As Nato prepares for the July 7 Summit in Ankara, the implications for Cyprus and its strategic decisions are becoming increasingly evident. The summit is set to address significant issues, including defence industry investment and support for Ukraine, while discussions on burden-sharing between the United States and European allies may shape the continent’s security landscape.
Photo: cyprus-mail.com
The expected outcomes of the summit suggest a gradual reduction of the American military presence in Europe, prompting European nations to take on greater responsibility for their own defence. Ino Afentouli, Senior Policy Advisor at the Hellenic Foundation for Foreign and European Policy, highlighted this shift, noting that it encompasses not just troop numbers but also air and naval assets.
Photo: cyprus-mail.com
“The United States has made it clear that it wants to reduce its military presence in Europe,” she told the Cyprus Mail. Afentouli emphasized that this process has been in discussion for some time, signalling a new division of labour within Nato.
This evolving dynamic poses strategic challenges for Cyprus and Greece. As Turkey, a non-EU Nato member with the second-largest military in the alliance, potentially takes on a more significant role, Cyprus may have to navigate complex political waters. Afentouli articulated that the balance within Nato’s southern flank is crucial, stating, “The issue is how the balance within Nato’s southern flank changes.”
While Afentouli refrained from suggesting that Turkey’s increased importance would directly lead to military pressure on Cyprus or Greece, she pointed out that Ankara’s influence over Cyprus remains primarily political. “Turkey’s leverage is mainly in the political process surrounding the Cyprus problem,” she explained, suggesting that any military responses are unlikely, particularly in the context of European defence cooperation.
The debate over Cyprus’ relationship with Nato has gained traction, especially following discussions about the European Union’s mutual defence clause. Afentouli noted the importance of keeping this dialogue alive, advocating for serious engagement from political forces in Cyprus.
However, the prospect of Cyprus joining Nato as a solution to its division is complicated. Afentouli cautioned against viewing membership as a panacea, describing the situation as highly complex. She proposed a partnership status akin to Malta’s historical relationship with Nato, though this would require unanimous consent from all member states, including Turkey.
“Turkey would not automatically consent unless it sees advantages within a broader settlement framework,” she asserted. This means that any movement towards closer ties with Nato would likely need to be linked with a resolution of the Cyprus issue, including security guarantees and the future presence of foreign troops.
Afentouli elaborated on the hypothetical scenario of a settlement that involves Nato member states providing security for both Turkish and Greek Cypriots. While this is theoretically possible, she characterized it as ambitious under current conditions, noting that only the United States could exert the necessary pressure to facilitate such an arrangement.
More immediately pressing is the question of Turkey’s expanding role in European defence initiatives outside of Nato. As the EU seeks to enhance its defence capabilities in response to the war in Ukraine, there is growing pressure to foster closer cooperation with key non-EU Nato allies like Turkey.
Many EU member states regard Turkey as an essential component of European defence due to its military capabilities, creating a challenging strategic dilemma for Cyprus and Greece. While both nations have historically resisted Turkey’s involvement in European defence structures, the increasing cooperation among various countries may compel them to reconsider their stance.
As Afentouli pointed out, if cooperation with Turkey continues to grow among other member states, there may be pressures for special arrangements that require Cyprus and Greece to weigh their options carefully. “They will need to think carefully about a flexible strategic response,” she suggested.
The broader implications for the Eastern Mediterranean highlight a significant strategic gap in both Nato and EU policies. Afentouli lamented the absence of a coherent strategy for the region, attributing this to divisions among European nations regarding Israel and Arab states, which have hindered a unified approach.
As the EU increasingly focuses on Ukraine and the eastern flank, Cyprus and Greece may need to take the initiative in addressing their security concerns in the southern flank. “For countries like Cyprus and Greece, the southern flank remains a vital security issue,” she concluded, emphasizing the need for proactive engagement.
