NATO Air-COM Izmir's Visit to Athens

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 ATHENS 000063

NOFORN
SIPDIS
AMEMBASSY ANKARA PASS TO AMCONSUL ADANA
AMEMBASSY ASTANA PASS TO AMCONSUL ALMATY
AMEMBASSY BERLIN PASS TO AMCONSUL DUSSELDORF
AMEMBASSY BERLIN PASS TO AMCONSUL LEIPZIG
AMEMBASSY BELGRADE PASS TO AMEMBASSY PODGORICA
AMEMBASSY HELSINKI PASS TO AMCONSUL ST PETERSBURG
AMEMBASSY ATHENS PASS TO AMCONSUL THESSALONIKI
AMEMBASSY MOSCOW PASS TO AMCONSUL VLADIVOSTOK
AMEMBASSY MOSCOW PASS TO AMCONSUL YEKATERINBURG

E.O. 12958: DECL: 2020/01/29
TAGS: PREL NATO MOPS GR TU
SUBJECT: NATO Air-COM Izmir's Visit to Athens

CLASSIFIED BY: Daniel V. Speckhard, Ambassador; REASON: 1.4(B),(D)


1. (C/NF) SUMMARY. Lieutenant General Ralph Jodice (USAF),
Commander of NATO's Component Command Air - Izmir (and also
dual-hatted in a national role as Commander, 16th Air Expeditionary
Task Force, USAFE) visited Athens January 13-14, for introductory
meetings with Ambassador Speckhard, HAF Chief Lt Gen Vasilios
Klokozas, MFA NATO and IO Director General (A/S equivalent)
Ambassador Eystathios Lozos, Deputy Chief of Hellenic National
Defense Vice Admiral Dimitri Elefsiniotis, and MOD Diplomatic
Advisor Dimitri Chronopoulos. In a cordial meeting at MFA DG Lozos
expressed Greece's commitment to NATO, but regretted that his
primary focus within NATO was Turkey because of Turkish behavior in
the Aegean. Looking at the issue of NATO air exercises in the
Aegean, Lozos criticized NATO's stated neutrality as a pretext that
ultimately served Turkish interests. Lt Gen Jodice, who assumed
command December 4, 2009, expressed pleasure at being able to come
to Athens early in his tenure and pledged to return, noting he
would head to Ankara for similar introductory meetings in a few
weeks. He agreed that all Allies should receive fair treatment,
and stressed that his travels to Athens and Ankara are to better
understand the views of both countries, so that he can best
accomplish the mission of his HQ for NATO's Southern Region.
Looking back at his November 16 meeting with ASD Vershbow, Lozos
also raised Missile Defense, noting its NATO implications and
sea-based interceptor requirements for Phase 1. He indicated a
desire for further discussions with the U.S. END SUMMARY.



-------------- --------------
--------------

MFA: Not Satisfied with NATO's Stance Toward the Aegean

-------------- --------------
--------------




2. (C/NF) MFA DG Lozos thanked Lt Gen Jodice for coming to Greece
so soon after taking command at CC-Air Izmir, stressing Greece's
commitment to the Alliance and NATO operations. He characterized
Greece's overall military and financial contributions to the
spectrum of NATO operations as "midway" among Allies, and stated
that the Alliance underestimates Greece's contributions. Turning
to Aegean issues, which have traditionally caused friction between
Greece and NATO with CC-Air and its predecessor command "AIRSOUTH"
the focal points, he expressed Greece's dissatisfaction with NATO's
stance toward Aegean problems. Lozos asserted most of his time
working NATO issues is spent trying to alleviate problems caused by
Turkey, when he would prefer to concentrate more on the full range
of NATO issues. He stated that NATO's policy of neutrality in the
Aegean was a pretext that has resulted in an encroachment of Greek
sovereignty, as this "Luns Doctrine" has come to exclude portions
of Greek territory from NATO defense planning. Lozos also
criticized NATO for remaining silent in the face of what he termed
"massive" violations by the Turkish Air Force (TUAF) of Greece's
Aegean airspace, and TUAF overflights of Greek islands. "We just
want fair treatment," he concluded.




3. (C/NF) Lozos complained of Turkish behavior at NATO whereby, he
alleged, Turkey tries to use NATO to advance Turkish goals in
bilateral relations between Greece and Turkey. He cited the issue
of NATO's efforts to unify its air picture over the Aegean --
"Cross Border Connectivity" -- as NATO moves to a more streamlined
air command structure as an example. Lozos criticized NATO
officials for having the temerity to suggest to Greece that
acquiescing to Turkish desires could be a confidence building
measure in Greece-Turkish bilateral relations. (Comment: Greece
believes its radars should be responsible for the air picture
corresponding with the territory of its current ICAO-established
Athens Flight Information Region, which includes Greek Aegean

ATHENS 00000063 002 OF 003


islands. Our understanding is that Turkey believes a line should
be drawn roughly halfway through the Aegean. This longstanding
thorn in Greece-Turkey bilateral relations has now snagged a NATO
initiative. Turkey has since 1974 disputed the ICAO Athens FIR
delineation that was established in the 1950's, and Greece's
corresponding claims for search-and-rescue responsibility within
the boundaries of the FIR. End comment.) Lozos stated to Lt Gen
Jodice that the Greek position cannot be downgraded, as it is an
issue of national security.




4. (C/NF) Lt Gen Jodice told Lozos that he agreed all Allies
should receive fair treatment, and that he is making an effort to
visit Athens and Ankara early in his tenure to understand the views
of both countries. Lt Gen Jodice sought to focus Lozos on the
strategic imperative that the nations of NATO's southern region
work together, and complimented the relationships between the Greek
and Turkish officers on his staff. He pledged his objectivity in
decision-making, while making clear that not all parties could
always be happy with every decision. Citing the importance of
resolving the Cross Border Connectivity (CBC) issue in order for
CC-Air Izmir to execute its air policing mission effectively, he
noted real threats to NATO nations could come from the south of
NATO's territory.



-------------- --------------

Missile Defense - MFA Interested in Discussion

-------------- --------------




5. (C/NF) Lozos shifted gears at the meeting's conclusion to
missile defense. Noting the sea-based Aegis ships of Phase 1 of
the PAA, he expressed interest in talking more with the United
States about missile defense in Europe, as well as its implications
for NATO. COMMENT: Post believes that DG Lozos' late February
trip to Washington is an excellent opportunity to program him with
missile defense officials at State, the Pentagon, and perhaps NSC.
Separate to this, we believe that a one-day stop in Athens by a
U.S. missile defense official on a future trip to the region would
be valuable in briefing key Greek interagency officials on
developing missile defense plans, with a focus on the role of
sea-based interceptors in the Aegean and eastern Mediterranean as
well as any releasable information about the Phase 2 basing
decisions. Though alternate facilities exist in the Med, the U.S.
Naval Support Activity at Souda Bay, Crete stands to play an
important logistical role in the support to Aegis Ships operating
in the eastern Med. END COMMENT.



-------------- --------------
--------------

MOD Meetings Largely Track MFA, but More Skeptical of NATO

-------------- --------------
--------------




6. (C/NF) Lieutenant General Klokozas, Chief HAF, and his staff
provided an overview brief of the Hellenic Air Force (HAF),
followed by a separate briefing on issues of concern regarding
Greece-Turkey tensions in the Aegean Sea. Aircraft track
identification, upcoming NATO exercises NEXUS ACE (20-22 JAN) and
NOBLE ASPECT, data link operations, Izmir-Standing OPTASK Link
(ISOL),Integrated Air Defense System-Izmir (IADS-I),and

ATHENS 00000063 003 OF 003


cross-border connectivity were briefed to Lt Gen Jodice. The
consistent theme was that each concern was viewed by the HAF as an
attempt by Turkey to draw NATO into GR-TU bilateral disagreements.
Lt Gen Jodice listened, thanked Lt Gen Klokozas for the input
saying that the purpose of his visit was to better understand the
issues, and repeated his priority of securing NATO's southern
region, noting with concern that the only the gap in NATO radar
coverage exists in the Aegean.




7. (C/NF) Vice Admiral Elefsiniotis, Deputy CHoD, started his
meeting with Lt Gen Jodice by emphasizing that many of the topics
they were about to discuss are GR-TU bilateral issues and do not
require NATO intervention to resolve; however, he felt it was
important to review them with Lt Gen Jodice because of his
position as Air-COM Izmir. VADM Elefsiniotis focused on two main
points; first the Turkish moves at NATO to draw areas of
responsibility (AORs) over the Aegean for Search and Rescue,
cross-border connectivity, and data link control. In each AOR, he
stated, Turkey divides the Aegean approximately in half, which
would result in the inclusion of Greek national territory as well
as international territory within Turkish control or
administration. Echoing comments from MFA, VADM Elefsiniotis
stated this was unacceptable to Greece for reasons of national
security. Second, he asked Lt Gen Jodice to ask why NATO exercises
operating out of CAOC 6 (in Eskisehir, Turkey) were always in the
Aegean, vice a rotational basis between the Black Sea, eastern Med,
and Aegean Sea. Lt Gen Jodice thanked the Deputy CHoD for his
thoughts and reiterated his focus on security for the NATO southern
region.




8. (C/NF) The last meeting of the day with MOD Diplomatic Advisor
Chronopoulos centered on the NATO command structure in the proposed
Flags-to-Post in CAOC Larissa. Chronopoulos summarized that the
proposed Turkey-Greece rotation in the Deputy Commander slot at the
CAOC was not viable to the Greek parliament, Greek press, Greek
people, and ultimately the Greek Government. He recommended a
return to the status quo proposal of early 2009 -- specifically a
U.S.-Greece rotation in the Deputy position; however, he believed
the government would accept any Deputy rotation that did not
include a Turkish flag officer. Mr. Chronopoulos recommended Lt
Gen Jodice allow countries "room to maneuver" in resolving
bilateral issues in the Aegean.




9. (C/NF) Comment. All four meetings provided valuable background
and understanding of Greek positions on GR-TU relations in the
Aegean Sea. Interlocutors were consistent in their message across
agencies, with little evident disparity other than attitudes toward
NATO. MOD principals recommended NATO stay out of bilateral
disputes. MFA DG Lozos agreed that NATO had no right to wade into
bilateral issues, and indeed, complained about Turkish efforts to
advance bilateral goals at NATO (such as CBC and SAR AORs).
However, he implied that NATO had no choice but to become engaged,
albeit with any decisions made on the consensus principle, rather
than by commanders or civilian policy officials such as the SecGen.
End comment.




10. (U) This message was cleared by Lt Gen Jodice.
Speckhard