Erdogan's decision to convert Hagia Sophia into a Mosque places Turkey outside the realm of the Western world.

The decision by Turkish President Erdogan to convert the church of Hagia Sophia, a UNESCO world heritage site, to a mosque is regrettable but ultimately unsurprising. Whilst this decision carries great historical and religious significance to the Christian world its foremost significance lays in geopolitics. It signals the islamisation of Turkey, its politics, and its society. It is an axis shift that chooses to place Turkey outside the realm the Western world and deeper within its vision of a neo-ottoman sphere of influence in the Middle east and Asia. 

The decision annuls the one previously made by the founder of the modern Turkish state, Kemal Ataturk, in the 1930’s. In an attempt to promote a secular, modern world Turkey, Kemal Ataturk decreed that Hagia Sophia would become a museum and not a mosque in recognition of its 1500 years Christian history and its significance to the Christian Orthodox world. 

For many years Erdogan has attempted to revive a neo-ottoman view of the world. Today more than ever he is engaging in division, exclusion and expansionist politics. One cannot overlook the growing influence and involvement of Turkey in the Balkans (see Turkish International Cooperation and Development Agency (TIKA) investments in Albania, North Macedonia and Bosnia), in the Caucasus region, in Syria, Egypt and most recently Libya. Erdogan has openly supported and promoted hard islamist groups in all these states. 

Whilst today's announcement pains the Greek people it is imperative that Greece continue to show rationality, will and determination. As the leading Balkan politico-economic power it must continue to engage with all Balkan countries through promotion of unifying politics and EU membership for all the Western Balkan nations. As a Eurozone member state and a bastion of Western civilization it must continue to expose the actions of Turkey. It must convince the Western world that a non-secular Turkey that disregards human rights and has expansionist policies is not only a global pariah but also a serious global threat to stability and peace - a problem that requires a coordinated multinational response. 

Many decades ago, the great Eleftherios Venizelos was able to convince the West of this to the benefit of Hellenism. It is imperative that this be repeated today.

Vasilis Giavris

Lawyer & Political Scientist

Turkish invasion of Syria is a breach of International Law

Turkish invasion of Syria constitutes a breach of international law and the UN Charter. It reflects a grand new strategy that articulates a vision of Turkey as a unipolar state entitled to operate above the confines of international law and international institutions to further its national interest. It introduces in international law the “safe zone” concept as a unilateral right to invade without the need to show grounds of “self-defence”. It provides a dangerous precedent that inevitably risks undermining global peace and security whilst questioning the legitimacy and effectiveness of international law.

Background 

A few days ago, Turkish President Erdogan announced to the world that Turkey was unilaterally beginning “Operation Peace Spring” - an assault on Syrian-Kurds living in northeastern Syria. He further announced that the operation also aimed to establish a “safe zone”, facilitating the return of million Syrian refugees to their country. Turkish troops have now invaded Syria and bombed Kurds living in the north-east region. It has been reported that within 48 hours hundreds of people have died and 64,000.00 people have been forced to leave their homes - this number is expected to soon rise to 300,000.00. 

In effect what Turkey is really trying to do is to contain Syrian-Kurdish power. It wishes to quash any future possibility that a Kurdish state may be created. By creating a space inside Syria, where millions of Syrian refugees currently hosted in Turkey can be settled (disposing of the existing Kurds), it creates a buffer zone that serves its perceived national interest. 

United Nations Charter 

Pursuant to Article 2(4) of the UN Charter “all Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations”. The UN Charter makes it clear that the use of military force in the territory of a sovereign state without its consent is permissible only under at least one of two conditions: 

• By unanimous approval of the Security Council pursuant to Chapter VII whereby the Security Council should authorize what action should be taken to restore peace and security; and 

• Pursuant to Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. Amongst other this Article states that “nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.” 

To date the UN Security Council has not authorized any invasion of use of force. 

Self Defence? 

Turkey has defended it invasion pursuant to Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. It maintains that there is a presence of what it views as a “terrorist organization,” and maintains that pursuant to Article 51 it has the right to invade and create a “safe zone” or “peace corridor” along its border. 

Such defence is absent of any legal merit. Firstly, the people Turkey refers to as a Terrorist organization are the same Syrian-Kurdish fighters who are US allies and instrumental in delivering recent victory against ISIS. Indeed only a few days ago US President Trump referred to them as “special people and wonderful fighters”. Secondly, Turkey has not provided any evidence to the Security Council of any existing or imminent attack. Indeed, no armed attack against Turkey has taken place, has been threatened or is imminent or may reasonably be deemed imminent and arising from Syrian-Kurds. 

Turkey is attempting to re-write international law and create a new “safe zone” doctrine that grants it a “right to invade”. This concept means self-defense is no-longer a necessary pretext. To accept Turkish claims means to accept that, without any evidence whatsoever, any country may claim that a terrorist organization exists in another country and as such: 

• claim a legal right to invade such other country;

• create a “safe zone” along the border; 

• amend borders and re-populate this zone with millions of refugees from other areas thus completely altering the demographic composition of an occupied territory. 

The above are not permitted under international law. Turkish invasion of Syria is illegal, and the international community must immediately act to stop it.

By Vasilios Giavris - Lawyer & Political Scientist

Friday, 11 October 2019