Though in fairness, they really did earn that one. No one else was running old Roman political institutions, after all. (Though now and then some Italian bandit would try to be recognized as a nominal vassal of the Byzantine emperor.)
Not only were they calling their state the Roman Empire, they were calling themselves Romans (Rhomioi).
On the Palestinian thing, there are a fair number[1] of Greek Orthodox[1] Christian Palestinians, which could have something to do with it.
Also, the Arabs (particularly Levantine Arabs) are totally down with the hating-on-the-Turks thing, which gives them something else in common.
[1] much fewer now in the Palestinian territories & Israel than there used to be, but still a fair number
[2] Technically, they just use “Orthodox”
Do you have any evidence to support that? Have you lived in Greece/Cyprus, have Greek friends, are Greek, or something like that?
Going back to the original question by the OP about Macedonia, I think the way some Greeks see it is, if a country with the name of Macedonia is created in that space, then somewhere down the line, in a century or more (or less), some nationalist movement of that country could make the claim that “We are Macedonia. Some of our land is under Greek control. We must liberate it and unite it with the rest of Macedonia”
Worrying about this too much today does look to be on the paranoid side, but it is not totally unlikely.
Of course, such a nationalist movement might occur no matter what the name of that country is, so it’s not clear that worrying about the name is that important.
I think the religion angle has nothing to do with it. I could even say that Greeks identify with the Palestinian cause despite the religion angle, not because of it.
Come to think (and apologies for continuing a minihijack), in pretty much every country that borders Turkey and doesn’t speak a Turkic language, they hate the Turks, with the possible exceptions of Iran and Georgia.
Greece did free itself from Turkish rule. They did as well as anyone in the Balkan Wars. They were on the right side of World War II and the Cold War so there’s nothing they’ve got to revise there. And they successfully made the transition from autocratic monarchy to constitutional democracy.
Regarding the reason why Greece is so pro-Palestinian. Palestinians are seen as weak underdogs which has struck a cord in Greece. As I said, Yasser Arafat was an ultra friend of Greece back in the day. Many of the Greek “anarchists” have been wearing palestinian scarfs for quite a while now, to such a degree that it has become part of their identity.
To a very large degree, the support for Palestinians was fed by the Greek left which sees itself as a champion of underdogs everywhere. Of course… that is not to say they did not support Serbia during the Kosovo conflict. Probably the bleakest page in recent Greek history.
Apropos…the recent fall out between Turkey and Israel has created a newly vacant niche for Greek-Israeli relationships. The Greek far-right has of course the “natural” anti-semitic tendencies, but it is rather comedic how the far-right is now doing whatever it can to convince the prime-minister to hasten signing deals with Israel.
Regarding the overall nature of recent Greek history. During its short existence Greece has managed to expand itself considerably, and was fortuitously on the right side during WWII. I say fortuitously because there was a dictatorship at the time. He could have chosen as he wished, and I can tell you that he had quite a bit of sympathy for Mussolini. It is always funny to me how out teachers would try to convince us that the Greeks said “NO” to Italy. It is not as if they voted… Nevertheless, Greeks did their share during WWII.
On the other hand, Greece experienced a humiliating defeat by Turkey at the very end of the 19th century (we never learn about that at school), and later after trying to play an ill-advised expansionist game deep in Turkey the plan seriously backfired resulting in the loss of Asia Minor, the post-WWII civil war robbed Greece of its brightest minds, and there was a 7 year junta in the end of the 60s until the mid 70s. The Cyprus issue is of course the most shameful part of all of this with no end in sight.
Thankfuly… Greece is now a democratic country without a royal family and a rather vibrant press that is extremely critical of the government without fear of prosecution.
Now… if there would be a separation of church and state…
What are you referring to here? I wonder if my understanding of the term “Asia Minor” is problematic. I understand to mean Anatolia, i.e., mainland Turkey. So it would seem to me that Greece “lost” Asia Minor a long, long time ago.
I understand that there is an ongoing dispute over whether North Cyprus should be an independent ethnically Turkish state. Where does the “shame” lie, in your view?
So you don’t think that Greece would have been a successful constitutional monarchy, such as Britain, Spain, etc.?
Khm… “right side of the Cold War”… :rolleyes:
There are still people around who escaped Civil War in Greece 1946-49 instigated by US and UK - they would probably beg to differ.
But, I guess, that’s a whole different subject now.
I am referring to this:
I should have said that Greece lost its claim on Asia minor after that conflict. Greek borders did not change after that conflict.
The shame in the Cyprus question lies in how it was initially a Greek plan to get rid of Turks, while it is almost always presented as Turkish aggression by the Greek press.
Regarding the monarchy question, I am content that Greece has no monarchy of any kind.
Anisos, which defeat are you referring to here?
I am referring to this:
I didnt answer your question. I suppose we could have learned to stop worrying and love our foreign royals but I find it unlikely. Ok… not “foreign” because they had been around for a while.
Only in the far right do you find people who yearn for the king. The ex-king still tries to sell himself as the king of Greece (although he does not interfere almost at all with Greek issues), attends the royal weddings etc. There is enough trouble with the church intervening with secular issues, I cant imagine how it would be having the king and his cohorts around. Losing the royals was a deliverance as far as I am concerned.
While I agree that the real story of what happened in Cyprus is much more complicated than what the Greeks had been taught, I think it is also much more complicated than what you are presenting here (“a Greek plan to get rid of Turks”)
Some events that happened in the beginning-to-middle of the 20th century, e.g. Britain/Turkey effort to emphasize that Greeks & Turks cannot possibly get along, staging some forced riots in Istanbul to prove that, calling for taksim (division) as the only solution for Cyprus, starting from around 1930 I believe , all laid the groundwork for the events that happened later in the 20th century, which had both sides doing horrible stuff.
Here is an example
[QUOTE=Wikipedia]
The pogrom was triggered by Greece’s appeal in 1954 to the United Nations to demand self-determination for Cyprus. Britain had the ruling mandate over the mostly ethnic Greek island, and wanted the Cyprus dispute to be resolved without being taken to the United Nations Security Council, where it could be problematically framed as an anti-colonialist struggle.[8][10] To this end, Britain diplomatically encouraged Turkey to agitate Greece.
…
The Istanbul Pogrom (also known as the Istanbul Riots or Constantinople Pogrom; Greek: Σεπτεμβριανά (Events of September); Turkish: 6–7 Eylül Olayları (Events of September 6–7)), was a pogrom directed primarily at Istanbul’s Greek minority on 6–7 September 1955. The riots were orchestrated by the Turkish military’s Tactical Mobilization Group, the seat of Operation Gladio’s Turkish branch; the Counter-Guerrilla. The events were triggered by the news that the Turkish consulate in Thessaloniki, north Greece—the house where Mustafa Kemal Atatürk was born in 1881—had been bombed the day before.[3] A bomb planted by a Turkish usher of the consulate, who was later arrested and confessed, incited the events.
[/QUOTE]
What’s interesting about the self-planted bomb by the Turks, is that they used this exact same tactic in Cyprus, where a Turk bombed some Turkish office and that started a set of bloody riots by Turks blaming Greeks for the bomb. Rauf Denktash (the Turkish-Cypriot leader) admitted a few years ago that a Turk had set off the bomb, and that it was a strategic move.
Anyway, the situation is hardly “the Turks were the sole aggressors” or “the Greeks were the sole aggressors”. It’s quite complicated, as you are undoubtedly aware.
Yes, that is fair Polerius, I did not mean to be unfair to the Greek side and I of course do not support the separation in any way. Nevertheless I am profoundly annoyed that the Greek side is not prepared to assume its responsibilities.
That would be a rather bizarre position to take seeing that a US ally, Greece, with backing from the US (political backing and military equipment) would be taking it.
Considering the conflict between the left and the right started while Greece was still under Axis occupation, it’s hard to see how the British and the Americans could have instigated it. Especially the Americans as we didn’t get involved in the war until well after it had begun.
As for which side of the Cold War was the right side - it wasn’t the one being led by Joseph Stalin.
I think Greeks don’t feel that they have *any *political backing from the US. In most disputes with Turkey, it is taken as a fact that the US leans more to the Turkish position than the Greek position, mainly due to the strategic geopolitical location of Turkey, which is much more important to US national interests than Greece is.
During the Cold War, Turkey was bordering the Soviet Union, and so was very useful, and today, Turkey borders Iran/Iraq, which is very useful in today’s world.
So, while technically allies, I don’t think most Greeks feel that much support from or connection to the US.
(Also, I think Turkey and Israel receive much more money in aid each year than Greece does, so that also may make them feel that they are not as buddy-buddy with the US as Turkey and Israel are)