Greece: history, culture, and contemporary society

Greece can be considered to be one of the most important countries in the European Union and of the region. This is largely due to its geostrategic position as well as the resources it has at its disposal in terms of financial and political capital. At the same time, it represents a connecting point for two essential regions of the world, Europe and the Middle East. Through its geographical position as well as through the capabilities it uses on a constant basis in order to lead a coherent political direction, Greece is viewed today as a crucial actor in this part of the world.

There are several aspects to be taken into consideration when discussing the strategic role of Greece and its importance for the world as a globalized entity. In this sense, the role of Greece can be defined in political, economic, as well as cultural terms.

The political aspect is extremely relevant for the way in which a country comes to constitute itself as a regional and global power. In the case of Greece, its historical tradition determined its political situation particularly because it relied heavily on the way in which ancient Greece created Europe and its political and cultural institutions. From this point-of-view, it can be said that Greece shares a privileged spot on the map of Europe as the cradle of the European civilization. It remains a connection point between Western Europe, the Balkans, and Turkey. At the same time, given its membership of the European Union, Greece also plays a crucial role in the framing of the European policy towards these regions which aim to strengthen the ties with Europe.

The first and most important strategic goal of Greece, according to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is related to the relationship with the European Union (2008). More precisely, Greece imagines its role as a vital component for the European Union precisely because of its geostrategic position. At the same time though, it is stated that this position would be used in order to increase the capabilities of the European Union to communicate with the Western Balkans. This represents an important element because it stands as a certification of the fact that Greece is a means of communication between the two regions.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs clearly points out the part Greece must play in the relationship between the Balkans and the EU. In this sense, "the strategic goal of the European Union, and naturally of Greece, in the Balkans is to create the preconditions for stability, functioning democratic processes and institutions, cooperation, development and prosperity, as well as fulfillment of the political criteria, which will allow all the Balkan countries without exception to become members of the EU" (2008). Therefore, it can be said that Greece tries, to a certain extent, to mediate the connection between the two sides, an ability which is embedded in the geographical position of the country. Greece borders Albania, Macedonia, Bulgaria, and Turkey (CIA World Factbook, 2008). Each of these countries is in variable degrees important for the European Union. From this point-of-view, Greece tries to intermediate the contacts with the countries at hand.

Another major point in the discussion over the strategic role of Greece includes the shore of the Aegean Sea. This aspect represents a point of communication between the countries in the region and in particular with Turkey. In any situation, Greece, throughout its foreign policy tries to exploit its strategic advantages.

Inside the European Union Greece is a strong advocate of the Western Balkans. As a proof of that, the 2003 Thessaloniki Summit marked "an important step in the deepening relationship between the EU and the Western Balkan countries (Albania; Bosnia and Herzegovina; Croatia; the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia; Serbia and Montenegro)" (the Thessaloniki Summit, 2003). Indeed, Greece supports the inclusion of the Western Balkans in diplomatic terms all year round; nonetheless, the fact that the problem of the Western Balkans was addressed precisely in Greece is another proof of the fact that Greece is deeply engaged in the relationship with the Balkans and considers itself as a reliable point of communication between the two sides.

One of the most important reasons for this approach taken by Greece is the security aspect. More precisely, "Greece is usually described as a small and strategically located state seeking, as all states, to maximize its security. In this context, security stands for the preservation of the territorial integrity of the state on the one hand and the promotion of internal development of the nation's quality of life, social balance, cohesiveness, democracy, and human rights, on the other" (Dimitrakopoulos, 2004, 77). While for the first part of the strategy, Greece works internally, in trying to ensure external security, the Greek state must cooperate at regional level. This includes the consideration of all the factors of risk present in the region.

There are several international disputes Greece is part of, not necessarily as a direct party. In this sense, the issue of Kosovo is very important for Greece because the country is relatively close to the former province. Geographically speaking, an instable situation in Kosovo would mean the destabilization of the region as a whole. This state of fact however would affect Greece directly from the perspective of its issues in Cyprus. In this sense, "the rapid deterioration of intercommunal relations in Bosnia and elsewhere in the Balkans in the early to mid-1990s had a chilling effect on the views of moderates on both sides of the island" (Lesser et al., 2001, 10).

The issue of the island of Cyprus represents a crucial matter for the Greek security and it motivates them to create a stable environment in the region so that the tensions in the split island do not escalate. This is indeed a strong motivation and it comes as a result of the strategic position of Greece towards Turkey. At the same time though Turkey itself poses a problem in the sense that it supports and recognizes the existence of the Republic of Northern Cyprus. Despite the fact that this action is not recognized by other states, it imperils Turkey's chances of becoming a full member of the EU. Greece on the other hand tries to maintain equilibrium though through the involvement of the EU in the Cypriot issue. In this sense, discussions are held inside the European frameworks and enable both a constant dialogue of Turkey with the EU as well as with Greece.

The geographical position of Greece can be said to have determined an improvement in its relations with Turkey as well. Natural disasters such as the 1999 earthquakes created a certain sense of human compassion between the two peoples. Thus, "the mutual dispatch of emergency teams and the adequate promotion by the TV channels and the mass media, generally, altered the public opinion in both sides of Aegean that the opposite side is not the "King of Devil." (Bilgic & Karatzas, 2004, 3) the change in perspective was all the more obvious in the change of the Foreign Secretary from the Greek side who was considered to be a radical with one who envisaged a more moderate approach to the situation with Turkey.

The new direction Greece adopted in the Turkish problem was also visible in the way in which the Helsinki Summit in 1999 viewed Turkey's candidacy to the European Union. More precisely, at the official meeting of the heads of state, the decision to accept Turkey as a candidate for membership was taken. This implied the fact that inside the European Union, Greece did not have any crucial objections to make ((Bilgic & Karatzas, 2004, 4). Still, there is more that needs to be done in order to solve the issue of the island of Cyprus, an aspect which will always place doubt on the Greek- Turkish relations.

Macedonia is yet another case where Greece has definitely a point to make. It is rather will known the fact that the Former Yugoslavian Republic of Macedonia has been denied access in NATO largely due to the Greek objection. This veto lies in the fact that Greece refuses to acknowledge the name of Macedonia for the Republic. Do to their historical differences it appears clear that Greece influences the EU in regard to FYROM. More precisely, "Greece maintains that FYROM is threatening Greece's territorial integrity, as well as its national identity by calling itself 'Macedonia' using an ancient Macedonian symbol in its national flag and indulging in propaganda hostile to Greek interest. Therefore, in February 1994, Greece unilaterally imposed a trade embargo on FYROM (...). In spring 1994 the Commission filed suit against Greece at the European Court of Justice. The suit claimed that the Greek trade embargo violates the European Community's legal regime of commercial policy, which prohibits unilateral measures involving trade policy by member states." (Highet et al., 1995, 2) Therefore, it can be said that the decisions taken by Greece in regard to its own foreign policy sometimes affect the European Union, despite the rules already established by the Treaty of Accession to the EU. These are largely consequences of the geographical and geostrategic position of the Greek state.

There are other courses of action as well which influence both the EU and Greece which result from Greece's position. Given the proximity of the state towards Africa through the Mediterranean Sea, Greece has an important access to the Middle East. In this sense, it fosters relations both with Israel, as well as with the Arab countries. On this issue, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs points out that "in respect of the Mediterranean countries of Europe these relations fall within, and are largely dictated by, the political, economic and legal framework of the European Union." (2008) Under these general guidelines Greece established the Mediterranean Forum in 1994 and is working in close cooperation with the European Union in the Euro Mediterranean partnership. This aspect is important because it offers a sense of multiple dimensions to the Greek initiatives to maintain strong relations with the North African region as well as the Middle East.

Despite the involvement of Greece in the partnership it is rather hard to identify precisely the actual initiatives Greece had in this environment. Indeed its position represents an important linkage point particularly because it stands at the juncture of major routes of political debate, economic interests, and cultural perspectives. Nonetheless, there are no particular guidelines to provide a coherent and innovative position for Greece. In this sense, the role of Greece is pointed out by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in rather general terms. Thus, "Greece attaches particular importance to the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership, with its common goals of peace, security and prosperity for the region. Of course these relations are influenced, but not dominated, by developments and tensions in the Palestinian issue" (Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2008). These set of guidelines are as ideal as they are general.

In terms of the pressures the position of Greece puts on the ongoing political development of the state, it can be said that Greece has by no means different problems than other states from the European Union concerning the North African and Middle East regions. Thus, the problems with immigration Greece has are similar to those of Spain, Portugal or even Germany. More precisely, "Spain, Portugal, Italy and Greece have changed from traditional emigration countries into immigration countries, while tradition migratory "duos" such as Algeria and France or the Commonwealth and the United Kingdom, which are based on colonial links, are tending to split up" (Yazami, 1997). Therefore, it is rather hard to identify an individual stand regarding the Euro Mediterranean Partnership for Greece. Nonetheless, the simple fact that Greece is encountering these problems is a direct result of the position it has in the region and in the European Union.