Wow,I still haven't digested this....Is this the beginning of the end for NATO, is this the beginning of Greece getting kicked out of Nato, or is this just "semantics" to counteract Turkey's ally (as in Greater Albania/KLA)...Whatever it is, I just hope they know what they are doing<g>
STRATFOR's
Global Intelligence Update
July 1, 1999
Greece Announces Pending Defense Pact with Iran and Armenia
Summary:
Greece and Iran have announced that they intend to sign a
tripartite military cooperation agreement, along with Armenia, as
early as July 12. Such an agreement would seriously undermine
NATO unity and strategy in the Balkans and the Caucasus,
exacerbate tensions between Greece and Turkey, isolate Azerbaijan
and Georgia and, by extension, Central Asia, and provide Russia
with a tremendous lever against NATO. As all involved intended,
it is not something NATO can ignore.
Analysis:
Addressing reporters in Tehran on June 28, Greek Defense Minister
Apostolos-Athanasios Tsokhatzopoulos announced that Greece, Iran,
and Armenia would soon sign a defense cooperation agreement, with
the goal of creating peace and stability in the region. The deal
will reportedly be signed at the three countries' first
trilateral defense meeting in Athens on July 12. Tsokhatzopoulos
emphasized that military cooperation with Iran was based on the
fundamental principles of international law and a shared interest
in regional peace and security, and was not directed at any other
country. He also added that his visit, the first to Iran by an
EU or NATO defense minister since 1979, was not as a
representative of NATO. Tsokhatzopoulos, who is in Iran on a four
day visit at the invitation of his Iranian counterpart Vice
Admiral Ali Shamkhani, has reportedly met with Iranian President
Mohammad Khatami and Majlis Speaker Ali Akhbar Nateq Nuri.
While Tsokhatzopoulos' statement has been widely reported in the
Iranian and Greek press, the Greek defense attache's office and
the political section at the Greek embassy in Washington declined
to comment on the report. Eventually, a press officer at the
embassy insisted that the July 12 meeting should involve only
discussions of general issues concerning cooperation and claimed
that he had no further information on the reported defense pact.
An official at the Armenian embassy claimed no knowledge of the
reported defense pact plans. He insisted that, while Armenia,
Greece, Georgia, and Iran had met to promote regional economic
cooperation, and while Armenia had a defense agreement with
Greece, he knew of no plans for such an agreement with Iran. A
press officer at the U.S. State Department said the department
had issued no official statement on the reported Greek-Armenian-
Iranian military pact.
Greece has a long history of relations with Iran and has
accelerated development of ties with both Iran and Armenia in the
last few years. Greece was one of the first countries to send a
defense attache to post-Soviet Armenia, and Greek officers have
assisted in the development of the Armenian military since 1992.
In June 1996, Greece signed a defense cooperation agreement with
Armenia, a move condemned by Ankara as pointedly anti-Turkey.
The first meeting of experts on trilateral cooperation between
Greece, Armenia, and Iran occurred in August of 1995. A second
meeting occurred in December of 1996, at which time deputy
foreign ministers from the three countries and Georgia signed a
memorandum of understanding on cooperation in the economic,
industrial, scientific, and technical arenas. At that time, the
deputy foreign ministers rejected any notion of military security
cooperation between their countries.
A series of committee and ministerial level meetings between
Greece, Iran, and Armenia continued through 1997 and 1998,
promoting cooperation in economic and commercial fields, and
establishing joint commissions on transport, postal service,
telecommunications, tourism, industry, technology, economics, and
energy. Officials from the three countries continued to insist
that the goal of their ties was to promote regional peace and
cooperation, and that their tripartite cooperation was neither
targeted at a particular country, nor exclusive of relations with
other countries. Meetings on economic cooperation continued into
1999, with Greek Deputy Foreign Minister Grigoris Niotis calling
in May for Georgia to join in Greek-Iranian-Armenian trilateral
cooperation.
Tsokhatzopoulos' announcement that the trilateral cooperation
between Greece, Iran, and Armenia would be expanded from the
economic arena to include security and defense cooperation is a
political bombshell, setting the stage for dramatic shifts in a
number of regional alignments. First and foremost, the claim
that this defense pact is not directed at any country is patent
nonsense. Explicitly intended as such or not, Ankara can only
view a new military alignment of its traditional foes Greece,
Armenia, and Iran -- with Russia as a silent partner -- as a
clear and present danger to Turkey. The agreement also raises
concerns in Azerbaijan, which remains in conflict with Armenia
over the Nagorno-Karabakh enclave and which has blamed Iran for
backing an assassination plot against President Heydar Aliyev.
The defense pact between Iran, strongly Russian-backed Armenia,
and NATO member Greece, and the tacit threat it poses to NATO
member Turkey, is a slap in the face of NATO. Greece has tried to
warn both NATO and Ankara of its concerns by building cooperation
with Russia. That was not enough, so it is moving on to Iran.
Greece was incensed that NATO not only ignored its security
concerns regarding Kosovo, but in fact exacerbated the threat
faced by Greece. Thanks to NATO's intervention, Greece finds
itself between a nascent Greater Albania and Turkey, which before
and since the crisis has grown increasingly involved with
supporting the Albanian military. Turkey assisted Albania in
rebuilding the naval base at Pashaliman and in developing the
Naval Academy at Vlore. Turkish commandos are currently training
Albania's Republican Guard. During meetings with top Albanian
officials on June 17 and 18, the Turkish Army's Director General
for Logistics, Maj. Gen. Dursun Bak, reiterated Turkey's
commitment to cooperation with the Albanian Army and vowed that
it will remain at the top of Turkey's list for assistance.
For Iran, Athens' desire for military cooperation offers a handy
lever in its relations with the West. Tehran always likes to
maintain a balanced international position by having lots of
irons in the fire. Iran's read of its strategic situation is that
it remains a strategic asset to a lot of people so long as it
does not get locked down in any exclusive alignment. The current
Iranian regime read the Shah's mistake as his locked down foreign
policy. Thus its entry into one relationship is merely the
preface for opening the door for another relationship. Therefore,
there is never a final Iranian position. On the other hand,
Tehran is very much in favor of strategic groupings that do not
preclude other relationships. For Iran, the nice thing about
Greece's overture is not that it torpedoes Iran's relationship
with the U.S., but that it puts the U.S. in the position of
suitor. Now the U.S. must do something to loosen up the situation
-- as must Turkey.
For Yerevan, aligning with Iran and Greece not only makes it
makes Armenia a bridge between the Greco-Iranian group and
Russia, but in doing so focuses NATO's attention on its conflict
with Azerbaijan. Clearly Armenia, Greece, and Iran wanted
Georgia in the military grouping, but as Greece went public
without Georgia, it appears Tbilisi is standing firm with its
GUUAM alliance with Azerbaijan, Ukraine, Moldova, and Uzbekistan,
and with its hopes for stronger ties with NATO. Tbilisi does not
see those goals furthered by a military pact with Armenia and
Iran.
Overall, a tripartite military pact between Greece, Iran, and
Armenia seriously undermines NATO unity and strategy in the
Balkans and the Caucasus. It exacerbates tensions between Greece
and Turkey -- already strained by Turkey's ties to Albania. It
isolates Azerbaijan and Georgia, threatening NATO's strategic and
economic interests in the two countries and in Central Asia. It
provides Russia with a tremendous lever, circumventing NATO's
would-be proxies in the GUUAM organization. It is not something
NATO can ignore.
|
