French President Emmanuel Macron, speaking at a public session on April 25 alongside Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis, stated—without directly naming Turkey—that if Greece’s sovereignty in the Aegean were to be threatened, France would stand by Athens. While these remarks drew a strong reaction from Ankara, the Greek press interpreted them as a “clear message to Turkey.” Following the backlash from Ankara, the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement claiming that Macron’s words were not directed at any specific country, effectively making a U-turn.

The Greek state was largely shaped through diplomatic and military interventions led by Britain. First, the Greek uprising against the Ottoman Empire in 1821 was encouraged. Then, with the intervention of Britain, France, and Russia, it was transformed into an independent state. However, each country supporting Greece had its own agenda. We will not go into excessive detail.

Britain’s primary objective, within the context of the “Eastern Question,” was to prevent Russia from expanding southward toward the Mediterranean and the Straits. It wanted to keep the Ottoman Empire standing—albeit weak—as a buffer against Russia. It preferred controlled weakening rather than total collapse. By establishing a Greek state under its influence, Britain sought to prevent Russia from gaining naval bases or direct influence in the Mediterranean (especially the Aegean). By keeping Greece “small and controlled,” it both restrained Russia and secured Mediterranean trade routes for itself.

In other words, for Britain, the goal was not for the Greek people to be “free and independent,” but to serve as a buffer and balancing instrument against Russia.

In the 1827 Battle of Navarino, Britain, France, and Russia sent a joint fleet and destroyed the Ottoman-Egyptian navy. This marked a turning point in the uprising. Although the intervention was presented as an effort to “prevent massacres of Christians,” the real motive was the balance of power.

With the 1832 London Conference, the Kingdom of Greece was established. A 17-year-old Bavarian prince, Otto, was brought in and made king. Greece was not formed as a “republic,” but as a “monarchy.” In its early years, the country was governed by Bavarian regents and advisors. Loans were extended to Greece, making it easier for the Great Powers to deepen and maintain control.

For a long time, Greece remained a “protected” small state. Its borders were kept narrow, and its internal affairs were interfered with. For instance, during the Crimean War in 1854, Britain and France occupied Piraeus.

In 1919, Britain once again used Greece as a tool by facilitating the occupation of İzmir, positioning it against both the Ottoman Empire and Italy in Anatolia.

In short, Greece was designed not as a truly “independent” state, but as a pawn that could be used in line with the interests of Great Powers. This is a typical example of 19th-century Great Power diplomacy: using nationalist uprisings as instruments in geopolitical games.

Although Greece may appear to have found its own path over time, this “external determination” present at its founding continues today.

Just as Greece was established as a “buffer state” project in Western Anatolia, Armenia in the East and Israel in the South were also established as similar “buffer state” projects. The main objective was to control the Turks and regional countries that remained after the fragmentation of the Ottoman Empire.

Renowned Greek scholar Prof. Dimitris Kicikis explains this issue very succinctly during a live broadcast on a television program in Athens:

“The political level in Greece is very low. We lack analytical capacity; we simply get carried along by events. We do not try to access real information. Unless we understand the major mistake we have made regarding Turkey, there is no chance of solving our problems. In fact, it was not us—Western powers set this trap by establishing this small state (Greece) in 1821. This may sound crazy. Because we are stuck in elementary school narratives about heroes like Kolokotronis. We cannot understand that this revolution of March 25 was a project of Western ‘Greek........

© Stratejik Düşünce Enstitüsü