MASARYK UNIVERSITY
Faculty of Social Studies
Masarykova Univerzita v Brn / Ćeska Republika
Department of Political Science
And
Department of International Relations and European Studies
‘’ A comparison of Greek and Turkish foreign policies towards Visegrad- Four countries (relatively; the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Poland and Hungary) ’’
Master's Thesis
Görkem Atsungur
Supervisor: doc. JUDr. PhDr. Miroslav Mares, Ph.D.
UCO: 922
Field of Study: Political Science - European Politics
Year of enrollment: 2005 Brno, 2007
0
I hereby declare that this thesis, which I submit for assesment is entirely my own work and has not been taken from the work of others unless such work has been cited and acknowledged within the text my work.
Date: Signature:
1
Acknowledgements
This thesis marks at the end of the two years of my studies in the Political Science - European
Politics Programme at the Faculty of Social Studies, Masaryk University in the Czech Republic.
I want to thank all lectures who have been teaching in the programme for sharing their academic knowledge with us. My appreciation goes to doc. JUDr. PhDr. Miroslav Mares willingly took upon the role as my supervisor during the writing of this thesis. A special word of appreciation also goes to Mgr. Jolana Navrátilová for helping all the time. Also, I would like to thank my family for everything and supporting me to study at Masaryk University.
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction...... 5-17
1.1 Foreword...... 5-10
1.2 Aim of Thesis...... 10
1.3 Importance of Topic...... 10-12
1.4 Reseacrh Questions...... 13-14
1.5 Scope and Limitation...... 14-15
1.6 Metholodgy and Theoretical background...... 15-17
2. The Main core of Greek and Turkish foreign policies' objectives...... 19-24
2.1 Introduction...... 19-21
2.2 The main core of Greek and Turkish foreign policies' objectives...... 21-23
2.3 Conclusion...... 23-24
3. Foreign Policies of Greece towards Visegrad countries...... 26-54
3.1 Introduction...... 26-28
3.2 The Czech Republic...... 28-40
3.3 Slovakia...... 40-46
3.4 Poland...... 46-48
3.5 Hungary...... 48-52
3.6 Greek Party Politics towards Visegrad Parties...... 52-54
3 4. Foreign Policies of Turkey towards Visegrad countries...... 56-75
4.1 Introduction...... 56-60
4.2 The Czech Republic...... 60-64
4.3 Slovakia...... 64-66
4.4 Poland...... 66-70
4.5 Hungary...... 70-74
4.6 Turkish Party Politics towards Visegrad Parties...... 74-75
5. Comparison of Greek and Turkish foreign policies' towards Visegrad countries.....77-79
5.1 Basic similarities of Greek and Turkish foreign policies towards Visegrad countries.....77
5.2 Basic differences of Greek and Turkish foreign policies towards Visegrad countries....78-79
5.3 Evaluation of the first hypothesis...... 79
6. Main Conclusion...... 81-83
List of Acronyms...... 84-85
Abstract...... 86
Bibliography...... 87-95
Characters (with spaces): 164.175
4 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Foreword
Both Greece and Turkey have an aim of being a leader country in the region. These two South
East European Countries have peaceful relations with their neighbour countries. Both of them try to increase their power in the world politics. Moreover, both of these two South East European countries are important policy actors in the international system. Both Greece and Turkey are member of the United Nations (the UN), North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO),
Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), Organisation for Economic and
Development (OECD), Council of Europe and Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC).
Therefore, both Greece and Turkey have been following very similar foreign policies and try to increase her influences in the region.
After the disintegration of the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics (USSR) in 1989, the international system start to change dramatically. First of all, there was not continuation of the threat of ''enemy '' anymore. During the Cold War, Greece and Turkey were belonging to the
Western Block under the leadership of the United States (the US) and Visegrád – Four countries; relatively former Czechoslavakia, Poland and Hungary, were belonging to the Eastern Block under the leadership of Russia. This division of internatioanl system and shape of bi-polar international system affect to their political relations spontaneously. When Greece and Turkey tried to have relationship with the Soviet Union (the SU), the US tried to cut off their relations as much as she can. Because both Greece and Turkey had strategic importance during the Cold war.
Western block can not allow to Greece and Turkey to change democratic regime into Communist regime such as in the case of Central Europe. Therefore, the US paid the maximum attention to these two South East European countries in order to prevent of having relations with the SU.
5 Such as Marshall Plan, NATO membership and the supportance of integration with the West
Europe, these two South East European countries had reached to maximum level political relations with the West in stead of the East. Therefore, neither Greece nor Turkey had not any chance to increase political relations and cooperations with the Visegrád – Four countries. But on the other hand, these two South East European countries had some level of economic relations with the Eastern Block countries at that time. But their political relations were at minimum level.
After the end of Cold War, Greece and Turkey had to produce foreign policies towards Central
Europe. Even during the Cold War, both of these two South East European countries had to some level of political relations with East Europe. For example, both Greece and Turkey have borders with East European countries such as Bulgaria. Therefore, their political relations with East
Europe should be better rather than relations with Central European countries. Also, there are other factors which they could continue their political relations, such as history, economic needs, societical and cultural linkages and minorities situation. For example, Greek and Turkish political relations with the East European countries such as Bulgaria and Romania were traced back many centuries ago. Both Bulgaria and Romania were controlled under Greek and Turkish authorities in the past. Therefore, they might continue their bilateral relations even during the Cold War.
These factors let to have more intensive bilateral relations with the Eastern European countries rather than Central European countries. As a result of these, East Europe is always part of their foreign policies.
But the notion of ‘’Central Europe’’ was a new concept for both Greece and Turkey such as other Western countries.1 As a result of this, both Greece and Turkey had foreign policy problems towards Visegrád – Four countries in the beginning of 1990s. They did not know how to act
1 Greece and Turkey are not located in the West Europe. But during the Cold War, they were part of the Western block. Therefore, they are evaluated as a Western countries politically.
6 towards these countries. It is true that they had been political and diplomatic relations before
World War II (WWII). But the international system had been dramatically changed especially the disintegration of USSR when nobody expected at that time. Also, Greece and Turkey continued to contend in order to be more important policy maker actor in the international system after the end of Cold War. Because at that time, Greece and Turkey had many important problems such as territorial mile in Aegean Sea, Kardak crises, Turkish Minorities in Western Thrace, Heybeliada
Clergy School and Fener Rum Patriarchate, etc... Because of these problems, both Greece and
Turkey tried to gain more supportance of the international system. In that context, Central Europe has been including their foreing policy agenda and also they start to make competition that who will be more effective policy actor in the Central Europe. But in order to achieve this, they should overcome around fifty years of silence and minimise of damages of Cold war in their political relations. This can be only happening through stable good political relations and certain foreign policies. For example, both Greece and Turkey were great supporter of Visegrad – Four countries admission into North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO). The admission of Visegard – Four countries into NATO may be would not promote vital benefits to Greece and Turkey. But they would show their attention in order to increase political relations.
On the other hand, at the beginning of 1990s, these Central European countries start to be involved in world politics. At that time, there were two important developments for these Central
European countries; Visegrád co-operation and Central European Free Trade Agreements
(CEFTA). Both of these two developments are formed as a regional cooperation between the member states. But it is true that these regional cooperations played important role in the world politics such as in the case of integration of NATO and the European Union (the EU).
On 15 February 1991, Visegrád Agreement was signed between former Czechoslovakia,
Hungary and Poland in order to co-operate each other while they had aim to integrate to the
7 West. Visegrád – Four countries would face with similar political problems and they had similar ways of political transformations. Also, they stressed that there was needed to have further regional economic cooperations in order to reach political stability in the region. After establishing economic stability, they would continue to integrate with West. Even though they achieved their main goal which integration with the West Europe, they continue their cooperation. Therefore, it is still continued to mention about Visegrád – Four cooperations.
However, they are critised so often that they are not active and successful cooperation, it does not mean this cooperation is dead. I argue that Visegrád – Four cooperation will have new period so soon. With the European Union membership, this cooperation would be rebirth within the EU.
Visegrád – Four countries will come together within the EU and they will start to talk about regional interests again. Therefore, this cooperation is still important for the world politics. And
Greece and Turkey can not exclude themselves from this factor.
Also, the other development in the region at that time was to creation of Central Free Trade
Agreement (CEFTA). Visegrád – Four countries are also member of first CEFTA. The Central
Free Trade Agreement was signed on 21 December 1992 in Krakow/Poland by former
Czechoslovakia, (and then the Czech Republic and Slovakia), Poland and Hungary. Their main aim was to cover a common market. Also, Slovenia became a member on 1 January 1996,
Romania became a member on 1 July 1997 and Bulgaria became a member on 1 January 1999. In
2007, CEFTA had new member states such as Crotia, Albania and Bosnia Herzegovina,
Moldova, Serbia and Montenegro. With the EU membership, Visegrád – Four countries left
CEFTA in 2004. Therefore, CEFTA is not important anymore for Visegrád – Four countries.
Origionally, The CEFTA was harmonisation of the General Agreements on Trade and Tarriffs
(GATT) and World Trade Organisation (WTO) principles. They have common objectives which try to form market economies, supportance of the development, human rights, and democracy.
8 One of the objective is to harmonise the development of economic relations. Another objective is to remove trade barriers between the members. But the main aim was to gradual free trade area between the members till end of 1 January 2001. It is true that the other important reason to create CEFTA is to the membership to the EU. Eventhough there was no institutionalisation, it was adopted for the EU membership. The founder member states of CEFTA such as Czech
Republic, Slovakia, Poland and Hungary achieved their aim which was integration with the EU.
But CEFTA has been continued its activity with the new member states in the international system however Visegrád – Four countries are not part of this agreement anymore.
Greek and Turkish political relations with Central European countries were totally new topic. It start to be increased just after the beginning of 1990s. Untill now, there are really rare studying about Greece and Turkish political relations with Visegrád – Four countries.
Till the second half of 1990s, both Greece and Turkey did not have enough political relations with Visegrád – Four countries. Even though the diplomatic relations with the Visegrád – Four countries such as Poland and former Czechoslovakia) had been started just after the World War I
(WWI), the diplomatic relations were stopped after the World War II. With the creation of bi- polar international system, they did not have many chance to establish better political and diplomatic relations. Therefore, Greek and Turkish political relations with Visegrád – Four countries start to increase after the second half of 1990s .
Ater the dissolution of USSR; Greece and Turkey with Visegrád – Four countries started to have some level of relations. Both Greece and Turkey recognised these Visegrád – Four countries and opened diplomatic Embassy in these countries. But it is true that these relations were mainly based on economic needs. And these economic relations were not enough in the new international system. They needed to more cooperate in order to stabilize the region. Because, at the beginning of 1990 and also in the second half 1990s, there were many problems such as Yugoslavia crise,
9 Bosnia war, etc... Both Central Europe and South East European countries were effected by these negative developments. Therefore, the political relations between Greece and Turkey with
Visegrád – Four countries should be more developed.
1.2 Aim of Thesis
The thesis will focus on the political relations of Greece and Turkey with Visegrád – Four countries. There will be evaluation of foreign policies of Greece and Turkey towards Visegrád –
Four countries. The aim of this dissertation is ‘’ A comparison of Greek and Turkish foreign policies towards Visegrad countries.’’ There will be also analyses of non-state actors such as economic conditions and minority influences in Visegrád – Four politics. Basically, there will be analyses of hypothesis in this dissertation and there will be evaluation of reasons and results of this hypothesis.
1.3 Importance of Topic
Greece and Turkey start to deal with Central European Politics after 1990s. Under the current international system, these Central European countries became very important for both Greece and Turkey. During the Cold War, neither Greece nor Turkey had political relations with Central
European countries. Therefore, they did not need to have foreign policies towards Central
Europe. But with the admission of Central European countries into NATO and the EU, both
Greece and Turkey must contact with these states. Moreover, both Greece and Turkey have active foreign policies in the world politics. Thus, they can not exclude themselves to increase political relations with Central European countries. Central Europe is a bridge between these two
South East European countries and West Europe. To have better friendly relations will gain benefit to Greece and Turkey automatically. Moreover, they are partners countries in the
10 international system. NATO membership let to increase political relations among them. Central
European countries are predominanetly supporter of the Transatlantic relations. In that context, both Greece and Turkey are important partners of the US. During the Cold War, Greece and
Turkey had this mission, and now Central European countries have this mission. Therefore, the factor of the role of the US in domestic politics and NATO partnership forced to Greece and
Turkey in order to produce important foreign policies. Greece and Turkey need to know more and deeper about new partners and they should follow common policies in order to promote international stability and peace. This can be happened only through stabe foreign policies.
On the other hand, one of the most important factor of their relations are the European Union politics. Greece has been member of the EU since 1981 and Turkey is a official candidate of the
EU. These Central European countries became member of the EU on 1 May 2004. Therefore, there is not any possibilities to exclude Central Europe in the Greek and Turkish foreign policies objectives.
The possibility of Turkish membership of the European Union has been a controversial subject for many years. Turkish membership has a direct impact on many difficult issues. And Central
European countries are inside of this process. Therefore, Turkey starts to pay maximum level of attention to these Central European countries recently. This thesis will analyse that how the recent bilateral Turkish visits to the Central European countries increase sharply? Also, there is an important role of the state holding the EU Presidency is within the negotiation phase. The
Central European countries will occupy this position in the future. For example, the Czech
Republic will be the president in 2009. Thus, Turkey tries to increase her relations with the
Central European countries. On the other hand, Greece wants to increase her role within the EU and tries to be group against Turkey if there will be dangerous situation for Greek national interests.
11 As a result of these factors, the relations of Greece and Turkey with the Central European countries became crucial in current international system. But unfortunately, there are still very rare Political Scientist who deal with this topic. During my research, I realised that there are not specific book only about this topic neither in Greece nor Turkey. Most of time, they analyse their relations with the Central European countries in terms of the relations with the European Union and relations with the USSR in the past. Therefore, there were difficulties to find some academic resources in regarding with Greek and Turkish political relations and foreign policies towards
Central European countries.
In near future, there will be very important political crises in these countries about their foreign policies towards each other if this topic will not be considered. If they would not know how to act specifically, there will be possibility of tensions or problems in their bilateral relations. For example, if Czech political scientist will continue not to focus on foreign policies towards Greece and Turkey, and recognise Northern Cyprus as an independent country, there will be huge destruction of Greek and Czech bilateral relations. Or if Czech Republic will be affected by
Greece and veto against Turkish admission to the EU, Turkish and Czech bilateral relations will come to end. Therefore, Greece and Turkey should promote deeper foreign politics towards
Central European countries in order to increase bilateral relations in the world politics.
To sum up; Greece and Turkey excluded Central European politics during the Cold War. But under the current condition, none of these countries has this luxuries. They should overcome silence of political relations in the past. How could they achieve it is an interesting situation.
Therefore, I believe that this topic will be crucial in their foreign policies.
12 1.4 Research Questions
In this thesis, there will be evaluation of hypothesis; ‘’ Greece is a more important actor in
Visegrád politics rather than Turkey.’’
Therefore, this paper will check weather this hypothesis is correct or not. The reason of the hypothesis are; first of all Greece has been member of the European Union while Turkey is not.
Greece was a key actor during the admission of Visegrád – Four countries while Turkey was out of this process. Therefore, Greece should use this advantage. The negotiation process of the EU and European integration politics should increase bilateral relations between Greece and
Visegrád – Four countries.
On the other hand, During the accession of NATO of the Visegrád – Four countries; Turkey was also an important actor such as Greece. Therefore, Turkey should bring the equilibrium and catch the balance in regarding with Visegrád – Four countries’ political relations. Thus, Turkey should try to increase her bilateral relations with Visegrád – Four countries in order to try to minimize Greece' dominance rather than Turkish policies in the Visegrád – Four countries.
Moreover, in the process of the accession of Turkey to the EU; Visegrád – Four countries have been becoming important actor. Accession of Turkey to the EU is one of the most hot debate in the European Politics. Therefore, Turkey must change her foreign policies's objectives and also she should try to increase her relations with the Visegrád – Four countries. Thus, there should be radical changes of Turkish policies towards Visegrád – Four countries recently. On the other hand, Greece does not want to loose her situation of being more active and effective in Central
Europe if she is. As a result of these, there has been a new process of Greek and Turkish foreign policies towards Visegrád – Four countries after the second half of 1990s. After these developments; the hypothesis of ''Greece is a more important actor in the Visegrád politics rather
13 than Turkey'' should be evaluated again. It is surely that Visegrád politics have a new momentum for both Greece and Turkey.
As a result of these factors, this paper will check on the hypothesis of ''Greece is a more important actor in the Visegrád politics rather than Turkey'' weather it is correct or not.
1.5 Scope and Limitation
The aim of this thesis is to explain of political and diplomatic relations. Therefore, there will be mainly political relations explanations. If non-political factors affect directly sharply to the political relations, there will be only mentioning at that time such as in the case of Greek diaspora or economic conditions.
When dealing of their political relations, there should be evaluation of their bilateral relations, basic historical relations, bilateral agreements, bilateral official visits, political problems and disputes and number of migrants in order to cover whole their political relations. Hence, before explaining of their bilateral relations, there is needed to explain of the main core of Greek and
Turkish foreign policies’ objectives and goals. Because, maybe for one of them weather Greece or Turkey; Central Europe and Visegrád – Four countries are more important for one or both
Greece and Turkey pay same level attention to them. Therefore, there should be evaluation of their foreign policy tasks and find out the role of the Visegrád – Four countries in their foreign policies. But again, this dissertation does not focus on Greek and Turkish foreign policies. There will be very basically analyses of their foreign policies in order to understand their relations with
Visegrád – Four countries. I believe that political relations and foreign policies have direct linkages. If they have high level of bilateral of political relations, it shows that they have special foreign policies towards each other. If the bilateral of political relations are at minimum level, it shows that there is not any specific foreign policy towards these regions. Therefore, there will be
14 explaining of core of Greek and Turkish foreign policies and the role of the Visegrád – Four countries.
As a result of these, this thesis will be devoted into five main parts. In the First part; there will be evaluation of the main core of Greek and Turkish foreign policies objectives basically. In the
Second part; there will be evaluation of Greek diplomatic political relations with the Visegrád –
Four countries; the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Poland and Hungary in order to analysis of Greek foreign policies towards Visegrád – Four countries. In the third part; there will be evaluation of
Turkish diplomatic political relations with the Visegrád – Four countries in order to analysis of
Turkish foreign policies towards Visegrád – Four countries. In the Fourth part; there will be conclusion of comparison of Greek and Turkish diplomatic relations and foreign policies towards
Visegrád – Four countries. In the fifth part, last part but not least, there will be main conclusion.
1.6 Metholodgy and Theoretical background
In this thesis, there are three different category of sources were used.
First type of sources are books and articles about Greek and Turkish foreign policies towards
Central European countries. In Turkey and Greece, there are not so many books about foreign policies towards specifically Central Europe. For example, there is not any Turkish book about
Turkish foreign policies towards Visegrad countries. These topic are expressed as a different chapter in Turkish-European Politics books. Greece has similar process as well. Central Europe’ politics for Greece and Turkey are mainly expressed in the European integration. Therefore, these articles and chapters are mainly from relations with the European Union and relations with former Soviet Union during the Cold War. Also, in this type of sources; the foreign policies of
Greece and Turkey books are used. Foreign Policy books are also helped to figure out political relations between Greece and Turkey with Visegrad countries.
15 In the Second type of sources; there were used of books and articles as well. These books and articles were not about the topic excatly. But these books and articles gave some other relevant information about the topic. Reading of these books gained a deep knowledge about the topic in other aspects. But sometimes, there were contradictionary informations in this secondary sources.
For example, one of the article claimed that Turkish and Slovak political relations are excellent level. And then, same article claimed that first Turkish President who visited Slovakia in 2002. In that context, how is it possible if one country’ President visit merely after ten years later of
Velvet divorce and have excellent political relations. If there was an excellent relations, this country’ President should visit before 2000s. And there are many more examples like this.
But First and Second type of sources gained deeper information about the topic. Thus, I had vision and opinion according to these sources as they are mentioing in the Bibliography. It is fact that they are written by Greek and Turkish political scientist mostly. Due to my education in
Cyprus and Turkey; I read the same events and topics but in a totally two different sides. Greece and Turkey are mainly ‘’emotional states.’’ Thus, I believe that I should not take First and
Secondary sources a hundred percent correct. Because of my experience, I needed to check official internet web pages of the Greek and Turkish governments in order to find excat reliable numbers such as number of migrants and bilateral agrements, etc...
Therefore, the Third type of sources are Internet sources. They are mainly governmental web sites such as Foreign Affairs, Economy and Finance Ministers, Parliaments and Political Parties webpages, etc... Apart from governmental online resources, I used online articles, online pdfs, web sites of non-state actors such as minority associations, web sites of forums and panels and university web pages which are directly related with the topics.
16 Moreover, My educational experience at Cyprus International University, Istanbul Bilgi
University, Leiden University and Masaryk University helped me to have opinion and knowledge about the topic.
As a result of this, First and Secondary type of sources with my educational background let me to have knowledge about Greek and Turkish foreign policies. In addition, when I need to proove my sentences and information with official numbers, I used Online sources, mainly Foreign
Affairs web sites in order to be most reliable and decrease the clushes of wrong information as much as I can.
In this thesis, the two regions; South-East Europe (here it means Greece and Turkey) and
Central Europe (the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Poland and Hungary) try to be analysed under the
Foreign Policy analysis and Area Studies. Neither South East Europe nor Central Europe do not pay attention towards each other. When I search sources, I realised that South East Europe pay attention merely every part of the world regions but Central Europe is disapperead in the map. On the other side, it is same for Central Europe. South-East Europe (here mentioned about Greece and Turkey, not Balkan countries such as Albania or Crotia or) was not well-known in Central
European Politics. Therefore, there is needed to increase of these two regions in world politics.
Also, this studying is based on foreign policies and political relations of Greece and Turkey. I tried to read articles in Greek and Turkish about Greek and Turkish foreign policies. And then I tried to read same topic from foreigners. Thus, I wanted to figure out if there are any differences.
As a result of this, in this studies I wanted to check ‘’hypothesis’’ in two aspects; Area studies and Foreign Policies according to different kind of sources.
17
18 PART I.
2. THE MAIN CORE OF GREEK AND TURKISH FOREIGN POLICIES'S OBJECTIVES
2.1 Introduction
Central Europe is not only area where Greece and Turkey make competition about who will be more effective actor. Almost, in every region and topic, Greece and Turkey make competition in order to be more effective. Generally, both of these two countries; Greece and Turkey examine to their foreign policies in accordance to ''other factor.'' It means that Greece try to promote her foreign policy in terms of Turkish position and it is same for Turkey, she promotes foreign policy which is based on Greece. In that context, it is also important to evaluate of their basic foreign policies' goals and objectives in order to understand weather they have similar foreign policies and goals towards Central European countries or not. Due to ‘’othering factor’’; Greek and
Turkish foreign policies are dependent each other in so many cases such as Balkan policies of
Greece and Turkey, European politics and NATO transatlantic policies.2 Throughout history; what Greece does, Turkey does as well and also it is also opposite situation; what Turkey does,
Greece does as well. ''The other'' is the main actor in their foreign policies for a long time. For instance, when Greece applied to the European Economic Community (EEC) in June 1959,, two years later in July 1961 Turkey applied as well.3 It was the same situation during the NATO membership. When Turkey applied, Greece applied as well. The ideology or benefits were not so important concepts. The importance of their foreign policies to eliminate the threat of the
2 Barry Rubin and Kemal Kiriİçi (2002) Günümüzde Türkiye’nin Diİ Politikasi, Ğstanbul: Bogaziçi Üniversitesi yay. 3 Couloumbis, T. (1994), Introduction: The impact of EC (EU) membership on Greece’s foreign policy profile, in Kazakos, P. and Ioakimidis, P. (eds), Greece and EC membership evaluated, Pinter, London, pp 189-198
19 situation of when ''the other'' is a member hence they are not member of the same organisation.
But how about this situation affect to their bilateral relations with specific countries? Is it the same situation or there are some differences of their foreign policies, if there are, what are the reasons of it? Are Visegrád – Four countries have same level importance for Greece and Turkey or superior for one of them? These questions should be answered in order to analyse of the main hypothesis of this dissertation.
After the end of the Cold war and the disintegration of USSR and Yugoslavia, both Greece and
Turkey had problems with regional security environment. With the end of bipolar international system, Greece and Turkey could deal with the new areas such as Central and East Europe. Most of time, it is evaluated that Greece had better relations rather than Turkey with Western former
Soviet Republics such as Poland, former Czechoslovakia, thus current Czech Republic and
Slovakia and Hungary while Turkey had better relations with the Eastern former Soviet
Republics such as Azerbeijan, Georgia, and Central Asian Turkish Republics rather than Greece.
In that Case; Armenia should be exceptional. Because Armenia has close relations with Greece even though she is also Eastern Soviet Republic. During the Cold war, there had been common meanings, common expriences and understandings which the stabilize of Greek and Turkish role in the Visegrád – Four countries.4 This loose of common frameworks, there were many changes and unstabilise of both Greek and Turkish foreign policies. The main problems of Greek and
Turkish foreign policies in the post Cold War era was lack of the redefinition of their roles.5
Therefore, both Greece and Turkey should readjustment of their foreign policies. This readjustment brought another problem. In this process, both Greek and Turkish foreign policies
4 Baskın Oran (Eds.) (2003) Türk Dis Politikasi; Kurtulus Savasindan Bugüne Olgular, Belgeler, Yorumlar, Cilt I-II, Istanbul Iletism Yayinlari. 5 Kouveliotis, K. (2001), The impact of European integration on the Europeanisation of Greek foreign policy, Institute of International Economic Relations Occasional Paper no.20, Athens, 2001
20 were isolated by their Western Partners.6 But under these readjustment, Central Europe should be included and part of their foreign policy objectives. East Europe are always part of the Greek and
Turkish foreign policies, even during the Cold War. Because Bulgaria and Romania are their neighnbour states and both Greece and Turkey might have friendly relations with their neighbour in order to promote stability in the region. Balkan crisis affect their foreign policy radically. But
Visegrád – Four countries were not priority of neither Greek nor Turkish foreign policy objectives in the past. If both Greece and Turkey could not have perfect level of relations with
Visegrád – Four countries, the reason is that they should deal with problems in their neighbour countries. But after the stabilisation of their neighbour states, such as Bulgaria and Romania became member of the EU in January 2007, both Greece and Turkey could have more chance to deal with other regions in the world politics.
2.2 The main core of Greek and Turkish foreign policies's objevtives
The main topics of the Greek foreign policies are; Cyprus, Turkey, Balkans, Former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia, The topics of Culture, Diaspora Hellenism, Environment, Global issues,
Economic relations, International Organisations, and Security - Defense.7 The main core of the
Greek foreign policy is the promotion of the Greek's political and economic interests with the achievement of the environment stability.8 Greece has an aim active participation in the EU which constitutes the core of Greek foreign policy. There will be new common the EU perspective and future of Europe. Therefore, Greece pays attention the role of Greece in the
6 Oran, Baskin (2001) Türk Diİ Politikas,: Kurtuluİ Savasindan Bugüne Olgular-Belgeler-Yorumlar, (2 cilt), Istanbul. 7 Ioakimidis, P. (2000), The Europeanisation of Greece’s Foreign Policy: Progress and Problems, in Mitsos, A. and Mossialos, E. (eds), Contemporary Greece and Europe, Ashgate, Aldershot, pp 359-372 8 Ioakimidis, P. (1999), The Europeanisation of Greece’s Foreign Policy: Progress and Problems, in Stavridis, S. and Couloumbis, T. and Veremis, T. and Waites, N. (eds), The Foreign Policies of the European Union's Mediterranean States and Applicant Countries in the 1990s, Macmillan, Basingstoke, pp 140-170
21 context of the new EU framework.9 Moreover, Greece has aim to strengthen bilateral relations with the key players in the international community. Therefore, Visegrád – Four countries are some part of Greek foreign policy objectives. Even though, the Visegrád politics are not directly objective of Greek foreign policy, there are many linkages of other objectives. For example, under the objectives of the politics of the EU, bilateral relations, Diaspora Hellenism, Global issues, International organisations and Security - Defense, there are linkages with Visegrád –
Four countries. For instance, there are relatively important number of Greek migrants in Poland and the Czech Republic. All of them are the member of the EU and NATO. They co-operate for defense and security issues and exchange of diplomatic views about Global issues, etc. Thus,
Greece can not exlude Visegrád politics from her main foreign policies objectives.
On the other hand, the main topics of the Turkish foreign policies are; Cyprus, Greece, Turkish and the EU relations, Terrorism, the claims of Armenian genocide, Energy policy of Turkey,
Water policy of Turkey, Environmental policy of Turkey, Disarmament, Turkish citizens on abroad, Human Rights, Illegal migration to Turkey, Fight with drug traffic and Women Rights.10
Therefore, Central Europe is not part of Turkish foreign policy objectives. Turkey has many problems especially with her neighbour states such as Greece, Armenia, Syria, Cyprus, etc..in the international system. Thus, Turkey did not have any opportunity to deal with non-threat regions and produce foreign policies for them while they are fighting with these problems.
Central European countries; the Czech republic, Slovakia, Poland and Hungary came together and they started to co-operate in the region under the name of Visegrád – Four cooperation. But these two South East European countries; specifically; Greece and Turkey never try to build up
9 Gropas, R. (2003a), Greece and the Convention on the Future of Europe, EPIN working paper, Athens, April, www.epin.org 10 Oran, Baskın (2001), Türk Diİ Politikasi: Kurtulus Savasindan Bugüne Olgular-Belgeler-Yorumlar, (2 cilt), Istanbul.
22 co-operation and have aim of creation such kind of organisation. In stead of having co-operation between each other, they have been following hostile policies and make competition each other for so many years. Such as in the case of Aegaen sea territorial miles, Cyprus issue, Macedonian recognition and the EU relations, etc. They should take Visegrád – Four countries model.
Therefore, Visegrád cooperation is a crucial model for Greek and Turkish politics.
2.3 Conclusion
Greece has been member of the EU since 1981. At that time, Turkey could have possibilities to be member of the EEC ( at that time the name of the organisation was EEC, not EU). But Bülent
Ecevit who was Prime Minister refused to be member. He replied them ''Turkey can not be market for Europeans.11 This was a dramatic situation, because first of all, Turkey refused to be member where Greece would be member so soon of this organisation. ''The other factor'' was not determined to foreign policies for the first time. This case is one of rare situation where othering factor was not be considered. Moreover, it let to Turkey waits still at the door of the European
Union still in 2007 and most probably in next decade as well. Being member of the EU should support some benefit to Greece in terms of relations with the
Visegrád – Four countries. This is the main core of the hypothesis. Being member in the same organisation and being a decision making actor in the process of Visegrád – Four countries’ accession to the EU should let great advantage for Greece. Because Turkey was out of the process at that time. Therefore, Turkey should develop better foreign policies towards Visegrad countries in order to catch the balance.
11 http://kisi.deu.edu.tr/hakki.uyar/18.pdf
23 On the second half of 1990s, the hostile policies started to decrease and Greek – Turkish relations start to have new period especially after the earthquake in Turkey (Marmara Depremi
1999), Helsinki summit in 1999 and the period of Ismail Cem - Giorgos Papandreou.12 Even though there were continuation of the ''other'' factor of determination of their foreign policies,
Greek and Turkish relations started to be normalisation period. The 1999 Marmara eartquake was the chance for Greece to come closer to Turkey. Interestingly, Greece was among the first countries to send help to Turkey. Dramatically, there was an another earthquake, but at this time in Greece. And Turkey was among the first countries to send help to Greece. Just three years ago, in 1996, Greece and Turkey came to the war because of Imia Kardak crisis. These changes of
Greek and Turkish relations were unpredicted. It is true that civic diplomacy and the relations between these two societies were the major reason of the normalisation of Greek and Turkish relations. The period of Greek Foreign Affairs Minister Giorgos Papandreou and the Turkish
Foreign Affairs Minister Ismail Cem were also another important development in the normalisation of Greek - Turkish relations. Greece and Turkey did not enemy as in the past anymore and they start to cooperate about so many areas such as tourism, environment, culture and education. Because of these developments, While both Greece and Turkey wanted to increase bilateral relations with Visegrád – Four countries, they could not achieve it.
12 Gundogdu, Ayten (2001) Identities in Question: Greek-Turkish Relations in a Period of Transformation? Middle East Review of International Affairs 5: 1, pp. 106-117.
24
25 PART II.
''Greece is a more important actor in Visegrad politics rather than Turkey.''
3. FOREIGN POLICIES OF GREECE TOWARDS VISEGRAD COUNTRIES
3.1 Introduction
Greek foreign policy is based on the importance of improving relations with Balkan neighbours through diplomatic and legal concepts instead of restoring to inflmmatory rhetoric.13 Therefore,
Greece follows peaceful policy in the Balkan region. The stabilty of the Balkan region can bring important benefit to Greece. Because, Balkan region is a bridge between Greece and its partner of the Western European State. European politics is one of the most important Greek foreign policy objective. Greece supported of the EU enlargement and other goals such as economic growth, control of immigration, supportance of the structure of Europe, environmental issues and common defense and security policy.14 Therefore, Greece pays attention to the Visegrád – Four countries.
Greece is an important actor during the EU and NATO admission of the Visegrád – Four countries. This factor led to increase of Greek and Visegrád – Four countries relations. Turkey was only a key actor in admission of Visegrád – Four countries into NATO hence it was outside of the EU process. During the Greek Presidency of the EU in the first semester of 2003, the biggest enlargement in the history of the EU took place with signafication of the Accession
Treaty in Athens. This factor gain benefit to Greece. Greece is also Christian country where
13 Larrabee, S (1997) 'Greece and the Balkans: Implications for Policy' in G.T.Allison and K.Nicolaidis (eds.) The Greek Paradox, Mass: The MIT Press, pp.107-112. 14 Stearns, M (1995) 'Greek Foreign Policy in the 1990s: Old Sign Posts, New Roads' in D. Constas and T.Stavrou (eds.) Greece Prepares for the Twenty-first Century, Washington D.C. The Woodrow Wilson Center Press, pp.59-70.
26 Turkey has Muslim population (almost ninety seven percent) predominanetly. Greece did not have negative influences from past where Ottoman Empire has mostly negative reputation in
Europe. Also, there is a great importance of Greek influences over Slavic nations where Turkey does not have. Therefore, Greece could have more opportunity to increase bilateral relations with the Visegrád – Four countries. Also during the admission of
Visegrád – Four countries into NATO, Greece strives to better serve the strategic goals of Greek foreign policy. Greece should promote stabilty and play active role in the Balkan region.
Therefore, apart from Visegrád – Four countries, Greece also supported the accession of Bulgaria and Romania to NATO.
Moreover, Greece supports regional cooperation. Sometimes, it is evaluated that Greece supports regional cooperation in order to decrease of role of Turkey in the regional politics.
Greece has an advantage of being member of the EU. It makes her a powerful actor which would contribute to the development and modernization of Greek interests. Also, Greece has an aim active participation in the EU which constitutes the core of Greek foreign policy. Since 2004,
Visegrád – Four countries have been member of the EU. Therefore, they need to more intensive political cooperation in order to reach these goals.
Greek foreign policy is based on federalisation of the EU. Therefore, Greece has intensive foreign policy in the European integration. But it shows that Visegrád – Four countries are opposite to this idea. Most of them such as Poland or the Czech Republic are against European
Federalism and the European Constitution. Therefore, it is very important how will be shape of current bilateral relations between Greece and Visegrád – Four countries within the European
Union.
Because of these factors, it seems that Greece has very active foreign policy towards Visegrád –
Four countries. But it is true that Greece and Visegrád – Four countries relations start to be
27 developed just after the disintegration of the USSR and collapse of bipolar international system.
Even though all these positive developments, there is still needed time to reach maximum level of bilateral political relations between Greece and the Visegrád – Four countries. It should not be excluded that there is not any major political disputes between Greece and Visegrád – Four countries. Therefore, their bilateral political relations could be more intensive day by day.
Because in stead of solving and negotiated of political disputes, their foreing policies try to focus on increasing of bilateral relations.
3.2 The Czech Republic
The Greek and Czech relations are relatively good for a long time. The diplomatic relations between Greece and former Czechoslovakia were established in 1920.15 Also, Just after the split of former Czechoslovakia and establishment of a new state Czech Republic; there has been Greek reciprocal Embassy representation in the Czech Republic. Therefore, there is not any negative sentiments among Greeks and Czechs. Both Greece and Czech republic have not have any important political conflicts or disputes in the past. Greece and the Czech Republic have approximately same size of population which is around ten million. But their way of economic and political concept were very different. These differences should bring them more closer in order to support their needs. Therefore, these two countries need more intense cooperation. They have always tendency to increase their political, economic, cultural and defense-security fields especially second half of the 1990s. There have been very important official meetings between these two countries, especially during the admission of the Czech Republic to the EU and NATO.
Moreover, Greek and Czech officials start to have regular consultations about the EU issues. It automatically let to increase of political relations between the two countries. It is true that the
15 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/
28 amount of trade volume is the highest in comparison of other Visegrad countries even though there were some regional problems at that time such Transportation problem due to Kosovo crise, etc.16 It is important that; the amount of trade volume is the highest in comparison with other
Visegrád countries, this led to increase of bilateral relations between Greece and the Czech
Republic. As a result of this, Greece has more intensive foreign policies towards the Czech
Republic rather than other Visegrád countries.
Greece has a great advantages of being only member of the EU and NATO in the Balkans. For instance, during the Yugoslavia crises, Greece and the Czech Republic co-operated together under the NATO structure. Greece is an important actor for the Czech republic in terms of shaping policies of Balkan. During the Kosovo conflict, NATO found it difficult to contain the independent diplomatic efforts of the Greek and Czech foreign ministers. Also, both Greek and
Czech foreign ministers express that Kosovo should not receive its independence and it should have full autonomy within Yugoslavia.
Bilateral trade between Greece and the Czech Republic has been increasing rapidly since these two economies are complementary. The balance of trade between Greece and the Czech Republic is negative for Greece. In 2002, the trade balance was negative for Greece $78m.
In 2004, the Greek exports to the Czech Republic rose by 22.4 % in compared with 2003. This was the highest five year level. But on the other hand, Czech exports to the Greece rose by 9.6% and it was the lowest rate in five years.17
But there are some number of Greek small and medium size enterprises in the Czech Republic, especially in the food sector and restaurant services. Also, there are some other service sectors such as consulting firms have been involving in Czech markets.
16 Mitsos, A and Mossialos, E. (2000) Contemporary Greece and Europe, Aldershot: Ashgate. 17 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Economy and Finance, http://www.mnec.gr/en/
29 Tourism is another important figure in their relations. In 2004, there were 350.000 Czech tourists estimated who visited Greece.18
There are many important visits between Greek and Czech politicians at all levels. In May
1993, the President of the Czech Republic, Vaclav Havel, visited to Athens unofficially and received the prestigious Price for Politics from the Onassis Foundation in Athens. The Greek
Foreign Minister, Theodoros Pangalos, visited to the Czech Republic in April 1994. In November
1994, Czech Foreign Affairs Minister, Josef Zieleniec, visited Greece. Czech Prime Minister,
Vaclav Klaus, visited to Greece in July 1997.19
In January 1998, the Greek Defense Minister, Akis Tsochatzopoulos visited to Czech Republic in order to discuss Greek-Czech cooperation in military affairs.20 At that time, the major issue was the admission of the Czech Republic into NATO. Greece was favor of the Czech Republic's admission into NATO. In that context, both of Greek defense minister and Czech politicians claimed that there is an importance of cooperation between the smaller member states in the EU and NATO in order to resist the influence of the larger states. This Greek policy let to increase of
Greek and the Czech Republic bilateral relations. Actually, the Greek politicians had aim to resist the influence of Turkey over the Visegrád countries at that time. It is obviously that, Greece want to decrease the influence of Turkey in Visegrád politics, therefore, they paid more attention to the region. Even, Greece supported to have cooperation between Greece and the Czech Republic's arms industries in order to gain Czech arms production access to the European markets easier.
Czech defense minister, Michal Lobkowicz, agreed with the Greek defense minister in order to
18 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Economy and Finance, http://www.mnec.gr/en/ 19 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/ 20 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/
30 have mutual cooperation agreement. Czech Republic would opened the offices of its army and air force in Athens and cooperation of training military personal.21
In March 1998, the Greek Prime Minister, Konstantinos Simitis visited to the Czech Republic.
The Czech Defense Minister, A. Lobkowicz, visited to Greece in May 1998. Even the Health
Affairs Ministers started to cooperate each other. Thus, in April 1999, the Czech Health Affairs
Minister Ivan David visited to Greece. Czech Finance Minister, Pavel Mertlik visited to Greece in order to increase economic relations with Greece in June 1999. In July 1999, Czech Foreign
Affairs Minister, Jan Kavan visited to Greece. Such as in the case of Health Affairs,
Transportation and Communication Minister of the Czech Republic, Antonin Peltram, visited to
Greece. It shows that even before EU membership, both of these two countries started to cooperate in non-political areas such as Health, Telecommunication and Transportation, etc.22
On 23 February 2000, the Czech Foreign Affairs Minister J. Kavan visited again to Greece with a delegation of Czech businessman.23 In this meeting; there were cooperation between Greece and the Czech Republic in the Balkans. The Foreign Affairs Minister of Greece G. Papandreou and the Foreign Affairs Minister of the Czech Republic J. Kavan discussed about the EU issues, enlargement issues, and European security and defense (At that time, the Czech Republic was not member of the EU). Therefore, Greece is a vital country for the Czech Republic such as for the other Visegrád countries. But there was a more important development which was Papandreou briefed to Kavan about Greek and Turkish relations and the Cyprus isse. Therefore, the Czech republic started to become part of this issue such as in the case of Kosovo and Yugoslavia issues.
Both Greece and the Czech Republic have aim of promoting stability and peace in the region.
21 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/ 22 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/ 23 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/
31 In May 2000, the Czech Prime Minister, Milos Zeman visited to Greece with Industry and
Trade Minister, Miroslav Gregr and Agriculture Minister, Jan Fencl and as well as thedelegation of Czech businessmen. Transportation and Communication become important topic among the relations of Greek and Czech Republic. In July 2000, the Czech Transportation and
Communication Minister, Jaromir Schling, visited Greece.24
The Greek Foreign Affairs Minister, George Papandreou, visited to the Czech Republic in
November 2000. Also, in November 2000, the Greek President Konstantinos Stefanopulos visited to the Czech Republic. He met with Czech Prime Minister Milos Zeman at that time.25 In this meeting, the Greek President explained supportance of the Czech membership of the EU.
Moreover, they talked about Balkan renewal. Also, in this meeting, Greece expressed that they would not block any Visegrád countries membership in the EU. But there were secret diplomacy here. Greece wanted to convince of acception of Cyprus membership to the EU and try to show that Greece supported all Enlargement process. At that time, everybody knew that if Cyprus membership to the EU would be blocked by any member state, Greece would block all enlargement process. So, Greece used secret diplomacy very well at that issue.
In December 2000, the Czech Minister of Transportation and Communications Mr. Schling visited to Greece again. The Czech Foreign Affairs Minister, J. Kavan, visited Greece in April
2001. In May 2001, the Greek Minister of Transportation and Communications Verelis visited to the Czech Republic. This shows that again, there have been high level of relations about
Transportation and Communications areas. In July 2001, the President of the Czech Chamber of
24http://www2.mfa.gr/www.mfa.gr/enUS/Policy/Geographic+Regions/Europe/Relationships+with+EU+Member+St ates/Czech+Republic/ 25 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/
32 Deputies of the Czech Parliament, Vaclav Klaus visited to Greece. The Czech Foreign Affairs
Minister J. Kavan visited again to Greece in October 2001.26
After the membership of NATO in 1999 and the EU in 2004, the diplomatic relations were increased rapidly. Prime Minister of Greece Simitis in June 2003, President of the Czech
Republic V. Klaus, Prime Minister S. Gross in September 2004 and Prime Minister of Greece K.
Karamanlis in May 2005 visits are also important meetings in shaping of current Greek - Czech diplomatic relations.
Between Greece and the Czech Republic, there are some important bilateral agreements. For example, There was an Agreements on Friendship and Juridical Procedures in 1932. It shows that first bilateral agreement between Greece and the Czech Republic (at that time, Czechoslovakia, but would be also evaluated as a Czech Republic) was made in 1932. There was an Agreement of
Clearance of Financial Assets in 1964. It is clearly that there were not any other bilateral agreements between them for almost thirty five relations since 1932. It is also hint that the diplomatic relations between Greece and the Czech Republic were stopped during this time
(1932-1964). There was an Agreement on Civil Aviation Services in 1968. There was an agreement on International Truck Transportation in 1979. In 1980, There were agreements on
Cultural cooperation, Tourism cooperation and Economic, Industrial and Technical cooperation.
Therefore, the year of 1980 could be evaluation of starter of their relations again. There was a
Health care cooperation in 1983. And in 1983, there were Juridical Support in Civil and Penal law Cases. In 1984, there were Research and Scientific Cooperation and Long Term Economic,
Industrial and Technical Cooperation. In 1985, they started to have cooperation on Consular issues. In 1987, they had started to have on Bilateral Political Consultation. Till 1987, the other bilateral agreement had been mainly based on non-political issues such as economic, social and
26 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/
33 cultural. But after 1987, they started to have political bilateral relations. In 1989, they started to cooperation on Prevention of the Double Taxation. In 1991, they started to have both side Visa- free Travel. It was an important development. Because, this agreement let to increase their relations. In 1991, they agreed to have an agreement on Investment Protection. In 1994, Greece and the Czech Republic were negotiated about the validity of Greece and Czechoslovakia
Agreements and there were confirmation of both parties. There was a cooperation in Defense issues in 1998. There was a Cooperation on Economic, Industrial, Scientific in 1999. There was a
Memorandum on Economic cooperation in the Balkans in 2000. There was a cooperation on
Cultural and Education in 2000 which traced back to 1992. And also, There is a Protocol of
Military cooperation between the Defense Ministers of the two countries which was signed in
May 2001 and also a Cultural Agreement which was renewed of the version of 2001.27
There are important numbers of Greeks migrants live in the Czech Republic especially in the part of northern Moravia and Silesia regions.28 According to Greek community Associations, there are seven thousand of Greeks in the Czech Republic but this number is around three thousand in official statistic.29 This number is relatively high. Thus, there should be excat Greek foreign policies towards the Czech Republic. After the civil war in Greece, the former
Czechoslovakia accepted more than fifteen thousand leftist (most probably communist) Greek migrants.
Greek minorities in Central Europe is an interesting situation. Because, most of Greek minorities came to Central European countries, especially to the former Czechoslovakia after the defeat of the Greek leftist in the civil war in between 1946-1949. Therefore, the result of Greek
27 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/ 28 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/ 29 Association of the Greek Communities in the Czech Republic, www.dialogos-kpr.cz
34 migrants was origionally made up from the civil war in 1940s. Between 1948-1950, there were more than twelve thousand Greeks migrated to former Czechoslovakia. But it was figured that most of these refuges, almost seventy five percentage, turned back to Greece after 1975 till end of the 1980s. In 1991, there were around three thousand five hundred Greek migrants in former
Czechoslovakia.30
They live mostly in Moravia and Silesia regions such as Ostrava, Jindrichov, Bohumin, Krnov,
Trinec, Karvina, Sumperk, Vrbno pod Pradedem, Havirov, Bohumin, Jesenik, Brno, Znojmo and
Mikulov. But there were some Greek migrants in other part of the Czech Republic such as
Prague, Liberec, Hradec Kralove and Jihlava.31 In these places, Greeks are not organised together as a getto. The Greek community in the Czech Republic still preserves their Greek national consciousness but on the other hand, they are fully integrated into Czech society at the same time.
Therefore, there is not any problem between these two societies. Also, in the Greek community in the Czech Republic, there is no demonstration of xenophobia, racism, discrimination or intolerance.
There are many important non state actors for Greek minorities in the Czech Republic such as
Association of the Greek Communities in the Czech Republic (AGCCR), Czech Society of
Modern Greek Studies, Lycee of the Greeks in the Czech Republic, Society of the Friends of
Nikos Kazantzakis, Club of the Friends of Greece and Hellenika Foundations.
Since the end of 1999, the Greek minorities have been participating in the solution of problems their rights. At that time, they start to be representative for a membership on the Council of the
Government for National Minorities. In 2002, there have been Greek minority representation in the Government Council for National Minorities and also in the Committee of Government
30 Association of the Greek Communities in the Czech Republic, www.dialogos-kpr.cz 31 Hellenika Foundation Fund, www.sweb.cz/hellenika
35 Council for National Minorities.32 Therefore, there are granting policy in the consultative bodies under some areas such as Education, Sport, Culture and Media. Most of chairmans of Greek communities are member of Commission for National Minorities. For example, the Chairman of
Prague Greek community is member of the Commission of National Minorities on the Territory of the Capital Prague of the Council of the Capital Prague.
The Greek schools were organised. But many of Greek migrants turned back to their homeland after 1975s. Therefore, many of Greek schools were disapperead todays. Lycee for the Greeks was founded in Greece in 1910 and now there are twenty braches outside of Greece.33 One of them was located in the Czech Republic. There are forty three members of the Lycee of the
Greeks in the Czech Republic.34 Also, there is still continuation to teaching of Greek language in the universities such as Masaryk University and Charles University.
Most of time, Greek minorities try to preservation and development of traditional Greek culture in the Czech Republic. Therefore, their cultural activities of regional organisations are based on development of the traditional Greek culture in the Czech Republic. There are many professional cultural activities, especially by singers such as Martha and Tena Elefteriadu and Froso Tarasidu.
There are also Greek influences of Arts such as Nikos Armutidis and Lefteris Joanidis. In the
Greek national days such as 25 March 1821, 28 October 1940, Easter (Pascha), New Year Cake
Cutting (Vasilopita), they make traditional Greek activities.35
The main Greek minorities activities are carried out by the Association of the Greek
Communities in the Czech Republic. There are six hundred ninety seven members in twelve
32 Hughes, J. and Sasse, G. (2003). “Monitoring the monitors: EU enlargement conditionality and minority protection in the CEECs”, Journal on Ethnopolitics and Minority Issues in Europe, 2003(1). 33 Association of the Greek Communities in the Czech Republic, www.dialogos-kpr. 34 Association of the Greek Communities in the Czech Republic, www.dialogos-kpr. 35 Association of the Greek Communities in the Czech Republic, www.dialogos-kpr.
36 communities. There are one hundred ten members in Prague, a hundred in Krnov, seventy two in
Ostrava, sixty one in Trinces, sixty in Brno and fifty four in Krnov, etc..36
In 2002, there was a ‘’7th Greek Festival’’ in the Czech Republic and there was a project of ‘’
Important Days of the Greek Nation.’’ Moreover, traditional Greek culture is preserved. The year of 2002 was a turning point for Greek minorities in the Czech Republic.Because, after this time, there were start to increase of Greek activities. For example, there was a partnership agreement between Athens and Krnov.
Also, Greek community of Prague also issue Kalimera, which means Good morning in Greek, quarterly and it is supported by the Prague Metropolitian Authority. Also Greek community of
Brno prepares Electronic form of the summary of the events under the title of Mantaforos tou
Brno. They publish six times a year.37 The other important periodicals are Dialogos,
Mantatoforos tou Brno and Angelioforos. But still, there is not any TV or Radio programmes in
Greek language. But Greek minorities representative in the Council of Czech Radio under the
Programme Director of Czech Radio for national broadcasts after 2001.
There are independent organisations of the Greek Communities in the Czech Republic. For example, Greek Community in Brno is one of them. These non-state organisations have aim to unite people of Greek origin with the support of development of Greek identity. Also, they propagate the legacy of Greek culture. Therefore, they try to keep and deep relations with Greece and other Greek minorities in Europe. And they try to extend friendly relations and cooperations of Greek living in the Czech Republic with non-governmental organisations which deal with similar topics in order to strengthen of cultural, educational and other social organisation.
36 Association of the Greek Communities in the Czech Republic, www.dialogos-kpr. 37 Association of the Greek Communities in the Czech Republic, www.dialogos-kpr.
37 On the other hand, they teach Greek language, traditional Greek dance. They promote information about problems and they arrange meetings of representatives of various Greek and
Czech institutions as well. Members of the Greek minority pay attention about preservation of traditional Greek dances. Therefore, the Association of the Greek Communities in the Czech
Republic holds annual seminars about Greek dances which aim to preparation of professional
Greek dances. These ensembles Akropolis, Prometheus and Gorgona are very active. A programme of ‘’ A homeland for the Members of National Minorities’’ which was incorporated into the programme of International Folklore festival Straznice in 1995 was a good decision.
They preserve traditional Greek dances in the Greek Community in the Czech Republic. This was resulted increasing of Greek dances in the Czech Republic. Such as in this programme, they take part in festivals of other national minorities and Greek minority events in every year. They concentrates on annual Important Days of the Greek culture. Therefore, Greek culture is expanding day by day in mass Czech Society.
In that context, they cooperate with Municipal City Councils, Regional Offices, Ministry of
Culture of the Czech Republic, Ethnical Minorities Council of the Government of the Czech
Republic, Universities of Greek language departments, Chamber of Commerce and Business,
Greek Communities Associations in the Czech Republic and Greek Embassy in the Czech
Republic. Moreover, they cooperare in abroad with Government and Ministries of the Greece, the
General Office of Greeks living abroad (GGAE), the Council of Greeks living abroad (SAE), the
Greek Tourist Organisations (EOT) and Greek communities abroad.
The Society of the Friends of Greece is also another important Greek minority Association in the Czech Republic. It was established in 1990. There are fifty two members in the Society of
38 Friends.38 All these states actors are mainly voluntary association for Greek minorities. The
Society of the Friends of Greece has like other Greek Community Associations, has aim to preserve and maintain the national awareness of the Greek minorities in the Czech Republic. This society try to support all types of cultural and other projects in order to bring Greek and Czech national cultures closer. This is an important step. Because whenever, societies come closer, the foreign policies come closer as well. As it mentioned in the paper, Greece and the Czech
Republic have relatively good political relations. With Slovakia, Czech Republic have better political relations with Greece rather than Poland or Hungary. In that context, the role of non- state actors are very important. They make deepen relations between Greece and the Czech
Republic in all sectors. They arrange mutual information among all its members, organised and supports cultural and social events related with Greek culture, organises exhibitions, organises debates and meetings, organises lectures, Greek language courses and excursion and give relevant information about Greece. Therefore, both Greek and Czech societies know each other.
They do not say ‘’ Czechoslovakia’’ such as in Turkey. Also, They cooperate with other non- state actors such as the Foundation Filhelenia.
Apart from Greek Community Associations, Universities are another important actors. For example, Czech Society of Modern Greek Studies in Brno. It was founded in December 1997 in
Brno. The headquartes of the Society is in the Faculty of Arts in Masaryk University. There are fourty six members of the Czech Society of Modern Greek Studies.39 The main goal of the society is to support studies in Greek language, history, and culture. This society has also international relations. For example, it is member of the European Society of Modern Greek
38 Association of the Greek Communities in the Czech Republic, www.dialogos-kpr.cz 39 Association of the Greek Communities in the Czech Republic, www.dialogos-kpr.cz
39 Studies which has headquartes in Strasbourg/ France. Therefore, they have very important number of contacts in the world.
In addition, the Society is a member of the Council of Czech Scientific Societies of the
Academy of Sciences and cooperates with other organisations such as in Vienna, Warsaw and
Bratislava.
Also, the Greek Orthodox religion is around two percent of the whole population of Czech society which effect the role of Greek minorities in other minorities in the Czech Republic.
As a result of these, Greek minorities in the Czech Republic have relatively positive features where there have been some level of discrimination against Gypies and Ukrainans minorities.
Therefore, these positive athmosphere affect to their relations in a good way. Greek minorities in the Czech Republic are working efficiently and produce successful projects in Greek and Czech bilateral relations. These non-state bridge make closer Greek and Czech countries.
The hypothesis of ''Greece is a more important actor in the Visegrad politics rather Turkey'' could be true in the Greek - Czech relations. It is true that Greek and Czechs bilateral relations could be one of the highest relations in comparison with other Visegrad countries' relations.
3.3 Slovakia
Eventhough, Greek and Slovak relations were traced back a long time ago and have deep past, there have been recently independent policies each other. Therefore, there is still needed to improve Greek - Slovak relations. For many historicans, Greek- Slovak relations traced back to
Mycenaean culture in some region of Slovakia such as Spis. The ruler Ratislav tried to escape from the influence of Frank Empire, therefore, the relations bewteen Greek and Slovak communities were started. Moreover, there was a threat of Ottoman Turks. These factors were affected to development of Greek - Slovak relations in the past. But the most durable of Greek
40 and Slovak relations were Greek Orthodox Church. The arrival of Constantinos and Methodios to the Greater Moravia and start to increase of contacts of both Greek and Slovak nations.40 There were important element of Greek intellectual heritage in the developments of the Central Europe where Slovakia is also included. There was an important role of Greek influences over Slovak nations till the beginning of the Twentieth century. Classical Greece and Greek language also influenced Slovak nations such as other European nations.
After the creation of Czechoslovakia in 1918, the Greek and Slovak relations were continued.
Greece and former Czechoslovakia, thus Slovakia, had close and friendly relations. Greece opened its Embassy in May 1920 in Prague. And in 1922, the Czechoslovak Embassy was opened in Athens. With the creation of ''Little Entente'' by Greece, Greece and the former
Czechoslovakia started to cooperate each other.41 After the Second War War, there were important developments in Greece. The civil war in Greece let to changes of their political relations. Such as in the case of Czech lands, there were some Leftist (or Communists) Greek migrants in Slovak lands. Bratislava, Martin and Kosice become attractive place for these Greek migrants in Slovak lands.42 Greek culture were continued to its influence in the Slovak lands.
Throughout the history, Greek and Slovak relations have been increasing rapidly.
After the velvet divorce in 1993, the diplomatic relations between Greece and Slovakia has been re-started. But Greek has launched its Ambassy in September 1996.43 Why did Greece wait three years to launch its Ambassy in Slovakia? After having these traditional long historical relations, Greece should open its Ambassy and increase diplomatic relations with Slovakia so soon. Does this development affect to the hypothesis of '' Greece is a more important actor rather
40 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/ 41 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/ 42 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/ 43 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/
41 than Turkey ?'' It will depend on the shaping of Turkish foreign policies. If Turkey could achieve to have better and more closer foreign policy towards Slovakia, it would affect the role of Greece in Slovak' politics. But still, Greece had chance to develop and increase relations with Slovakia.
Both Greece and Slovakia claim that their bilateral relations are based on friendship and sharing of the same values such as democracy, rule of law, human rights and peaceful in the international system. Admission into NATO and the EU of Slovakia, Greece and Slovakia started to have a good framework of their bilateral relations. But it is true that these bilateral cooperation is still not reaching its optimal intensity. As in the mentioned, Greece and Slovakia has a deep long historical relations which is traced back to Nineth century. After the independence of Slovakia, the bilateral relations between Greece and Slovakia was developed with the efforts of Slovakia most of time. Especially, in the context of the European integration and NATO membership,
Slovakia needed Greece supportance. Slovakia also tried to increase economic bilateral relations with Greece. Greece and Slovakia achieved to have intensive political relations on overall enhancement of mutual cooperation.
Bilateral trade betwen Greece and Slovakia are relatively low. But both Greece and Slovakia start to pay attention to increase their bilateral relations. Greece balance of trade with Slovakia is running a deficit recently. There has been decreasig of Greek exports to Slovakia in proportion to her imports. There are some basic Greek exports such as fruit, foods, tobacco, chemicals and textiles. And Greece imports from Slovakia iron products, steel, timber, machinery and various industrial goods. Greece holds very small number of share of the Slovak market. It is around
0.18% of whole Slovak market.44 There are basically two important Greek companies in
Slovakia; Hellas Sat and J&P for constructions. There are only almost over seventy thousand of
44 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Economy and Finance, http://www.mnec.gr/en/
42 Slovak tourists visit Greece every year.45 This figure shows that even though, there was a good historical ties, Greece and Slovaks economic relations are not so good.
There have been very important official visits. On 2 June 1995, The Greek Foreign Affairs
Minister, Karolos Papoulias visted to the Slovak Republic. The Slovak Foreign Minister, Pavol
Hamzik visited Athens on 6-7 Feburary. On 7-8 April 1997, the Greek Foreign Minister Pangalos visited Bratislava. The Slovak Foreign Minister Kramplova visited to Greece on 16 October
1997. On 1-2 July, the Slovak Deputy Prime Minister Jozef Kalman visited Athens. On 27-28
Febuary, the Minister of National Defence of Greece, Tsochadzopoulos visited Slovakia. On 17-
19 February 1999, the Slovak Minister of Foreign Affairs, Eduard Kukan visited to Greece. On
March 31 and April 1, the Slovak Deputy Prime Minister, Pavol Hamzik visited Athens. The minister of Foreign Affairs of Greece, Giorgos Papendreou visited to Slovakia on 1 October
1999. On 25-26 January 2000, the Foreign Minister of Greece, Rokofyllos visited Slovakia. In
May 2000, Slovak President of Rudolf Schsuter visited to Athens. Greece supported Slovakia's membership to the EU and NATO.46 Moreover, both Greece and Slovakia are member of the UN and OSCE, OECD and Coucil of Europe. Also, Greece is member of Black Sea Economic
Cooperation while Slovakia is observer there. The Prime Minister of Greece, Constantinos
Simitis visited to Slovakia in November 2001. On 8-9 April 2002, the Greek President of
Constantinos Stephanopoulos visited to Slovakia. Greece was the EU Presidency country at that time and Slovakia such as other ten new member states of 2004 enlargement, signed the
Accession Treaty in Athens on 16 April 2003. On 16 April 2003, The Slovak President, R.
Schuster, Prime Minister Mikulas Dzurinda, Foreign Minister Eduard Kukan and Chief
45 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Economy and Finance, http://www.mnec.gr/en/ 46 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/
43 Negotiator of the EU, Jan Figel signed the Treaty on the Accession of the Slovak Republic in
Athens.47
The President of the Slovak Republic, Ivan Gasparovic visited Athens during the Olympic
Games and also met with the Greek President, Stephanopoulos. On 25 May 2003, the Speaker of the National Council of the Slovak Republic, Pavol Hrusovsky participated at the meeting of
Speakers of Parliaments of the EU countries. On 19-20 June 2003, the Slovak Prime Minister M.
Dzurinda and Slovak Foreign Affairs Minister, E. Kukan were participated to the EU Summit in
Thessaloniki. On 8-9 December 2003, the Slovak Minister of Defense, Juraj Liska, visited to
Athens. On 12-17 August 2004, the Slovak Foreign Minister E. Kukan visited Athens and met with Greek Foreign Minister, Petros Molyviatis at the opening of Summer Olympic Games of
2004.48
It is true that the year of 2005 is a year of growing of the Greek - Slovak bilateral relations. On
8-9 February 2005, Slovak Defense Minister, Martin Fedor, visited Athens. Also, Deputy Prime
Minister and Finance Minister of Slovak Republic, Ivan Miklos visited to Greece on April 18-19
2005. Ivan Miklos met with the Greek Finance and National Economy Minister, Giorgos
Alogoskoufis. They participated at the Economist Conference in Athens. In June 2005, the
Speaker of the National Council of the Slovak Republic, Pavol Hrusovsky, visited to Greece. He met with the President of Greece Karolos Papoulias and with the Speaker of Greek Parliament
Anna Psarouda-Benaki.49
The agreements which were signed during the Czechoslovakia period, continued in Slovakia.
There are many agreements bewteen Greece and the Czehoslovakia, therefore Slovakia, On 08
June 1929, An Accord of friendship, conciliation, arbitration and judicial settlement, An
47 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/ 48 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/ 49 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/
44 agreement on Cultural Cooperation on 10 Febuary 1976, An Agreement on International Road
Transport on 06 June 1977, An Agreement on Tourist Cooperation on 27 March 1980, A
Consular Treaty on 22 October 1980, An Agreement on scientific and technical cooperation on
04 July 1984, An Agreement on the avoidance of double taxation and prevention of tax evasion on 23 October 1986 and An Agreement on the promotion and mutual protection of investments on 03 June 1991. Even between 1946-1989 under the communist regime of Czechoslovakia, the diplomatic relations between two countries did not cut. After the velvet divorce, the diplomatic relations were continued and they made more agreements between two countries. In 1995, Greece and Slovakia signed the Protocol on revision of legal framework. This protocol let to modernization of Greek and Slovak bilateral legal relations according the current legal standarts.
On 16 May 1995, there was a Protocol for the continuation in force of the Agreement between
Greece and Czechoslovakia on the avoidance of double taxation, A Protocol of Transport on 26
April 1996, An Agreement on Air Transport on 08 April 1997, An Agreement between Greece and Slovakia on economic and technological cooperation on 16 October 1997, Aprotocol of
Cooperation between the Foreign Ministries of Greece and Slovakia on 18 Febuary 1999, and An
Agreement on military cooperation between the Ministries of National Defense of Greece and
Slovakia on 27 January 1998.50 It is true that the Greek and Slovak relations have been continued all the time but after the membership of NATO and the EU, this relation start to increased rapidly.
Even though, there was an importance of Greek influence over Slovak nations, there are relatively small number of Greek migrants live in todays Slovakia. According to Greek Embassy statistic, there are three thousand Greek students and twenty Greek citizens live in Slovakia.51
50 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/ 51 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/
45 Therefore, there is not importance of Greek diaspora in Greek-Slovak bilateral relations. There are only cooperation bilateral educational and cultural programmes. But recently, there have been increasing of Greek culture promotions in Slovakia such as film shows, painting exhibitions and literature.
The hypothesis of '' Greece is a more important actor in the Visegrád politics, in that context
Slovak politics, could be wrong if Turkey could develop a better and more closer relations with
Slovakia. In order to check this hypothesis is correct or not, there should be also evalution of
Turkish foreign policies towards Slovakia. But it can be evaluated that despite of having long deep historical relations, Greece did not pay great attention to Slovakia between the period of
1993 till end of 1990s. But it should not be excluded that in the past, there had been great importance of Greek influences over Slovak nations in the past.
3.4 Poland
The Relations between Greece and Poland started in 1919 in a diplomatic way. Even in 1922, both Greece and Poland started to have Ambassodors since 1922.52 On Political level, bilateral relations between Greece and Poland are excellent.
With the membership of NATO and the EU; the relations between Greece and Poland have been increasing, therefore, there is a new momentum in the relations.
During the Polish admission to the EU, Greece had always fully supported Poland's accession to the EU. Even, there were some Greek politicians whose are from Polish origion such as
Former Foreign Minister, Giorgos Papandreou. All the time, Greece was one of the EU state where public opinion was very high in favour of Polish accession. Even though Greece lost some of beneficial advantages, they support of Polish membership.
52 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/
46 Since 1990s, the bilateral trade between Greece and Poland have been increasing. In 2004, there was a trade deficit for Greece. Greece exports mainly fruits. In return, Poland exports to
Greece vehicles, television sets and washing machines. Greek investment in Poland is relatively low. The main Greek companies in Poland are the Hellenic Bottling Company Coca Cola,
Mailius and Germanos. Also, Greece is one of Polish favourite tourist destination, there are many
Polish tourist in Greece every year. 53
After 2004, there were important visitings of Greek politicians to Poland such as on 28-29 June
2004, TheDeputy of Defense Minister V. Mihaloliakos visited to Poland in order to make some defense industry cooperation between the two countries. At the end of this visiting, they signed the Memorandum of Mutual Understanding on Cooperation in the Defense Industry. Also in
2004; Deputy Foreign Minister Y. Valinakis participated in the Warsaw meeting in order to discuss financial problems of the EU and new financial policies with the new Community budget for the period of 2007- 2013.54
There are some agreements between Greece and Poland; some of them are; Agreement on the avoidance of double taxation which was signed on 28 May 1987, Agreement on economic, scientific, and technical cooperation in Agriculture and Food Economics on 07 September 1995,
Agreement on Cooperation in Science and Technologyon on 09 November 1998 and
Memorandum of Mutual Understanding on Cooperation in the Defense Industy on 29 June 2004.
These are some bilateral important agreements between Greece and Poland.55
In Poland, there are almost three thousand greek immigrants, especially in the region of
Wroclaw and South-East Poland. There are almost fifty thousand of Poles who live in Greece.56
53 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Economy and Finance, http://www.mnec.gr/en/ 54 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/ 55 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/ 56 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/
47 In 2001, there were only one thousand four hundred people declared themselves they are Greek origions in Poland. In Wroclaw, there is an Association of Greeks. Apart from community associations in Poland, there are Association of Friends of Greece, the Modern Greek Studies department of the University of Warsaw and the Adam Mickiewiz Institute. Moreover, the Greek
Embassy is an active role in Greek communities in Poland. For example, it held an event of 2001-
2004 Cultural Olympiad.57 In these activities, Greek musics and sports are introduced. Such as in the case of Slovakia, Polish - Greek diaspora are not important figure in their political relations. It shows that Greek and Poland bilateral relations are relatively weak in comparison of Greek-
Czech and Greek-Slovak bilateral relations.
Therefore, the hypothesis of ''Greece is a more important actor in Visegrad politics rather than
Turkey'' should be wrong in context of Greek-Polish bilateral relations.
3.5 Hungary
Diplomatic relations between Greece and Hungary were established on 23 July 1956, but till 24
August 1964 there was not any Ambassadorial representation.58 The Greek-Hungarian bilateral relations are balanced. After the accession of Hungary to the EU, many bilateral treaties became inactive. But there had been continuation of some educational, scientific and cultural cooperation.
With the membership of NATO and the EU increased relations at all levels. The cooperation between Greece and Hungary has strengthened to a considerable extend.
There are sharply increasing of Greek-Hungarian economic relations. There is a small number of trade balance negative for Greece. In 2004, there had been 52% of increasing of bilateral trade.
57 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/ 58 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/
48 Therefore, trade would rise to around four hundred million dollars in 2004.59 Mostly, Greece exports fruits, food, textile products, aluminium goods, plastics and tobacco. Also, Hungary exports electronic and telecommunication equipments, motor vehicles corn seed and plastics to
Greece. Also, there is an important number of Greek capital investments in Hungary. There are approxiametly eighty Greek companies in Hungary. It amounts 180million dollars. Greek investment capitals is reaching 0.5% of the total of foreign investments in Hungary.60 Greek investments mainly base on tourism, services, transportation and trade such as paper, food, non- alcoholic beverages, cosmetics and minerals. Tourism is also another factor in their relations.
There are over 15% of all Hungarian tourists go to Greece.61 It estimates over than two hundred thousand Hungarian people choose package tours to Greece every year.
There are some important meetings between Greek and Hungarian politicians. In 1992, Greek
Prime Minister Konstantinos Mitsotakis visited Hungary. After the collapse of the socialist regime in Hungary, this meeting has turning point in order to re-establish of diplomatic relations between Greece and Hungary. Also, the basic agreement between these two countries was signed during this visit. Foreign Minister of Greece, Karolos Papulias visited Budapest in May 1995. On
28-30 May 1996, the Hungarian President Arpad Göncz visited to Greece. On 14-15 October
1996, Foreign Minister of Hungary Laszlo Kovacs visited to Greece. Greek President
Konstantinos Stephanopoulos visited to Hungary on 22-24 April 1998. On 28 November 2000,
Greek Prime Minister Konstantinos Simitis visited to Hungary. The Foreign Minister of Greece,
George Papandeou visited to Budapest on 24 October 2001. K. Simities visited to Hungary again on 9 May 2003. This visiting were also important because K. Simitis held a President of the EU.
59 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Economy and Finance, http://www.mnec.gr/en/ 60 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Economy and Finance, http://www.mnec.gr/en/ 61 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Economy and Finance, http://www.mnec.gr/en/
49 The Hungarian President Ferenc Madl visited to Greece in September 2003. During the Greek
EU presidenct in the first half of 2003, there were almost one hundred delegations from Hungary to visited Greece. Most of Greek and Hungarian relations are based on the cooperation of the economic stability and security on the Balkans.62
There are many bilateral agreements and cooperations between Greece and Hungary such as
Agreement on Aviation in 1963; Cultural, Education and Scientific Agreement in 1977, Consular
Agreement in 1977, Agreement on Scientific and Technological Co-operation in 1979,Agreement on Mutual legal Assistance in Criminal Matters in 1979, Agreement on the Avoidance of Double
Taxation in 1983, Agreement on the Protection of Investments in 1989, Agreement on the
Abolition of Visa Requirement in 1991, Treaty on Friendship and Co-operation in 1992,
Avoiding the Danger of Catastrophes in 2000 and Hungarian Greek Readmission Agreement in
2003.63 These agreements show that there are always relations between Greece and Hungary in every areas.
In Hungary, there are important number of Greek refugees such as in the case of the Czech
Republic. Greeks in Hungary is one of the officially recognised ethnic minorities. The Greeks have thirty one self-governents, and these nineteen self-governments in Hungary.
Greeks start to migrate to Hungary in the sixteen century. Greek merchants came firstly to
Hungary. It became mass migration during the seventeeth century. In the second half of the eighteen century, there were ten thousand Greek migrants in Hungary. By the end of nineteen century, Greek migrants in Hungary had their own churches in many Hungarian towns. Also, at that time, they start to operate Greek schools. Such as in the case of former Czechoslovakia,
Greeks who were suffered from Civil war, started to migrate to Hungary as well after 1945s.
62 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/ 63 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/
50 They were settled in Budapest, Tatabanya, Miskolc, Beloiannisz and Pecs. These Greek migrants paid attention to their language and culture. Todays, most of Greek minorities live live in mainly
Budapest, Beloiannisz and Fejer.
In the 1990s, there were around two thousand people who declare themselves to belong to the national Greek language. But this number has been increased at the beginning of 2000s. There were around two thousand five hundred Greek migrants in Hungary in 2001. But the minority organisations showed this figure up to four thousand migrants as in the region of Budapest and
Belloyannis (Beloiannisz) in Hungary.64 These Greek migrants came from mostly from escaping of Civil war in Greece. Greek migrants in Hungary is approxiametly 0.06%. Therefore, there are more crowded some other minorities in Hungary such as Gypsies, Germans, Slovaks, Crovats,
Romanian and Ukrainans.
There are various number of active Greek Associations in Hungary such as the Cultural
Association of Greeks in Hungary, the Association of Hellenic Youth in Hungary, the
Organisation of Greek Women in Budapest, the Caryadites Cultural Association, the Chelidonaki
Greek Folk Dance Association. Moreover, there are some Greek Unions in Hungary such as the
Semelweiss Greek Student Union with a Foundation known as Greek House.65
But the most important non state Greek community actor in Hungary is the Cultural
Association of the Greek Community in Hungary. And for the past fifty years, it has been existed.
It really plays important role in the life of Greek community in Hungary. They ensemble some traditional Greek dances such as Iliosz, Aitosz and the Helidonaki Greek heritage Children’s and
Youth dance.
64 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/ 65 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/
51 Also, there is a Greek heritage club in Hungary. There are various musical bands such as Sirtos,
Akropolis, Palio Buzuki, Zeus and Maskarades are recognised for their cultural activities. In order to increase promoting of Greek culture in Hungary, a Greek Cultural Centre was opened in
Kecskemet.66
Due to these non-state organisation activities, there is a visible of Greek culture at many events in Hungary. Also, there is a Modern Greek Studies at the Eotvos Lorand University of Budapest.
They promote Greek language courses.
Therefore, Greeks diaspora are affective only in the Czech Republic and Hungary. In the case of Slovakia and Poland, Greek diasporas are not affective. Greek diasporas in both Czech
Republic and Hungary create a positive figure in their relations and it let to increase of their political relations.
The hypothesis of ''Greece is a more important actor in Visegrád politics rather than Turkey.'' in terms of Greek-Hungarian relations could be true. But in order to answer of this hypothesis in terms of Hungarian case, there should be evaluation of Tukish- Hungarian relations. Because both Turkey and Hungary have good deep historical relations as well. If there are better relations between Turkey and Hungary rather than Greece and Hungary, such as possibility of the case of
Poland, this hypothesis will be wrong.
3.6 Greek Party Politics towards Visegrad Parties
There is a two-party system in Greece. Therefore, there two important Greek political parties; the New Democracy and Panhellenic Socialist Movement. Also, there is small number of partipication of the Communist Party and the Coalition of the Left of Movements and Ecology.
66 The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/
52 Also, there is a representation of Popular Orthodox Rally (Popular Party - LAOS) in the
European Parliament.
Now, New Democracy (ND) is the ruler party in the government. At the 7 March 2004 elections, ND took forty five percentage of vote and they are in the govermental party.
ND is a member of the Group of the European People’ s Party (Christian Democrats) and
European Democrats (EPP-ED). Also, ND is member of International Democratic Union and
Christian Democrat International. EPP-ED is the largest political group in the European
Parliament (EP) currently.
In the Czech Republic, ND has cooperation with Christian and Democratic Union –
Czechoslovak People’s Party (KDU-CSL), Civic Democratic Party (ODS) and European
Democrats (SNK ED). In Slovakia, ND has cooperation with Slovak Democratic and Christian
Union (SDKU), Party of Hungarian Coalition (SMK) and Christian Democratic Movement of
Slovakia (KDH). In Poland, ND has cooperation with Civic Platform of the Republic of Poland
(PO) and Polish People’s Party (PSL). In Hungary, ND has cooperation with Hungarian Civic
Union (FIEDSZ) and Hungarian Democratic Forum (MDF).
All these political parties are center-right oriented. It is true that all these political parties are currently in good positions in their country; such as ND, ODS, PO and SDKU.
Even though, there are cooperation of ND with these political parties in Central European countries, there are important differences of these parties politics. For example, ND claims that they are supporting of ‘’future of Europe’’ and European Convention. In the Party politics of ND, it is written that there should be deepening and strengthening of European Union institutions with a view to creation of eventual formation of a Federal Europe. But on the other hand, most of
Visegrad parties are against this idea such as in the case of PO and ODS.
53 On the other hand, the other important party in Greek politics is the Panhellenic Socialist
Movement (PASOK). It is a social democratic political party in Greece. PASOK is member of the Party of European Socialist and the Socialist International. They took forty percentage of vote in the 2004 election and become second political party in Greek politics.
PASOK has cooperation with Czech Social Democratic Part (CSSD) in the Czech Republic.
Also it has cooperation with Smer-Direction Social Democracy in Slovakia. In Poland, PASOK has cooperation with Labour Union (UP). Also, PASOK has cooperation with Hungarian
Socialist Party (MSZP) in Hungary.
Also, The Communist Party of Greece (KKE) has relations other communist parties in Central
Europe. In Czech Republic, KKE has relations with Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia
(KSCM). Also, KKE has cooperation with Communist Party of Slovakia (KSS) in Slovakia. In
Hungary, KKE has cooperation with Hungarian Communist Workers’ Party.
As a result of these figures, it shows that there are an important number of reactions between
Greek and Visegrád political parties. Not only European (Christian) Democrats and Social
Democrats are interaction each other. Also, minor political parties such as Communist or Greens are interacted each other. These political parties reactions will bring more stable and deeper foreigner policies in their bilateral political relations.
54
55 PART III.
4. FOREIGN POLICIES OF TURKEY TOWARDS VISEGRAD COUNTRIES
4.1 Introduction
The important factors such as the collapse of the USSR, insecurity of the region, wars in
Balkans, collapse of Berlin Wall, etc affected to the Turkish-European relations and it brought some difficulties to their relations. Because Central and East Europe became an attractions for
West Europe in stead of Turkey after the collapse of the bi-polar international system. Therefore, since the disintegration of the USSR, Turkish foreign policy environment has changed dramatically. Kurdish problem in the Southeast of Turkey, Balkan regions unstability, the Black
Sea and Caucasus relations, Middle East politics, NATO relations, the politics of the European integration, Iranian nuclear capability in the region, Iraq unstability, Lebanese problem, Islamist extresim and Central European political relations were gained importance for the Turkish foreign policies. Moreover, the West Europe faced with the problem of next enlargement and this affect
Turkish admission to the EU. At that time Turkey was not ready with how to deal with these problems. Also, there was a German unification and it became very important actor in the
Europen continent and as well as in the international system. Although all these development,
West Europe continued the European integration and with the Maastricht Treaty of 1993, the
European Community became the European Union in the world politics. These developments affect to the Turkish foreign policies directly. Because after the collapse of the USSR, enlargement started to evaluated under the new concept with strict rules such as Copenhagen criteria. But the most important development were the changes of the international system and elimination of threats and enemies for the West. Even enlargement was including of the Central
56 and East European countries and this created an enlargement problems. The enlargement of
Central and East European countries to the EU was highly costly policy. But during these developments, Turkey was outside of the process and did not play any important role.
After 1980s till the end of 1990s, Turkey had more important problems such as re-creation of democracy, decrease the influences of military in the politics, etc. Moreover, there were economic liberalization and trade at that time. Also, the Central Asia became an important region for Turkey. But Central Asia became a very attractive region for all international actor, therefore,
Turkey must make competition with other states. Under these developments, Central Europe was never be part of directly Turkish foreign objective.
Globalisation was also affected to the changes of Turkish foreign policy in the international system. But under all these factors, Turkey must improve relations with the Europe. In that context, Turkey did not have any luxurious to ignore the role of the Central European countries.
But during this time, Turkish foreign policy was very simple. And Turkey continued to evaluate
''West'' such as during the Cold War. Moreover, Turkey paid more attention to relations with the
US in stead of the Europe at that time. This was the other biggest mistake of Turkish foreign policy in shaping why did they have relations with the Visegrád countries very late. Also, at that time, there was another turning point for Turkish policy objectives. In 1983, Turkish Republic of
Northern Cyprus (TRNC) was introduced to the international system where Greece was the member of the European Community (EC) and had power of this organisation. This affect to damage to the Turkish and European relations which affected to be outside of the process. As a result of these developments, Turkey did not have so many chance to develop relations with the
Visegrád – Four countries. After the fulfillment of the Custom Union duties in 1996, Turkey was achieved to be part of the process of the European integration, therefore, the relations with the
European states, including Visegrád – Four countries, were mainly based on economic factors.
57 But surely the most important factor of the relations with the Europe was Security and Defense concept and NATO operations. These factors let to increase the relations with the Visegrád –
Four countries. The admission of Central and East European countries to the EU led to make slower of Turkish and the EU relations obviously, therefore, Turkish foreign policies start to based on the EU enlargement and overcome this negative affect.
In order to eliminate this negative affect; there are two main objectives of Turkish foreign policy vision for the future. The first and most important objective is to make Turkey an integral part of the EU. Therefore, the relations with the Visegrád – Four countries are including under this objective. Second objective of the Turkish foreign policy is to create an environment of security and friendship in the international system where Europe is also including. Therefore, the relations with the Visegrád – Four countries can be also evaluated in the second objective of the
Turkish foreign policy. Turkey is active in her foreign policy and relations in all regions, thus,
Central Europe could not be excluded. Till the second half of 1990s, Turkey did not pay any attention to Visegrád – Four countries directly. Therefore, Turkey have more deeper foreign policies towards Visegrád – Four countries.
In 1999, the EU explained that Turkey is an official candidate state to the EU in the Helsinki
Summit. This date is crucial for shaping of Turkish foreign policy, also in relations with Visegrád
– Four countries. Because, after this date, Turkish foreign policy started to be based on
Europeanization of Turkish foreign policy. But it is true that the relations with Europe is always part of the Turkish foreign policy objective and it is one of the most ambitious goals of the
Turkish foreign policy. But it should be discussed weather it was a successful policy or not before
1999? Turkey should prove that how a membership of Turkey would impact to the EU, thus
Central Europe in order to maximize their relations.
58 The most important topic among currently Turkish and Visegrád – Four countries’ relations is the admission of Turkey to the EU. Visegrád – Four countries’ policies about Turkish membership are much more dependent on Western European policies. Therefore, the recent
Turkish foreign policies towards Visegrád – Four countries are mostly depended on taking of supportance of the Visegrád – Four countries to the Turkish admission. Visegrád – Four countries’ relations had not been a major Turkish foreign policy objective in the past. Turkey did not feature as high in the foreign policies of most Central European states that were more preoccupied with the relations of the EU, neighborhoods such as Greece, Cyprus, Armenia and the Middle East, Balkan, the US and Russia. But with the admission of Visegrád – Four countries to the EU, they become part of the process automatically. Therefore, Turkey might develop new foreign policies towards them. Because of these reasons, Turkey should develop better and deeper foreign policies towards Central Europe. But the problem is that these Visegrád – Four countries did not enjoy privileged relations with Turkey. While Poland and Hungary are likely to be net beneficiaries from the EU budget, it is very difficult to convince them for supporting of
Turkish admission to the EU. Even though these conditions, Visegrád – Four countries express that they support of Turkish membership to the EU. But still, Turkey needs to convience them in order to increase of their supportance. Therefore, Turkey has a difficult period in order to take supportance of the Visegrád – Four countries in regarding with the admission to the EU.
On the other hand, Turkey is one of the most supportive country of Visegrád – Four countries admission into NATO. And these Visegrád – Four countries are supporters of strong transatlantic ties. Moreover, these Visegrád – Four countries do not share the values of future of Europe with the EU Constitution too much. Because of this, Turkey is in the middle of their political policies.
First of all, Turkey should prove that being a large state such as France and Germany, Turkey could be partner with the Visegrád – Four countries and take part in the same block. Because it is
59 known that Turkey is one of the important partner of the US in the transatlantic relations. This factor led them they will feel secure with the Turkish admission. Because of this, Turkey should visit more to the Central European countries. Up to second half of 1990s, Turkey and Visegrád –
Four countries had not have strong relations. This negative aspect should be eliminated. Turkey should prove that Turkey and Visegrád – Four countries could be act under one block such as
NATO. Therefore, NATO is an important factor of their relations. If Turkey could use all possibilities of NATO partnership, the idea of ''privileged partnership in the EU and fear of large country admission could be eliminated. There are some positive developments between Turkey and Visegrád – Four countries. Therefore, Turkish foreign policy should be based on these positive factors such as Turkey refused of recognition the partitions of Poland and Hungary's positive reaction to good treatment of her ethnic diaspora in Ukraine, etc.
Due to all these factors, Turkey and the Visegrád – Four countries did not traced back so many years ago apart from Turkish and Polish relations. Both of Turkey and Visegrád – Four countries’ relations could be new foreign policy objective but nobody can ignore its importance. There will be evaluation of bilateral relations of Turkey and Visegrád – Four countries relations. In that context, the hypothesis of '' Greece is a more important actor in Visegrad politics rather than
Turkey '' will be checked.
4.2 The Czech Republic
On 28 October 1918 Czechoslovakia was established. After the World War I, Turkey started to have relations with former Czechoslovakia, therefore with the Czech Republic. On 16 May 1919,
Minister of Foreign Affairs E. Benes sent a Consular to Istanbul. The first President of Turkey,
60 M. K. Atatürk visited Karlovy Vary.67 As a result of these developments, the relations between them were started. The first important event was the signation of the Treaty of Friendship on 11
October 1924 which was entered into force in 1926.68 Till the World War II, the diplomatic relations were continued. But after the Second World War, the diplomatic relations between the two countries were stopped.
Between Turkey and the Czech Republic, there is not any major political dispute. But during the Cold war and bi-polar international system, the diplomatic relations were stagnation. After the
Velvet Revolution of 17 November 1989, the diplomatic relations start to increase, but till the second half of 1990s, the relations were mainly based on economic factors. Velvet divorce of 1
January 1993, Turkey recognised to Czech Republic from the first day. It is surely that 12 March
1999 is an important date for Turkish and Czech relations such as Turkish and Visegrád relations. In that context, the accession of the EU and NATO were the most important topics.
They signed an agreement on mutual support, protection of investments and long term collaboration and also Czech Republic offered preference custom duty on Turkish imports with a minimum 75% discount in 1999.69 With the NATO membership of the Czech Republic, these two countries became alliance under the NATO. It is true that their relations have been developing steadily. But the most important event is the Czech membership to the EU and its role of the accession of Turkey to the EU.
There have been sharply increasing of Turkish and Czech bilateral trade. For example, in 2003, there were fourty- seven percent of increasing in comparsion 2002. There are three important
Czech firms operating in Turkey; one of them is in the manufacturing sector and the rest are in
67 The web page of Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA_tr/ 68 The web page of Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA_tr/ 69 The web page of Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA_tr/
61 the services sectors.70 In addition, there are important number of cooperation between medium and small size enterprises in their bilateral trade relations. Turkey mainly exports to the Czech
Republic textile products such as leather and food products. Also, Turkey and the Czech
Republic cooperate together in the third countries such as in Middel East, Central Asia and
Caucasia. In Tourism, the percentage of Czech tourists who come to Turkey for a holiday, is
0.35 % in total number of foreigners coming to Turkey. This ratio is relatively low.71 There should be also increasing of this number in order to come closer these two societies.
In order to understand of Turkish foreign policies towards the Czech Republic, there should be evaluation of policy and role of the Czech Republic in terms of Turkish accession. Because, as mentioned in this paper, the Turkish foreign policies towards to Central European countries started to be evaluated in the context of the EU agenda. Before the EU accession, the relations between Turkey and Visegrád countries were mainly based on economic factors. But this situation has dramatically changed after the accession of the Visegrád countries to the EU on 1
May 2004. During the negotiations, the role of the EU Presidency state is very important. They should have stable foreign policies about candidate country. Therefore, Turkey started to have a different and more extend foreign policies towards to Visegrád countries.
For the Czech Republic; Turkey is not a priority of Czech diplomacy vis a vis Czech Republic is not a priority of Turkish diplomacy. But the Czech Foreign Ministry had to develop a policy.
Because the EU integration is an important topic and this agenda is EU-driven. According to the
Eurobarometer, the Czechs are 37% in favour of Turkish accession to the EU and 51% against it and 12% do not know about it.72 It reverse than in Poland and Hungary. In Czech Republic, there is not connection of historical relations such as in the case of Hungary, Czechs lands were not
70 The web page of Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA_tr/ 71 The web page of Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA_tr/ 72 Eurobarometer 63 (May-June 2005) http://europa.eu.int/comm/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb63/eb63_en.pdf
62 belonging to Ottoman Empire, apart from fact that in 1529 Turks occupied some part of Moravia lands, including Brno. Moreover, there is not a strong role of the Church such as in the case of
Poland where religious church is against secular, hence the majority of the populations are
Muslim, Turkey. But mostly, it is not easy to distinguish moderate secular Muslim state, which is excatly in the case of Turkey, and Muslim fundamentalism in the mass Czech society.
On February 1999, Former Foreign Minister of Turkey, Ismail Cem, visited to the Czech
Republic and they decided to increase both economic and political relations between Turkey and the Czech Republic. On 6-8 March 2002, the President of Turkey, A. N. Sezer, visited to the
Czech Republic. Former Prime Minister of the Czech Republic V. Spilda visited to Turkey on 1-3
October 2003 and he stated that he supported of Turkish accession to the EU. Also on 26 October
2004, Foreign Minister of Turkey, A. Gül, visited to the Czech Republic.73 It shows that the official visitings are currently and these are not enough to have a deeper relations.
There are one thousand Turkish residing in the Czech Republic.74 This number is relatively small in compare of other European countries. This also affect that mass citizens do not have enough knowledge about Turkey and Turkish people. Between Turkey and the Czech Republic, the cultural and societal relations should be increased while it will led to increase of political relations. The factor that there is not important number of Turkish migrants in the Czech
Republic create negative influences sometimes to the relations. For example, there are great important number of Greek migrants in the Czech Republic. And these Greek diaspora creates a bridge between Greece and the Czech Republic. In that context, Turkey did not have this advantage. But on the other hand, there are important numbers of Turkish migrants in neighbour countries of the Czech Republic such as in Germany and Austria. This factor also creates a
73 The web page of Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA_tr/ 74 The web page of Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA_tr/
63 negative aspect. Because Austria is strongly against Turkish accession while Germany supports privileged partnership. Therefore both Austria and Germany, there are mostly negative perceptions about Turkey. These negative policies of the neighbour countries influence to the
Czech Republic in a negative sense even though they do not know real concepts of Turkish features. Also, there are some civil society initiatives such as Association for European Values and Future of Europe, etc.. which creates a negative opinion towards Turkish accession. In addition, there have been increasing of discrimination against Muslims in the Czech Republic recently.75 Therefore, Turkish minorities are effected by these negative xenophobia. These explanations led to Czech Republic becomes outside of the Turkish policies where Turkey did not have any priority for the Czech Republic till recently. But after 2000s, both Turkey and the
Czech Republic have needed to increase policies towards each other.
As a result of this, in the case of the Czech Republic; the hypothesis of '' Greece is a more important actor in Visegrád politics rather than Turkey '' is relatively correct. But it should not be excluded that there is not huge gap between Greek-Czech bilateral relations and Turkish-Czech bilateral relations.
4.3 Slovakia
Such as in the case of Czech Republic, Turkey recognised the Republic of Slovakia and started to have diplomatic relations. The Turkish Ambassy was opened on 21 April 1994 in Bratislava.76
Turkey supported to ''Open Door Policy''. Turkey supported the accession of Slovakia to NATO.
Moreover, Turkey supported to educational of military assistance to Slovakia in Turkey.
Therefore, membership of NATO increased the relations. But why did they wait until NATO
75 http://www.abhaber.com/haber_sayfasi.asp?id=16357 76 The web page of Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA_tr/
64 membership. After the Slovakia membership to the EU in 2004, the diplomatic relations between
Turkey and Slovakia have a new concept.
The trade volume between Turkey and Slovakia was around two hundred sixty three million dollars in 2003. There was increasing of forty five percent in comparison 2002. Volfiks is a joint
Turkish and Slovakian venture in manufacturing special road paints, electronical systems for traffic signals and their applications in Turkey. Turkey ranks 35th with thirty one companies in
Slovakia.77 And there is a balance of diversification of trade goods. Turkey mainly exports textiles, leather-made goods, fresh and frozen foods, fruits, vegetables, chemical products, household goods, electronic items and construction materials. On the other hand, Slovakia exports to Turkey mainly iron and steel products, machinery and paper products. In addition,
Turkey and Slovakia have strategic importance countries. Therefore, there have been cooperation in enegry and oil sectors. Tourism is also another turning point in their relations. In 2003, there were estimated around twenty-five thousand Slovak tourists in Turkey which was 0.17% of total number of foreigner tourists.78
A. Necdet Sezar is the one of the first President of Turkey who visited Slovakia on 5-6 March
2002. The President of Slovakia R. Schuster visited to Turkey on 15-17 December 2003 and claimed that Slovakia would support the Turkish accession to the EU such as in the case of the
Czech Republic. In the visiting of Schuster, Turkey and Slovakia signed ''the Agreement on Legal
Cooperation on Legal and Commercial Issues.''
Also on 11-12 November 2004, Slovak Foreign Minister E. Kukan visited to Turkey.79 This is a dramatic situation. Since the Velvet divorce of 1993, not so many Turkish President visited
Slovakia and tried to increase the diplomatic relations at the presidential level. Even though it
77 The web page of Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA_tr/ 78 The web page of Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA_tr/ 79 The web page of Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA_tr/
65 was claimed that there was a positive political, economic and cultural relations between Turkey and Slovakia, there was not enough diplomatic relations with Slovakia such as other Visegrád countries in the region.
There are approximately one hundred Turkish residents in Slovakia while this number is approxiametly one thousand in the Czech Republic.80 Therefore, Turkish communities in
Slovakia are very small numbers. Therefore, they can not be play any role in Turkish-Slovak bilateral relations.
As a result of this, in the case of Slovakia; the hypothesis of '' Greece is a more important actor in Visegrád politics rather than Turkey '' is correct in terms of relations with Slovakia. Becuase there is a great importance of Greek influences over Slovak nation even though there is not important number of Greek diaspora in today’s Slovakia.
4.4 Poland
The relations between Turkey and Poland has a different context from the other Visegrád countries. Because, the first agreement between Ottoman Empire, thus affect to Turkey and
Poland was signed in 1439 which was first trade agreement between them.81 Therefore, the relation between Turkey and Poland has almost six hundred years historical background.
Moreover, they had a political treaty in 1489.82 They did not have relations which were based on pure economic factors. Ottoman Empire never recognised none of the occupations of Poland.
They have always embraced Poland. This is very important factor in shaping of relations between
Turkey and Poland. This long historical process distinguish of the relations with Poland from other Visegrád countries relations in some extend.
80 The web page of Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA_tr/ 81 http://www.polonya.org.tr/sec1-relations.html 82 http://www.polonya.org.tr/sec1-relations.html
66 On the other hand, such as in the case of the former Czechoslovakia, Turkey signed Friendship agreement with Poland in 1923.83 This date was crucial. Because it shows that from the end of the first World War and establishment of modern independent Republic of Turkey, they have a friendship agreement.
Spontaneously, during the Cold war, the relations between Turkey and Poland have been stagnation. But after the collapse of the socialist regime in Poland, they signed a Cooperation
Agreement in 1993, therefore, the relations were gained a new momentum. Turkey and Poland have an Action Plan for improvement of political, economic, social, security and military, cultural and scientific, legal and environmental protection relations between them. Thus, the relations of Turkey and Poland increased at all level.
Turkey supported to Polish accession into NATO. Such as the case of the Czech Republic and
Slovakia, NATO membership gained a new momentum of their relations.
The Trade relations between Turkey and Poland are relatively high. Poland has the highest amount in Central European countries trade. In 2003, there were amusing number of increasing in their trade relations. In 2003, there were fifty six percent of increasing of their trade relations in comparison 2002. Turkish foreign direcet investments are around twenty five million dollars in
Poland.84 There have been increasing of Turkish businessman in Poland. There are about seven hundred Turkish firms in Poland and there are four Polish firms which are operating in Turkey.85
Turkish firms are mostly operating in textiles, foodstuffs, electronics, tourism, constructions and auto sectors. Additionally, there have been cooperation of NATO infrastructure projects between
Turkey and Poland. Turkey is one of the successful country in NATO. In that context, some
Turkish companies which hold NATO licences, help to Polish companies in terms of
83 The web page of Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA_tr/ 84 The web page of Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA_tr/ 85 The web page of Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA_tr/
67 standardization of Polish infrastructure. Moreover, there is a Turkish-Polish consortium which has won the tender as projects’ consultant for the Polish Navy.86 Furthermore, Turkish and
Polish companies start to cooperate of joint ventures in the third countries and they will gain important benefits from these cooperations in near future. Also, there have been increasing the cooperations of Small and medium size enterprises in Turkey and Poland. It will let to increase of diversity of bilateral trade relations between Turkey and Poland. Tourism is also another field where 0.73% of total number of foreigner tourist in Turkey are Polish in 2003.87
Turkish President visited to Poland on 31 May- 02 June 2004. In this visit, Poland claimed again their supportance of Turkish membership to the EU. Turkey and Poland have high level of bilateral relations on major international issues. On 6-7 April 2003, Polish Prime Minister L.
Miller visited to Turkey. Also on 15-18 March 2005, B. Arinç who is the speaker of the Grand
National Assembly of Turkey, visited to Poland.88
On the other hand, Poland is expressed that they support to the Turkish accession. Moreover, there are many scholars who analyse Turkey and Poland accession to the EU and they claimed that their membership has a similar way of advantages and disadvantages. After the Conservative
Polish government of ''Law of Justice's (PiS), they claimed that they are against Non-Christian country membership, such as in the case of Turkey. But on the other hand, Civic Platform (P0) , claimed that they support to Turkish admission to the EU. But there are some unreal arguments in
Poland for Turkish membership is that Ukraine could only become a member of the EU if the EU embraces Turkey.89 Also Poland has so many underdeveloped regions such as Turkey and this will led to move Poland from being one of the biggest recipient of EU funding into a net
86 The web page of Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA_tr/ 87 The web page of Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA_tr/ 88 The web page of Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA_tr/ 89http://www.mirovniinstitut.si/eng_html/projects/Position%20of%204%20CEE%20states%20on%20future%20EU %20enlargement.pdf
68 contributor to the EU common budget. But on the other hand, Poland started to follow very close policies with the US. And it is sure that the US is one of the most important factor of the Turkish admission to the EU. If the US force to Poland to be more supportive of Turkey, the Polish foreign policies could be in a different context. Even if all these developments, Poland is the most supportive Visegrád country of the Turkish admission to the EU at the societical level. This is an interesting situation. Because as logical, Poland should be less supportive country in the Central
Europe due to role of strong Church and being largest agricultural country in the region. But in fact, Poland is the most supportive Central European country in regarding Turkish admission to the EU.
There are approximately two thousand of Turkish residence in Poland.90 This number is relatively high from the Czech Republic and Slovakia. It is true that Poland has a maximum number of Turkish residence in Central Europe if Austria is not considered here. Therefore,
Turkey should have deeper relations and policies over Poland in order to protect her citizens.
Poland start to be ‘’new attaractions’’ for Turkish minorities in Europe. There are many Turkish citizens in Germany, Austria, Holland, France, etc.. And therefore, there is a needed to find new countries to migrate. In that context, Poland has the most attractions in Europe. After 2000s, there have been increasing number of Turkish people in Poland. Moreover, Turkish people claim that they can integrate to the Polish society easily and they do not have the integration problem such as in Germany and France. This is another positive features in Turkish and Polish relations.
Because, Turkish and Polish people have some level of similarities. Also, there is a Polish
Village in Istanbul which is called ''Polonezköy'' by the Polish refugees. This is the only living residence of Central European countries in Turkey. Therefore, Poland is a distinguish place in the
Central Europe for Turkey.
90 The web page of Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA_tr/
69 As a result of this, Poland has a close tie with Turkey, therefore the hypothesis of ''Greece is a more important actor in Visegrád politics rather than Turkey.'' should not be correct in the case of
Polish politics.
4.5 Hungary
Turkish and Hungarian relations are always in a different concept rather than the relations with the other Visegrád – Four countries. Because Hungary was the only Visegrád country who was part of Ottoman Empire for almost one hundred fifty years. Because of this reason, Turkey and
Hungary had spontaneous relations throughout history and contacts each others where the other
Visegrád countries do not have. Sometimes, this historical linkages affect to the relations in a negative aspects. During the Hungarian secession from the Ottoman Empire, Ottoman authorities did not hesitate embracing unlike Greek secession. This fact led to made smoother of the relations and decrease the tension of the current relations. In 1944, Hungarian Prime Minister
Miklos Kallay was protected in the Turkish Embassy during the Nazi occupation. In Hungary, there are many important Turkish influences of the Hungarian general life. Even Turkish and
Hungarian language are in the same group. Because of these reasons, Turkey had more exact foreign policies over Hungary rather than other Visegrád countries.
Turkish and Hungarian relations were started in 1947 but ambassadorial relations were started on 28 September 1967.91 During twenty years, bi-polar international system did not allow them to increase of their diplomatic relations. Because Turkey was part of the Western Block and NATO while Hungary was part of the Eastern Block and Warsaw Pact. But with the detente period, both of these two countries had chanced to contact and developed their relations.
91 The web page of Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA_tr/
70 The main topics between Turkey and Hungary were mainly based on the bilateral agreements until the EU and NATO period especially after the second half of the 1990s.
It is true that the relations between Turkey and Hungary started to improve rapidly after the collapse of the socialist regime in Hungary. Turkey is one of the most supportive country of
Hungarian admission into NATO such as in the case of Poland and the Czech Republic. In every possibility, Turkey tried to express that they support the admission of Hungary into NATO such as at the Madrid Summit. Hungary like other Visegrád countries were afraid of veto of Turkey during the NATO admission. But in 1997, the President of Turkey Süleyman Demirel expressed that there would not be any veto for these countries. Moreover, both Turkey and Hungary operated under the Southern wing of NATO, thus, they have more contact in the defense cooperation.
Between Hungary and Turkey, there is not any political problems. Turkey did not have any political dispute with the Visegrád – Four countries. It leads to have more stable relations. Now,
Turkey pays great attention to Visegrád – Four countries in terms of Turkish admission to the
EU. Now, Hungary such as the other Visegrád – Four countries, are the key actor of this process.
Therefore, the role and policies of Hungary is very important. In that context, Hungary does not have a negative opinion about Turkish accession to the EU.
Trade relations between Turkey and Hungary have been increasing. There was increasing of sixty percentage in 2003 in comparison of trade volume in 2002. There are approximately seventy Turkish firms in Hungary.92 Most of them are operated in commerce sector. For example, some Turkish companies took the construction of important commerce centre of Budapest projects. On the other hand, there are six Hungarian companies in Turkey.93 They are mostly
92 The web page of Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA_tr/ 93 The web page of Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA_tr/
71 operated in glass, energy and food sector. Both Turkish and Hungarian companies cooperate in many joint ventures in the third countries such as Middle East and Central Asia. Also, Turkish and Hungarian companies cooperate in the local projects. For instance, Turkish and Hungarian companies cooperate Southeastern Anatolia project. In order to increase of bilateral trade relations between Turkey and Hungary, there have been increasing number of high level visits currently. Additionally, there was 0.35% of total number of foreigner tourists in 2003.94
The main agreements between Turkey and Hungary are that; Agreement on criminal legal assistance and extradition in 1981; Cultural, technical-scientific cooperation Agreement in
1989.95 Up to this date; bi-polar international system and Cold war were continued. But they could achieve to have some level of bi-lateral relations between Turkey and Hungary, at least in the areas of law, culture, technology and science. It is true that end of Cold war and collapse of the Soviet Union made a significant changes of the Turkish-Hungarian relations. At that time,
Turkey and Hungary continued to expand bilateral treaties such as an Agreement on the protection of investment in 1992, an Agreement on the avoidance of dual taxation, an Agreement on cooperation in the fight against terrorism, illegal drug trafficking and organized crime in 1993.
In 1994, they signed Friendship and cooperation treaty.96 NATO accession of Hungary was the turning point in shaping of bilateral relations. They continued to increase bilateral relations with an Agreement on calamity abatement in 1996, Plant protection and animal health Agreement in
2000 and Economic cooperation Agreement in 2005.97 It is obviously show that Turkish and
Hungarian relations has been expanded to almost all level. It was not only pure law, cultural and
94 The web page of Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA_tr/ 95 The web page of Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA_tr/ 96 The web page of Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA_tr/ 97 The web page of Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA_tr/
72 scientific relations as in the past. Now, almost every topic such as economic, political, animal health, environment, security and defense have been their bilateral relations agenda.
Terrorism is one of the most important Turkish foreign policy objective and it is one of the biggest issue of Turkey. Moreover, illegal drug trafficking and organized crime were other important problems of Turkey. Between Turkey and Hungary, they started to have bilateral relations in that area since 1993. It shows that Hungary started to be part of Turkish foreign policy at that time. Because as stated in the section of the Turkish foreign policy objective;
Central Europe is not included as a topic.
There are also many meetings of Turkish and Hungarian politicians at all level. Prime Minister of Hungary Viktor Orban visited to Turkey in May 2000. On 15-18 October 2002 President of
Hungary Ferenc Madl visited to Turkey. Bülent Arinç also visited to Hungary on 25-27 July
2003. The Hungarian Interior Minister M. Lamperth visited to Turkey on 25-26 September 2003.
Also, on 28-30 November 2004, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Hungary, F. Somogyi visited to
Turkey. The Prime Minister of Turkey Recep Tayyip Erdogan visited Hungary between 12-13
May 2005.98 These figures show that there are strong relations between Turkey and Hungary recently and they have been trying to increase relations as much as they can.
There are approximately one thousand five hundred Turkish citizen living in Hungary.99 After
Poland, this number is the second largest Turkish population in the Central Europe. This number is not so high if there will be comparison with other European states such as Germany, Austria,
France and the Netherlands. But if there will be analysing that Turkish people do not migrate to
Central European countries generally, both Hungary and Poland start to have important number
98 The web page of Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA_tr/ 99 The web page of Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA_tr/
73 of Turkish migrations and it is possible of increasing of new Turkish migrants to Hungary and
Poland in near future.
As a result of this, such as in the case of Poland, Hungary has a close tie with Turkey, therefore the hypothesis of ''Greece is a more important actor in Visegrád politics rather than Turkey.'' should not be correct.
4.6 Turkish Party Politics towards Visegrad Parties
There is a multi-party system in Turkey where there is a two-party system in Greece. Therefore, there are more diversity in Turkish party politics rather than Greek party politics. But on the othe hand, there is a ten percentage of minimum threshold where this number is only three percent in
Greece. Thus, it affects to the situation of political parties in the National Assembly.
There are two important Left-Wing political parties in Turkish political specturum. Democratic
Left Part (DSP) and Republican People’s Party (CHP). Also there are important major Right wing political parties such as Justice and Development Party (AKP), Motherland Party (ANAP),
True Path Party (DYP), Youth Party and Nationalist Action Party (MHP).
In Turkey, Justice and Development Party (AKP) is observor of European People’ s Party and
European Democrats (EPP-ED). Therefore, they contact and cooperate with ODS, KDU-CSL and
SNK ED in the Czech Republic, SDKU in Slovakia, SMK and KDH in Hungary, PO and PSL in
Poland and MDF in Hungary. But AKP is not member of the EPP-ED. It is only observer party, therefore, their cooperations are not maximum level such as in the case of ND.
ANAP and DYP are the rightist parties and they have cooperations with LAOS in Greece, SNS
(Slovak National Party) in Slovakia, LpR (League of Polish families) in Poland.
CHP is also associate Member Party of the Party of European Socialist. CHP is a member of the Socialist International group. CHP has some level of cooperation with PASOK, KSCM,
74 MSZP, SLD (Democratic Left Alliance in Poland) SdPl (Social Democratic Party of Poland), UP and Smer.
Turkish Communist Party (TKP) has also some cooperations with other communist parties of
Central Europe such as KSCM in the Czech Republic, KSS in Slovakia and Hungarian
Communist Workers Party in Hungary.
It shows that both Turkish political parties such as Greek political parties are cooperated with
Visegrad political parties under the EPP and PES forms. Therefore, European (Christian)
Democrats and Social Democrats are two important forms of cooperation for Turkish political parties such as Greek political parties, come closer with Visegrad political parties in the world politics.
75
76 PART IV.
5. COMPARISON OF GREEK AND TURKISH FOREIGN POLICIES TOWARDS VISEGRAD COUNTRIES
5.1 Basic similarities of Greek and Turkish foreign policies towards Visegrad countries
Both Greece and Turkey had been part of the Western Block while Visegrád – Four countries had been part of the Eastern block during the bi-polar international system. Therefore, both
Greece and Turkey could not have many opportunities to increase political relations with the
Visegrád – Four countries during the Cold War. Both Greece and Turkey had minimum level of political bilateral relations during 1950s till end of 1960s. But after the disintegration of the
USSR, both Greece and Turkey started to develop their bilateral diplomatic relations with the
Visegrád – Four countries. Non of Visegrád – Four countries had difficulties to restart political relations with Greece and Turkey. But their political relations should be evaluated since 1990 even though they had political relations before the Second World War. In that context, the EU and NATO are the key factors in shaping of their bilateral relations.
Both Greece and Turkey were the key actors during the admission of Visegrád – Four countries into NATO. Therefore, both of these two countries needed to developed specific foreign policies towards Visegrád – Four countries in the 1990s. NATO let to increase bilateral cooperation of
Greece and Turkey with the Visegrád – Four countries in terms of defense-security and political eras. Both Greece and Turkey had treaty of friendship with the Visegrád – Four countries, it shows that both Greece and Turkey do not have any major political dispute with the Visegrad countries.
77 5.2 Basic differences of Greek and Turkish foreign policies towards Visegrad countries
Greece was the key actor during the admission of the Visegrád – Four countries to the EU while Turkey was outside of this process. Therefore, Greece should use this advantage and have more opportunities to increase of bilateral relations with the Visegrád – Four countries. This is the one of the most important differences of Greek and Turkish relations with the Visegrád –
Four countries.
Greece has a policy that support of small countries and she wants to have cooperation of the small members of the EU. In that context, the Czech Republic and Slovakia are the great attention of Greece. Also, in the evaluation of bilateral relations, it shows that Greece has better political and economic relations with the Czech Republic and Slovakia. For example, Greece has the highest amount of trade volume with the Czech Republic in comparison of other Visegrád countries. And Turkey has better relations with Poland and Hungary. Hungary can be interesting situation. Becuase, after one hundred fifty years Ottoman Empire control, there should be increase of tension against Turks. But this situation was not happened. Hungary continued to its good relations with Turkey. Even in Hungary, there are many streets and squares name in
Turkish. It shows that there is not any hostile in Turkish and Hungarian bilateral relations. On the other hand, Poland and Hungary are supporter of Turkish admission to the EU and this affect positive developments of bilateral relations.
History is another important concept in shaping of their bilateral relations. For example,
Slovakian and Hungarian territories were controlled by Turkish. And there was some level of negative influence of this. For instance, Greece could achieve better bilateral relations with
Slovakia because of this reason. On the other hand, there is a positive impact of the same reason in the other relations. For example, Greece and Slovakia have good relations because of history.
There is an importance of ''Mycenaean Culture'' which traced back to nineth century. Or the fear
78 of Ottoman Empire expansion, Greece and Slovakia, in some extent with Hungary, could come together more closer. Thus, history is an important factor in shaping of their bilateral relations.
Moreover, Greek culture, language and tradition affect to Slavic nations. Therefore, Greece could have better bilateral relations with the Czech Republic and Slovakia rather than Turkey.
Also, Greek Orthodox Church is another positive influences over their bilateral relations such as in the case of Greek-Slovak relations. But on the other hand, there is a dramatic situation. Poland is a religious Catholic country and Turkey is a Muslim country. But they have good relations.
Even, Turkey has better relations with Poland rather than Greece. Greece and Poland are the most strong Christian country out of these countries but Greek-Polish relations are the weakest one in comparison of Visegrád – Four countries. Therefore, these factors such as culture, history or religious can be change one situation to another such as explained in this paper.
There are important significance of Greek migrants in the Visegrád – Four countries; For example, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary have important number of Greek migrants.
On the other hand, Poland and Hungary have some Turkish migrants. But there are not any importance of Turkish migrants in the Visegrád – Four countries.
5.3 Evaluation of the hpothesis
As a result of these explanations, it shows that the hypothesis of ''Greece is more imporatant actor in the Visegrad politics rather than Turkey'' is not correct totally. It figure out that Greece has better relations with the Czech Republic and Slovakia rather than Turkish and Czech, Slovaks relations. But in case of Poland, Turkey has better relations rather than Greece. Both Greece and
Turkey have also good relations with Hungary. Therefore, this hypothesis can not be true a hundred percent...
79
80 PART V.
6. MAIN CONCLUSION
In this dissertation, the hypothesis of '' Greece is a more important actor in Visegrád politics rather than Turkey'' has been evaluated.
The hypothesis of '' Greece is a more important actor in Visegrád politics rather than Turkey'' should be wrong.
The reason of creation of this hypothesis are dependent on many factors. First of all, Greece was the key political actor during the admission of the Visegrád – Four countries to the EU. And
Turkey was (and still) out of process. I thought that this factor should support great advantages to
Greece. But Greece could not use this opportunity very well. On the other hand, Greece had important international political problems such as Cyprus issus, Macedonian problem, Aegean
Sea problems with Turkey,etc. Therefore, Greece paid the maximum attention to solve these problems. In that context, it is normal that can not create intensive foreign policy towards
Visegrád – Four countries. The only thing, Greece express that Greece support of small countries interests in the EU. Therefore, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary could be evaluated under this Greek foreing policy. But Poland could be exception. Because Poland is relatively big country. The bilateral relations between Greece and Poland also shows that Poland is the worst situation in comparison of bilateral relations of Greece and
Visegrád countries. Moreover, this paper shows that Turkey and Poland has relatively good political relations. For example, Turkey never recognise of any Partition of Poland through out history. It shows that Turkey support Poland all the time. If the most conservative parties in
Poland support of Turkish admission to the EU, it shows that this hypothesis can not be correct.
Also, bilateral relations of Turkey and Hungary are in a good position. Even if, it can be
81 evaluated that their bilateral political relations are relatively better than Greek-Hungarian bilateral political relations. Therefore, in the context of bilateral relations with Hungary, this hypothesis is not correct as well. This paper analyses that the bilateral relations of Greece-Czech Republic and
Greece-Slovakia are better than relations of Turkey-Czech Republic and Turkey-Slovakia. For example, Greece has the highest trade volume with the Czech Republic in Central Europe while
Turkey has the highest trade volume with Poland in the region. As a result of all these analyses, it shows that Greece has better relations with the Czech Republic and Slovakia while Turkey has better relations with Poland and Hungary. Also, this paper find interesting other outcome which was Turkey has relatively good bilateral political relations with Hungary. Because, in most of cases, the countries which ruled by the Ottoman Empire for a long time, did not want to establish perfect relations such as in the case of Bulgaria or Serbia. Also, these kind of countries follow pro-Greek foreign policies. The fear of Turks let to bring them closer. Moreover, Greek is a symbol for Slavic nations. There are great importances of Greek influences in Slavic nations such as in the case of Slovakia. Also Greece is a Christian country where Turkey has predominantly
Muslim Population. Therefore, there should be better role of Greece in other christian countries such as Poland or Hungary. But this factor is not true. Because, this paper shows that Poland and
Hungary have better relations with Turkey rather than Greece. Thus, role of religion and its effect to the bilateral political relations did not work in these cases. And there are important number of
Geek migrants in Visegrad countries; especially in the Czech republic, Slovakia and Hungary.
Apart from these factors, there are other reason of why this hypothesis is not correct. Even though both Greece and Turkey started to increase their bilateral political relations after the disintegration of the USSR, both Greece and Turkey pay great attention to the Visegrád – Four countries. Both Greece and Turkey try to decrease the impact of the minimum political relations during 1950s and 1960s. Neither Greece nor Turkey have political dispute with the Visegrád –
82 Four countries. Therefore, it was very easy to restart of the diplomatic relations between Greece and Turkey with the Visegrád – Four countries.
Both Greece and Turkey support of Visegrád – Four countries and old CEFTA members accession to NATO. With the admission of NATO and the EU, their political relations started to increase rapidly. Even though Turkey is not member of the EU yet, She participates many of the
European activities. Of course, Turkey did not have same advantage of Greece in the Visegrád –
Four countries integration of the EU. Both Greece and Turkey supported to Visegrád – Four countries admission into NATO. In that context, both Greece and Turkey start to have more intensive foreign policies towards Visegrád – Four countries. Both Greece and Turkey had friendship treaties with the Visegrád – Four countries. Therefore, their bilateral relations were always in a peaceful context and now they are cooperated under the same international organisations.
83 LIST OF ACRONYMS
∑ AKP...... Justice and Development Party ∑ ANAP...... Motherland Party ∑ AGCCR...... Association of the Greek Communities in the Czech Republic ∑ BSEC...... Black Sea Economic Cooperation ∑ CEE...... Central and East Europe ∑ CEEC...... Central and East European Countries ∑ CEFTA...... Central European Free Trade Agreement ∑ CHP...... Republican People’s Party ∑ CSSD...... Czech Social Democratic Party ∑ DYP...... True Path Party ∑ DSP...... Democratic Left Part ∑ EC...... European Community ∑ EEC...... European Economic Community ∑ EOT...... Greek Tourist Organisations ∑ EP...... European Parliament ∑ EPP-ED...... European People’ s Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats ∑ EU...... European Union ∑ GATT...... General Agreement on Tarrifs and Trade ∑ GGAE...... General Office of Greeks living abroad ∑ KDH...... Christian Democratic Movement of Slovakia ∑ KDU-CSL...... Christian and Democratic Union – Czechoslovak People’s Party ∑ KKE...... Communist Party of Greece ∑ KSCM...... Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia ∑ KSS...... Communist Party of Slovakia ∑ LAOS...... Popular Orthodox Rally ∑ LPR...... League of Polish families ∑ MDF...... Hungarian Democratic Forum ∑ MHP...... Nationalist Action Party
84
∑ MSZP...... Hungarian Socialist Party ∑ NATO...... North Atlantic Treaty Organisation ∑ ND...... New Democracy ∑ ODS...... Civic Democratic Party ∑ OECD...... Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development ∑ OSCE...... Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe ∑ PASOK...... Panhellenic Socialist Movement ∑ PO...... Civic Platform of the Republic of Poland ∑ PSL...... Polish People’s Party ∑ SAE...... Council of Greeks living abroad ∑ SDKU...... Slovak Democratic and Christian Union ∑ SDPL...... Social Democratic Party of Poland ∑ SLD...... Democratic Left Alliance in Poland ∑ SMK...... Party of Hungarian Coalition ∑ SNK/ED...... European Democrats ∑ SNS...... Slovak National Party ∑ SU...... Soviet Union ∑ TKP...... Turkish Communist Party ∑ TRNC...... Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus ∑ UN...... United Nations ∑ UP...... Labour Union ∑ US...... United States ∑ USSR...... Union of Socialist Soviet Republics ∑ V-4...... Visegrad -4 ∑ WTO...... World Trade Organisation ∑ WWI...... World War I. ∑ WWII...... World War II.
85
ABSTRACT
The aim of this dissertation is the comparison of the Greek and Turkish foreign policies towards
Visegrad countries; relatively, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Poland and Hungary. Therefore, it examines of the Greek and Turkish political relations with Visegrad countries. In that context, there is one hypothesis which is Greece is a more important actor in Visegrad politics rather than
Turkey. Therefore, this thesis is checking weather this hypothesis is correct or not. As a result of this, this paper is analyzing their political relations, political disputes if there is any, bilateral agreements, official political visits and cooperation’s, number of migrants and role of diasporas, foreign policies, political parties cooperation and their political history.
Keywords: Foreign Policy of Greece, Foreign Policy of Turkey, political relations of Greece and Turkey with Visegrad countries, Greek and Turkish minorities in Central Europe, Greek and
Turkish political party relations with Visegrad parties.
86 BIBLIOGRAPHY
PRIMARY SOURCES
Akçalı, Nazif, (1988) "Tarihi Geliİim Ğçinde Türk Dıİ Politikasının Esasları", Düİünceler, Cilt 2, No 2, ğubat 1988.
Aktan, Gündüz, (1998) "Türkiye-AB: Dünden Yarına", Görüİ, No 37, Ekim-Kasım 1998.
Alkin, Erdo₣an, (1990) Avrupa Toplulu₣u Sosyalist Ülkeler, Türkiye, y.y., European Parliament, 1990.
Arı, Önder, (1977) Uluslararası Ğliİkiler Bakımından Türkiye ve Komİuları, Ğstanbul, Ğstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları, 1977.
Armao₣lu, Fahir, (1992) "Türkiye ve Batı Dünyasına Genel Bir Bakıİ, Dün-Bugün-Yarın", Tarihi Geliİmeler Ğçinde Türkiyenin Sorunları Sempozyumu, Ankara, 8-9 Mart 1990, Ankara, TTK, 1992.
Atila Eralp (Eds.) (1997) Türkiye ve Avrupa, Yay. Haz., Ankara: Imge Yay.
Baskın Oran (Eds.) (2003) Türk Dis Politikasi; Kurtulus Savasindan Bugüne Olgular, Belgeler, Yorumlar, Cilt I-II, Istanbul Iletism Yayinlari.
Barry Rubin and Kemal Kiriİçi (2002) Günümüzde Türkiye’nin Diİ Politikasi, Ğstanbul: Bogaziçi Üniversitesi yay.
Baydarol, M. Can, (1990) "De₣iİen Dünya Koİulları ve Türkiye-AT Ğliİkileri", Denizatı, Cilt 4, No 9-10, Eylül-Ekim 1990.
Bolat, Ömer, (1995) "Türkiye'nin Avrupa Birli₣i'ne Endekslenmiİ Dıİ Politikası", Türk Yurdu, Cilt 15, No 98, Ekim 1995.
Canbulut, ğeyma Ğpek, (1997) "Son Geliİmelerin Iİı₣ında Türkiye-Avrupa Birli₣i Ğliİkileri", Türk-Ğİ, No 323, Nisan 1997,
Chryssochoou, D. and Stavridis, S. and Moschonas, A. (2000), 'Greece and the European Union after Amsterdam', in Mitsos, A. and Mossialos, E. (eds), Contemporary Greece and Europe, Ashgate, Aldershot.
Couloumbis, T. (1994), Introduction: The impact of EC (EU) membership on Greece’s foreign policy profile, in Kazakos, P. and Ioakimidis, P. (eds.), Greece and EC membership evaluated, Pinter, London.
87 Eralp, Atila, (1991) "Avrupa Toplulu₣u Ğkinci Geniİleme Sürecinin Türk Dıİ Politikasına Olan Etkileri", Ğktisat Dergisi, No 313, Mart - Nisan 1991.
Gropas, R. (2003a), Greece and the Convention on the Future of Europe, EPIN working paper, Athens, April, www.epin.org.
Gundogdu, Ayten (2001) Identities in Question: Greek-Turkish Relations in a Period of Transformation ? Middle East Review of International Affairs 5: 1.
Ioakimidis, P. (1999), The Europeanisation of Greece’s Foreign Policy: Progress and Problems, in Stavridis, S. and Couloumbis, T. and Veremis, T. and Waites, N. (eds.), The Foreign Policies of the European Union's Mediterranean States and Applicant Countries in the 1990s, Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Ioakimidis, P. (2000), The Europeanisation of Greece’s Foreign Policy: Progress and Problems, in Mitsos, A. and Mossialos, E. (eds.), Contemporary Greece and Europe, Ashgate, Aldershot.
Karklins, Rasma (2000) Ethnopluralism: Panacea for East Central Europe? in Nationalities Papers, vol. 28(2).
Karluk, Rıdvan, (1992) "De₣iİen Avrupa'da Türkiye'nin Yeri", Ğİveren, Cilt 30, No 5, ğubat 1992.
Kouveliotis, K. (2001), The impact of European integration on the Europeanisation of Greek foreign policy, Institute of International Economic Relations Occasional Paper no.20, Athens.
Larrabee, S. (1997) 'Greece and the Balkans: Implications for Policy' in G.T.Allison and K.Nicolaidis (eds.) The Greek Paradox, Mass: The MIT Press.
Malik Mufti (1998) ''Daring and Caution in Turkish Foreign Policy', Middle East Journal, 52.
Mitsos, A. and Mossialos, E. (2000) Contemporary Greece and Europe, Aldershot: Ashgate.
Oran, Baskin (2001) Türk Diİ Politikasi,: Kurtuluİ Savasindan Bugüne Olgular-Belgeler- Yorumlar, (2 cilt), Istanbul.
Stearns, M. (1995) 'Greek Foreign Policy in the 1990s: Old Sign Posts, New Roads' in D. Constas and T.Stavrou (eds.) Greece Prepares for the Twenty-first Century, Washington D.C. The Woodrow Wilson Center Press.
Tezel, Yahya Sezai, (1992) "Yeni Koİullarda Dünyadaki Yeri, Kimli₣i ve Statüsü Açısından Türkiye'nin Avrupa Toplulu₣u ile Ğliİkileri Hakkında Bazı Tesbit ve Düİünceler", Türkiye Günlü₣ü, No 19, 1992.
Wallden A.S (2000) ''Greece and the Balkans'' In: Mitsos A. and Mossialos E. (Eds.) Contemporary Greece and Europe, Aldershot Ashgate. SECONDARY SOURCES
88
Anna Diamantopoulou, (2002) “The Future of Europe and Greece” in P.C. Ioakimidis (ed.) The Future of Europe and Greece, Athens, Sakkoulas/ EKEM.
Ataöv, Türkkaya, (1968) "Marshall Planından NATO'nun Kurulmasına Kadar So₣uk Harp", Ankara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt 23, No 3, Eylül 1968.
Batu, Hamit, (1965) "Türkiye'nin Dıİ Siyaseti", Dıİiİleri Bulleteni, No 6, Mart 1965.
Bayur, Yusuf Hikmet, (1995) Türkiye Devletinin Dıİ Siyasası, 2. Baskı, Ankara, TTK, 1995.
Bazo₣lu Sezer, Duygu, (1999) "So₣uk Savaİ Dönemi ve Türkiye'nin Ğttifaklar Politikası", Ça₣daİ Türk Diplomasisi, 200 Yıllık Süreç, Sempozyuma Sunulan Tebli₣ler, Ankara, Türk Tarih Kurumu, 1999.
Bilge, Suat (1992) Güç Komİuluk (Sovyetler Birli₣i Ğle) Ankara: Ğİ Bankası Yayınevi.
Birand, M. Ali, (1988) "Türk Dıİ Politikasında Öncelikler", Dıİ Politika, No 2, Temmuz 1988.
Bostancı, M. Naci, (1995) "Dıİ Politika/Ğktidar/Güzellik", Yeni Türkiye, Cilt 1, No 3, Mart- Nisan 1995.
Christakis, Michael (1998) "Greece: Competing with Regional Priorities." Adapting to European Integration. Eds., Kenneth Hanf and Ben Soetendorp. New York: Addison Wesley Longman Ltd.
Clogg, R. (1992) A Concise History of Modern Greece, Cambridge: Cambridge Uni. Press.
Constas, Dimitris, (eds.) (1991), The Greek-Turkish Conflict in the 1990s: Domestic and External Influences, New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Constas, Dimitris and Theofanis Stavrou (eds), (1995) Greece Prepares for the Twenty-First Century, (Standford CA: Woodrow Wilson Centre Press, John Hopkins University Press.
Couloumbis, T. (1994), Introduction: The impact of EC (EU) membership on Greece’s foreign policy profile, in Kazakos, P. and Ioakimidis, P. (eds), Greece and EC membership evaluated, Pinter, London. Couloumbis, T. and Yannas, P. (1996) 'Greek foreign policy priorities for the 1990s' in K.Featherstone and K.Ifantis (eds.) Greece in a Changing Europe. Between European Integration and Balkan Disintegration, Manchester: Manchester Uni. Press.
Couloumbis, Theodore, Fotini Bellou and Theodore Kariotis, (eds.), (2003) Greece in the Twentieth Century, New York: Frank Cass Publishers, 2003.
"Cumhuriyetin 75. Yıl Dönümünde T. C. Dıİ Politikasının De₣erlendirilmesi", Yeni Türkiye, Cilt 4, No 23-24, Eylül-Aralık 1998, s. 1338-1342. (Comments)
89 D. Keridis and Trianthphyllou (2001) Greek-Turkish Relations in the Era of Globalisation, Virginia: Brassey’s.
Fakiolas E. (2002), « : » (“Theories of European integration: An overridden issue”), (The Social Science Forum).
Faruk Sönmezoglu (2004) "Kurtulus Savasi Dönemi Diplomasisi", Türk Dis Politikasinin Analizi, Faruk Sönmezoglu (Eds.), 3.Baski,Der Yayinlari Istanbul.
Faruk Sönmezoglu (2004) Türk Dis Politikasinin Analizi, 3. Baski,:Der Yayinlari. Istanbul.
Faruk Sönmezoglu (2006) II. Dünya Savasindan Günümüze Türk Dis Politikasi, Der Yayinlari, Istanbul.
Featherstone, Kevin and George N. Yannopoulos (1995) "The European Community and Greece: Integration and the Challenge to Centralism." The European Union and the Regions. Eds., Barry Jones and Michael Keating. New York: Oxford University Press.
Featherstone, K. and Ifantis, K. (eds.) (1996), Greece in a changing Europe Between European integration and Balkan disintegration? Manchester University Press, Manchester.
Featherstone, K. and Kazamias, G. (2001b), Introduction: Southern Europe and the Process of Europeanization, in Featherstone, K. and Kazamias, G. (eds.), Europeanisation and the Southern Periphery, Frank Cass, London.
Fernav, F. W. (1968) "Türkiye Dıİ Politikasının Esasları", Stratejik Etütler Bülteni, Cilt 2, No 710, Haziran 1968.
Fırat, M. (2001) “Yunanistan’la Ğliİkiler”, Türk Dıİ Politikası 1919-1980, Ed: Baskın Oran, C.I, (325-357), Ğstanbul.
Fulya Kip-Barnard (2003) Soguk Savas Sonrasinda Türkiye-AB iliskileri, Soguk Savas Sonrasinda Avrupa ve Türkiye, Cem Karadeli (eds.), Ankara: Ayraç Kitapevi.
Gencer Özcan (2002) Türk Dis Politikasinda Olusum Süreci ve Askeri Yapisi, Günümüzde Türkiye’nin Dis Politikasi, BarryRubin, Kemal Kirisçi (eds..), Istanbul: Bogaziçi Üniversitesi yay.
George Alogoskoufis, (2002) “The Future of Europe and the European Economy” in P.C. Ioakimidis (ed.) The Future of Europe and Greece, Athens, Sakkoulas/ EKEM, 2002.
Gö₣üİ, Zeynep (2000) "Türk Basınında Dıİ Politika Bilinci", Stratejik Analiz, Cilt 1, Sayı 2, Haziran 2000.
Gönlübol, Mehmet (1993) Olaylarla Türk Dıİ Politikası, 1919-1990, Ankara, Siyasal Kitabevi, 1993.
90 Gönlübol, M., ve Sar, C., (1969), “1919-1939 Yılları Arasında Türk Dıİ Politakası”, Olaylarla Türk Dıİ Politikası, ikinci baskı, (3-147), Ankara.
Gürel, ğ. S., (1993) Tarihsel Boyut Ğçinde Türk-Yunan Ğliİkileri (1821-1993), Ankara.
Halefo₣lu, Vahit (1984) "Türkiye'nin Batı ile Ğliİkileri", Dıİiİleri Bakanlı₣ı Belleteni, No 11, Kasım 1984.
Hamit Batu (1995) Avrupa'yla Bunalimli Yillar Istanbul: Altin Kitaplar.
Hatipo₣lu, M. (1997) Yakın Tarihte Türkiye ve Yunanistan 1923-1954, Ankara.
Hughes, J. and Sasse, G. (2003). “Monitoring the monitors: EU enlargement conditionality and minority protection in the CEECs”, Journal on Ethnopolitics and Minority Issues in Europe, 2003(1).
Ihsan Dagi (Eds.) (1998), Türk Dis Politikasinda Gelenek ve Degisim, Der. Ihsan Dagi, Ankara: Siyasal Kitabevi.
Ioakimidis P. . (2000), : ! " # $# (The Future of Europe: Prospects for a European Federation and Greece), %& : '# (Athens: Sideris).
Kamran Unan (1999) Dis Politika, Istanbul: Timas Yayinlari.
Kamuran Gürün (1991) Türk - Sovyet iliskileri (1920 - 1953), Ankara: TTK Yay.
Kavakas, D. (2000), Greece, in Manners, I. and and Whitman, R. (eds), The Foreign Policies of European Union Member States, Manchester University Press, Manchester.
Kazakos, P. and Ioakimidis, P. (eds.) (1994), Greece and EC membership evaluated, Pinter, London.
Kazakos P. (2003), ( (The uncertain future of the European Union and Turkey), %& : ) * (Athens: Papazisis).
Kemali Saybasili (Eds.) (1997) Yeni Balkanlar, Eski Sorunlar, Yay. Haz. - Gencer Özcan, Istanbul: Baglam Yay.
Kitromilides, Paschalis M. (1990) Imagined Communities and the Origins of the National Question in the Balkans, in Martin Blinkhorn and Thanos Veremis, Modern Greece: Nationalism and Nationality, SAGE-ELIAMEP.
Kitromilides, Paschalis M. (1994) Enlightenment, Nationalism, Orthodoxy: Studies in the Culture and Political Thought of South-eastern Europe, Aldershote-Variorum.
91 Kofas, J.V. (1989) Intervention and Underdevelopment. Greece During the Cold War University Park: The Pennsylvania State Uni. Press.
Kurat, Y. T. (1986) “Yunanistan’ın Küçük Asya Macerası”, Tarih Boyunca Türk-Yunan Ğliİkileri (20 Temmuz 1974’e Kadar) , Üçüncü Askerî Tarih Semineri Bildiriler, (407-423), Ankara.
Lavdas, K.A. (1997) The Europeanization of Greece. Interest politics and the Crises of Integration, London: MacMillan.
Lesser, Ian, Stephen Larrabee, Michele Zanini and Katia Vlachos, (2001) Greece’s New Geopolitics, Santa Monica: National Security Research Division, RAND, 2001.
M. Cüneyt Yenigün (2004) Soguk Savas Sonrasinda TBMM ve Dis Politika: Belgeler-Yorumlar, Ankara: Nobel Yayinevi.
Meray, Seha L. (1960) "Bazı Türk Andlaİmalarına Göre Komİuluk Münasebetleri", Ankara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt 12, No 2, Haziran 1960.
Mustafa Türkes, Ilhan Uzgel (Eds.) (2002), Türkiye’nin Komsulari, Ankara: Simge Yay.
Mütercimler, E., (2000) 21. Yüzyıl ve Türkiye, 2. Baskı, Ğstanbul
Nye, J.S (1997) 'Greece & the Balkans: A Moment of Opportunity' in G.T.Allison and K.Nicolaidis (eds.) The Greek Paradox, Mass: The MIT Press.
Oral Sander (1998) Türk Dis Politikasinnda Sürekliligin Nedenleri, Türkiye’nin Dis Politikas, Melek Firat, (eds.) Ankara: Simge Yayinlari.
Ostrogorsky, G., (1981) Bizans Devleti Tarihi,Çeviren: Fikret Iİıltan, Ankara.
Özda₣, Ümit, (1993) "1993 Yılına Bakıİ veya Türk Dıİ Politikasının Tutarsızlı₣ı Üzerine", Türk Yurdu, Cilt 13, No 76, Aralık 1993.
Pagoulatos, G. (2002), Greece, the European Union, and the 2003 Presidency, Research and European Issues Paper No.21, Groupement d Etudes et de Recherches Notre Europe, December, www.notre-europe.asso.fr/Etud21-fr
Papademos, L. (2001), “The Greek Economy: Performance and Policy Challenges”, in Greece’s Economic Performance and Prospects, Bank of Greece and the Brookings Institution.
Resat Özkan (1999) Küresel Çikar Oyunlar içinde Türkiye'nin Dis Politika Sorunlari, Ankara: Ümit Yay.
Rühl, Lothar (1992) "Avrupa ve Do₣u Arasında Türkiye" (çev. Hüseyin Ba₣cı), Dıİ Politika Bülteni, Cilt 4, No 1, 1992.
Soysal, Ğ. (1989) Türkiye’nin Siyasal Andlaİmaları 1920-1945, C.I, Ankara.
92
Stavrou, Theophanis G. (1995) The Orthodox Church and Political Culture in Greece, in Dimitri Constas and Theophanis G. Stavrou (eds.), Greece Prepares for the Twenty-First Century, The Woodrow Wilson Center - The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Stefanidis, I. (2001), Pressure Groups and Greek Foreign Policy, 1945-67, Hellenic Observatory Discussion Paper no.6, LSE European Institute, London, December.
Svoronos, N. (1994), Ça₣daİ Helen Tarihine Bakıİ, Çeviren: Panoyot Abacı, Ğstanbul , 1988, s.30-31; Toktamıİ Ateİ, Siyasal Tarih, Ğstanbul .
Tayfur, M.F. (2004) The Turkey/Greece/Cyprus Security Complex and the EU Enlargement: Implications or the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership and Eastern Mediterranean Relations. EuroMesCo Papers, No.28
Tekin, Kazım (1995), "Sınır Nedir? Türkiye'nin Komİularıyla Olan Sınırları", Türk Ğdare Dergisi, Cilt 67, No 406, Mart 1995.
Tziampiris, A. (2000), Greece’s contribution to European Political Cooperation Policies towards Former Yugoslavia, June 1991-January 1992: an Institutional Analysis, in Mitsos, A. and Mossialos, E. (eds.), Contemporary Greece and Europe, Ashgate, Aldershot.
Van Coufoudakis, Harry J. Psomiades, and Andre Gerolymatos, (eds.), (1999) Greece and the New Balkans: Challenges and Opportunities, New York: Pella, 1999.
Varouxakis, Georgios, (1997) A Certain Idea of Greece: Perceptions of the Past and European Integration, Synthesis, 2:1.
Wolff, S. (2002). “Beyond ethnic politics in Central and Eastern Europe”, Journal on Ethnopolitics and Minority Issues in Europe 2002(4).
93
ONLINE SOURCES
The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.ypex.gov.gr/www.mfa.gr/el-GR/
The web page of Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA_tr/
The web page of Hellenic Republic, Ministry of Economy and Finance; http://www.mnec.gr/en/
The web page of the Embassy of Poland in Turkey; http://www.polonya.org.tr/sec1-relations.html
Eurobarometer 63 (May-June 2005); http://europa.eu.int/comm/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb63/eb63_en.pdf
Hellenic Centre for European Studies; http://www.ekem.gr
Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy; http://www.eliamep.gr/
Institute of International Relations (Greece); http://www.idis.gr/
Association of the Greek Communities in the Czech Republic; www.dialogos-kpr.cz
Hellenika Foundation Fund; www.sweb.cz/hellenika
Greek Organisation Krnov; www.rokm.aktualne.cz
Society of the Friends of Nikos Kazantzakis; http://mujweb.cz/www.csspnk/index.htm
Antonis Kamaras, “A Capitalist Diaspora: The Greeks in the Balkans”, Working Paper, Hellenic Observatory, The European Institute, LSE, 2001 www.lse.ac.uk/Depts/European/hellenic
94 http://www.presidency.gr/en/index.htm http://www.carleton.ca/ces/papers/january03/karabelias03.pdf http://www.ekem.gr/old/ezine/deltio_312004_en.pdf http://www2.mfa.gr/www.mfa.gr/enUS/Policy/Geographic+Regions/Europe/Relationships+with +EU+Member+States/Czech+Republic/ http://www.mirovniinstitut.si/eng_html/projects/Position%20of%204%20CEE%20states%20on% 20future%20EU%20enlargement.pdf http://kisi.deu.edu.tr/hakki.uyar/18.pdf http://www.cfr.org/publication/3132/prepared_remarks_by_costas_simitis.html?breadcrumb=% 2Fregion%2F352%2Fgreece http://www.griechische-botschaft.de/index2.shtml http://www.yale.edu/eustudies/Cyprus_Conference_Kirisci.pdf
95