Some Lessons for Greece and Cyprus (and even for Russia!) from Iran’s Victory

source – defenddemocracy.press

By Dimitris Konstantakopoulos | June 21, 2026

1. Do not trust the assessments and predictions of the countless pro-Israeli diplomatic, defense, and strategic self-styled “analysts.” They are always wrong, and they often deceive you. But since you may disagree with or doubt what I have written above, consider what they are saying now and what they were saying three, twelve, or fifty months ago. Just the day before yesterday, I was listening to one of them explaining to us, with a three-year delay, that Israel is committing genocide and is being charged with it before international justice… It was about time.

2. The existence of dozens of American bases and strong overt or covert “strategic relationships” with Israel did not help the countries of the region at all—on the contrary, they saw themselves becoming targets, and some, like the Emirates, suffered terrible damage. Nearly all American bases were destroyed. But Athens and Nicosia told us that they have installed and are installing as many bases as possible and are developing special relations with Israel in order to defend themselves. Could it be that a very big mistake has been made, brothers? Could it be that these bases and “third‑type” relations with Israel increase rather than reduce the risks? Moreover, did the presence of British bases in Cyprus prevent—or did it perhaps help—the Turkish invasion?

3. American and Israeli weapons—the very weapons that the Mitsotakis government is buying in monstrous quantities and at an equally monstrous cost—proved neither combat‑worthy nor reliable in this war. Their main function, as far as we are concerned, is to make the country even more tightly dependent on the United States and Israel, and to feed the Greek “military‑brokerage complex” and the attendant notorious phenomena of corruption and foreign dependency. We do not know whether these weapons will ever be used against Turkey, and with what result; but we do know that they will sink the Greek economy even deeper and pave the way for the next bankruptcy

4. The infamous doctrine of the “pre‑emptive strike,” which—according to the Chief of the Hellenic National Defence General Staff—we have incorporated (presumably following Israeli “recommendations”) into our defense doctrine (1), has proven to be the shortest path to destruction for anyone who attempts to apply it. That is precisely what the United States and Israel did, on the latter’s recommendation—that is, a pre‑emptive war against Iran—and they have now suffered the most significant defeat in their history.

Normally, we Greeks—if we had not long ago abandoned our reason and any sense of morality for the sake of our pockets and the favor of foreigners—ought to know this better than anyone else. Was it not Ioannidis (Note: the Greek dictator who organized the coup d’ etat in Cyprus against Makarios) who, in 1974, carried out a pre‑emptive intervention in Cyprus, on American and Israeli prompting, with the result being the Turkish invasion? All those who in history have attempted pre‑emptive wars and surprise attacks—from Germany against the USSR and Japan against the United States, to Iraq against Iran and Kuwait—were utterly defeated. War, after all, remains—despite the fantasies of brainless militarists—”the continuation of politics by other means,” as Clausewitz defined it, and in that equation, what people believe plays as important a role as the power of weapons. All the manuals of the U.S. armed forces and their institutes, such as the RAND Corporation, never fail to point out the enormous political advantage enjoyed by the defender over the attacker. (2)

5. Judging by what the United States has suffered and is suffering, despite its power, from its Israeli allies—how much sabotage and provocation it endures—one cannot help but wonder whether one can seriously have an “alliance” or “strategic relationship” with Israel.

6. This writer has been advocating these ideas, almost alone, for several years now. One observes, however, on this occasion as well, that there is and has been for many years no opposition worthy of the name—neither from the Left nor from the Right—in Greece (nor in Cyprus). No serious opposition to the multiplication of bases, to the arms programs, or to the “pre‑emptive” absurdities.

7. The alignment of Athens and Nicosia with the massive violations of international law by the United States and Israel—even with the genocide of the Palestinians—has also destroyed a large part of the diplomatic, moral, and even cultural capital and the international standing of Hellenism. In contrast, our historical rival, Turkey, has significantly expanded its international influence. The balance of power between Greece and Turkey has suffered a critical blow to our detriment, because it is not only weapons that matter; the “soft power” of the two countries also counts. We have ridiculed our own official policy in favor of “international law,” and we did so in the most extreme manner, merely so that the Prime Minister and New Democracy could win the favor of foreigners at the expense of their own country.

In this area as well, we find that Greece needs a “revolution” in order to survive. What is not clear is who could carry out such a “revolution.”

Notes

(1) The idea of the “first pre‑emptive strike” was first floated by a large lobby of supposedly brilliant “strategic analysts,” along with various other “patriotic” ideas—such as declaring 12 nautical miles in the Aegean tomorrow morning, with no study of the prerequisites and possible consequences, or the “military liberation” of the occupied part of Cyprus. Now, of course, they have largely forgotten about pre‑emptive war, after having managed to turn it into a doctrine of the armed forces.

(2) Incidentally, we should stress that we hope (and this is probably the case) that various deranged ideas about pre‑emptive nuclear strikes by Moscow that have recently been circulating in Russian public life are merely the nonsense of hotheads who want and do not manage to frighten the West. The extreme Western war party—the one that systematically works to create the conditions for a first nuclear strike against Russia and China, the one that has managed to demolish the entire edifice of nuclear arms control agreements, that works to deploy new nuclear weapons in Western Europe and the Far East, that is closely linked to Netanyahu and the neoconservatives—would certainly like Russia to take the initiative of a nuclear strike (which would isolate it globally, even from friendly powers), in order to justify their own strikes against Russia.

A first use of a nuclear weapon would plunge us into a worldwide state of complete chaos and arbitrariness. If there is a core within the Western system (including, of course, Israel) that genuinely seeks a pre‑emptive nuclear strike against Russia—as Lech Wałęsa explicitly proposed in the past—then the increasingly reckless and deep strikes by the Ukrainians (i.e., the West) against Moscow and St. Petersburg, as well as against Russian strategic nuclear installations and the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, the largest in Europe, may well be aimed precisely at provoking a disproportionate response from Moscow. That is to say, they constitute above all provocations with terrifying potential consequences.

We will return at the earliest opportunity to these issues, which are so critical for the whole of Europe and for humanity.

Published in and translated from Greek https://www.konstantakopoulos.gr