By Nick Stamatakis
Interesting information came to light today by the usually very well-informed Greek website defence-point.gr, that the CIA director William Burns in his recent trip to China and Greece, added an extra leg by visiting Cyprus. According to the website, the main reason for his visit to the island was the discussion of Cyprus’ relations with Russia and China.
Helleniscope has reported that the State Department issued unfair and unwarranted sanctions against Cyprus that badly hit the banking, finance, and accounting sectors. Supposedly these sanctions have to do with the Russian oligarchs who are using Cyprus as a business haven – and allegedly as a money laundering vehicle. Helleniscope and others have expressed several objections to this argument: 1) The bulk of Russian money laundering has traditionally happened in Germany and the City of London, and to a lesser extent, is still happening there, evading the sanctions. 2) It is quite hypocritical for the United States, which is recently in the middle of grave corruption allegations for the Biden family and other elite or “DC swamp” operators, to accuse Cyprus of corruption. 3) Israel houses 1.3 million formerly Russian citizens, mostly of Jewish descent, and many are doing business there, including oligarch Roman Abramovich (here is a link to one of his recent visits), without the State Department saying a pip.
The real issue the DC establishment wants to promote in Cyprus is “War with Russia,” and, as it is already clear in Ukraine, this is a losing foreign policy concept. But Mr. Burns was ordered on a mission to Cyprus, and he has to “sell” the DC establishment’s proposal. It was recently announced that EXXON MOBIL would soon start drilling for oil and gas at Cyprus fields 5 and 10, likely leading to colossal production and income for Cyprus. Mr. Burns would likely “sell” protection and support for the drilling (that is now necessary for Europe’s supply) in exchange for Cypriot cooperation against Russia and China and, above all, a solution to the Cyprus problem that would allow the West to pull Turkey back in the fold. It is known that Mr. Burns is a diplomat with vast experience (he was US ambassador to Russia for many years), and as a CIA chief, he can say certain things very clearly.
But someone has to explain to the CIA chief and the rest of the delusional “decision makers” in DC that it is they who have to change their game entirely, and not Cyprus. Turkey has “zero” chances of turning west; All powers in the Eastern Mediterranean, including Israel and Egypt, have come to this realization and plan accordingly. Why am I so sure? Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and everyone in the area plan to join the BRICKs. Also, please try to see things as if you are in charge of Turkish Defense: You see US-made Patriot missiles being destroyed at will by the Russian forces in Ukraine. And you see Russian S-400 and other missiles being very successful there. Why would you spend political capital to be part of NATO if their weapons are worthless? You would buy more S-400 missiles from Russia and feel very secure. Especially if you have an offer from China (allegedly a loan close to $200 Billion) that would likely get you out of the current financial dire straights. Why would you insist on buying F-16s, if the S-400 missiles you already operate can shut down any NATO fighter plane quickly? Maybe you need these F-16s temporarily, but in 5-8 years, China and Russia could easily supply you with their modern fighter jets.
Conversely, suppose you are a patriotic Greek or Cypriot leader (and we are highly confident that Nicos Christodoulides is). Why would you disregard that over the last 50 years, Russia bailed Cyprus out several times at the U.N. Security Council, where Britain and the U.S. had ready to pass perilous propositions that would put Cyprus under greater Turkish control? Why would you ignore that the Mediterranean’s central Russian air and naval base is less than 50 miles away from Cyprus – in Latakia, Syria? Every time Israel hits a Hezbollah target in Lebanon or Syria has to call Moscow and be granted an OK from the Russian High Command. And you, the little state of Cyprus, would you ignore such a basic fact?
Cyprus (and Greece, for that matter) MUST avoid agreements on any permanent “peace plan” with Turkey in the next 12-18 months. At the end of this period, the whole global geopolitical “equation” will hopefully be more straightforward – if not settled with a new power equilibrium among the world’s three big powers (USA, Russia, China). Turkey’s Erdogan has no room anymore to play the same balancing act between Russia and NATO, East and West. Why? Because of Turkey’s pressing economic problems. Erdogan will have soon to make a choice, and he will likely turn East for good. He spent his early political career taking Turkey out of the onerous IMF loans. This experience has marked his political thinking: he sees Western financial institutions as “enslavement mechanisms” – much like the rest of the “Global South” does. This is why the next International Economic Forum in Saint Petersburg (June 14-17) will draw over 81 nations. And the August BRICKs meeting in South Africa will be historic regarding participation and agenda.
Greece and Cyprus have no reason to lose sovereign rights, so the delusional leaders of the West “keep their power” and keep planning unrealistically. Greece and Cyprus have to insist on a very simple rule: If the United States would like to attempt a “cooperation deal” between Turkey and the two Greek States regarding the sovereign rights in the Aegean and the Eastern Mediterranean, they should apply the International Law of the Sea in the same way (“middle line”) they delineated American territorial rights with Mexico and especially with the island nations of Cuba and the Bahamas. The last two nations have the same archipelagic geographical structure as Greece and Cyprus and should as an example of a fair “delineation of EEZ rights”. The Greek side would see any other solution as hypocritical and one-sided. Greece and Cyprus will NOT pay the price for the failing plans of the Western leadership.