Greek
sovereignty not only with regards to the islets but also the air and
The Protocol annexed to the Convention of January 1932 specifically
delimited the territorial waters between the island of Kastellorizo (under
Italian jurisdiction) and the Turkish coast, as well as Italian sovereignty
of the islets and rocks.
The protocol clearly designated the demarcation line between the two states
and did not divide the Aegean Sea. The agreement stipulated that within a
distance of 12 (twelve) miles between the two countries, the demarcation
line designated the sea sovereignty of the two states. Both parties also
concurred that: "It is clearly understood that in areas where this distance
surpasses the twelve (12) miles, the demarcation line will not affect the
extension of the territorial waters of both countries."
Section 30 of this agreement clearly indicates that the Italian-Turkish
border line passes between the Imia islets (which then belonged to Italy)
and the uninhabited island Kato (which was under Turkish sovereignty).
4) the Treaty of Paris (between the Allied Powers and Italy, Section V -
Greece, Special Clause; Article 14)
This article specifies that:
Italy hereby cedes to Greece in full sovereignty the Dodecannese Islands
indicated hereafter, namely Stampalki (Khalki), Scarpanto, Casos (Casso),
Piscopis (Tilos), Misiros (Nisyros), Calimnos (Kalymnos), Leros, Patmos,
Lipsos (Lipso), Simi (Symi), Cos (Kos), and Castellorizo as well as the
adjacent islets.
The procedure and the technical conditions governing the transfer of these
islands to Greece will be determined by agreement between the Governments of
the United Kingdom and Greece and arrangements shall be made for the
withdrawal of foreign troops not later than 90 days from the coming into
force of the present Treaty.
By the provisions of this treaty Greece acquired the Dodecannese islands and
sovereignty over the sea boundaries and islets established by the previous
treaties, conventions, and protocols.
In addition the Final Act of Helsinki (1 August 1975) underlined the
obligation to respect state's sovereign equality and territorial integrity
as well as frontier inviolability. It was also agreed not to change the
borders in Europe unless all parties concerned consented to it voluntarily.
The Helsinki agreement also offers protection to national and ethnic
minorities within states.
Turkey's flagrant violation of the basic human rights of the Kurdish people
and suppression of religious customs and traditions within the Turkish
borders is in direct contrast to the policies of a responsible state. In
this regard, the various Turkish administrations have demonstrated little
compassion by refusing to reveal any information on the fate of over 1,000
Greek Cypriots captured by the Turkish army in 1974
The recent Turkish actions on the islet of Imia not only challenged Greek
sovereignty in the Aegean but were in direct contravention of the Treaty of
Paris (1947) and of all previous international agreements, and most
significantly the Final Act of Helsinki which was signed by thirty five
European nations and Turkey.
In effect, the present actions of the government of Turkey can establish a
dangerous precedent by bringing into question all territorial boundaries in
Europe. Accordingly, the European Parliament has condemned Turkish actions
over the Imia incident and has called on Ankara to abide by international law.
As Canadians of Greek origin we believe that the Government of Canada must
use every opportunity to support the rule of law and the inviolability of
international treaties. The breakdown of the international order in any
part of the world cannot but have grave consequences for every country and
bring into question every national border. It is equally imperative that
Canada endorse the initiative of the United States House of Representatives
to demilitarize Cyprus and remove all foreign troops.
We also believe that the Government of Canada should condemn aggression as a
manifestation of foreign policy and in this respect condemn the recent
belligerent Turkish action in the Aegean.
Prepared for by the Hellenic Studies Centre at Dawson College
for the Hellenic canadian Congress.
The address for the Hellenic Congress of Quebec:
President, Sotiris Antypas
Congres Hellenique du Quebec
5777 Wilderton
Montreal, Quebec,
(514) 738-2421