A New Balance of Power in the Eastern Mediterranean

Developments in the Eastern Mediterranean in recent years have moved beyond traditional debates over energy sharing. The region has become a focal point not only for hydrocarbon reserves but also for military bases, intelligence networks, struggles for maritime supremacy and global power competition.

In particular, the military and strategic partnerships developed by the Government of the Republic of Cyprus (GRC) with certain countries indicate the emergence of a new security axis in the Eastern Mediterranean.

The ROC’s decision to open strategic locations—such as the Andreas Papandreou Air Base, the Mari Naval Base, the ports of Limassol and Larnaca, and the RAF Akrotiri and Dikelya bases—to foreign military forces, primarily from the United States, the United Kingdom, France and Greece, demonstrates that the island is increasingly being transformed into a military-geopolitical base.

From Turkey’s perspective, this situation is viewed not merely as a diplomatic matter, but as a development that could yield strategic and military consequences capable of affecting the balance of power in the Eastern Mediterranean.

Israel’s Regional Security Strategy and the Eastern Mediterranean

The heavy bombardments, blockade policies and large-scale military operations carried out by Israel in Gaza in recent years, resulting in the loss of 72,300 Palestinian lives, have elevated the security crisis in the region beyond a mere border conflict, turning it into a humanitarian and geopolitical issue debated on an international scale.

In particular, the killing of children, women and civilians, and the abandonment of the survivors to starvation under the blockade, is proof that the Tel Aviv administration is committing genocide.

Israel’s policies of blockade, forced displacement and demographic pressure in Palestine are not merely aimed at military security; they are assessed as an approach seeking to establish a ‘Greater Israel’ in the long term by altering the region’s political and demographic structure.

Israel’s Policy Towards Lebanon and Syria

Israel’s air, tank and UAV attacks on southern Lebanon continue despite ceasefires. The displacement of civilians in the Shebaa Farms, Kefer Shuba and border villages along the Litani River line, and the effective prevention of the return of the population in the occupied territory, constitute clear acts of occupation.

On the Syrian front, operations centred on the Golan Heights have expanded as far as Quneitra, Deraa and the outskirts of Damascus; attacks on infrastructure, military installations and ammunition depots have fuelled interpretations that Israel aims for long-term military superiority in the region.

When considered alongside contacts established with local actors such as Druze groups and the PYD/YPG, this picture points to a multi-dimensional regional strategy aimed at controlling energy routes and security corridors stretching from the Eastern Mediterranean to the Levant.

The Issue of Israeli Capital and Strategic Ownership

The recent intensive acquisition of property in Southern Cyprus by Israeli companies and investors should not be assessed solely from an economic investment perspective. Historical examples demonstrate that property acquisitions in strategic regions, carried out through foreign capital, can over time create spheres of influence based on political, economic and security considerations.

Intense foreign property acquisition activities on an island such as Cyprus, situated at the heart of the Eastern Mediterranean and possessing strategic importance capable of influencing energy and maritime trade routes, have the potential to yield different geopolitical outcomes in the future.

Security Risks from Turkey’s Perspective

The Cyprus issue is not merely a historical or political matter for Turkey. The island holds vital strategic importance for Turkey in terms of its southern maritime security, energy corridors in the Eastern Mediterranean, maritime jurisdiction areas, and the Blue Homeland doctrine. Consequently, every new military and geopolitical equation emerging regarding Cyprus is directly linked to Turkey’s national security.

It is worth recalling a historical fact that many young Turkish Cypriots, alongside the Turkish people of Turkey, are unaware of.

Let us not forget that following the conquest of Cyprus by the Turks in 1571, Yörük tribes were brought to the island from Antalya, Adana and Hatay and settled there. For this reason, the Turkish Cypriots are our fellow countrymen and relatives of Anatolian origin who have lived on the island for approximately 450 years.

The Republic of Cyprus, established in 1960, has three guarantor states: Turkey, Greece and the United Kingdom (England). The guarantee system was designed to safeguard the constitutional order on the island, the bi-communal structure and the security of the Turkish Cypriot people.

However, as events unfolded, EOKA organisations, which acted in pursuit of ENOSIS—the goal of uniting the island with Greece—gained strength; raids and attacks against Turkish Cypriots, resulting in deaths, increased.

In 1974, a coup d’état supported by the military junta in Greece was carried out against Archbishop Makarios, then President of the Republic of Cyprus, and a de facto process aimed at the annexation of the island to Greece was initiated. Following the coup, Makarios was forced to flee the island, whilst attacks against the Turkish community on the island reached serious proportions. Consequently, Turkey, invoking its guarantor rights, carried out the 1974 Peace Operation.

Turkey’s intervention as a guarantor state protected Turkish Cypriots from mass attacks and established a de facto environment of non-conflict between the two communities on the island that would last for many years.

Following the failure to reach a resolution in the subsequent years of federation-based solution negotiations, the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus was proclaimed on 15 November 1983. However, Greece and the Republic of Cyprus have continued to characterise the 1974 Peace Operation as an ‘invasion’; in recent years, this rhetoric has begun to be used more intensively in international forums.

In contrast, Turkey regards its military presence on the island as a right and duty arising from the guarantor system aimed at safeguarding the security of the Turkish Cypriot people.

Today, the relationships developed by the Republic of Cyprus with foreign military forces and the opening up of the island’s military infrastructure to external actors are creating new security risks for Turkey. In particular, the activities of foreign military structures;

• restricting Turkey’s maritime access capacity in the Eastern Mediterranean,
• strengthening blocs aimed at excluding Turkey from the energy equation,
• creating a military pressure element along the southern coasts of Anatolia,
• and the potential to narrow Turkey’s strategic manoeuvre space along the Eastern Mediterranean, Middle East and North Africa axis are being closely monitored by Ankara.

When France’s military presence in the region, Greece’s maximalist claims regarding maritime jurisdiction, and Israel’s security-centred regional strategies are considered together, the picture emerging for Turkey is assessed as a multi-dimensional attempt at geopolitical encirclement.

For this reason, the Cyprus issue is no longer merely a political problem awaiting resolution between the two communities; it has become one of the central issues in the new power struggle taking shape in the Eastern Mediterranean.

The Geopolitical Future of Cyprus

The Republic of Cyprus’s adoption of policies that use its European Union membership as a political shield to support anti-Turkey blocs in the Eastern Mediterranean is making the prospect of a lasting solution and stability on the island increasingly complex. Whilst Cyprus ought to serve as a foundation for peace, diplomacy and coexistence, its transformation into a military and strategic arena for global power struggles poses serious risks not only for the Turkish Cypriots but also for the security of the entire Eastern Mediterranean.

The recent opening of ports and airbases to foreign military forces by the Republic of Cyprus, the increase in military coordination with various countries, particularly Israel, and policies aimed at turning the island into a forward outpost in the Eastern Mediterranean are regarded by Turkey as a direct matter of national security.

In this context, Turkey’s reinforcement of its military presence in the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus and the deployment of Turkish Air Force F-16 fighter jets in the TRNC in recent weeks clearly demonstrate that Ankara will not back down regarding either the security of the Turkish Cypriot people or its national interests in the Eastern Mediterranean. This development is not merely a military message; it is also a strategic declaration that Turkey will not abandon its ‘Blue Homeland’ doctrine or its guarantor responsibilities in Cyprus.

From Turkey’s perspective, Cyprus is the southern defence line of Anatolia. The loss of Cyprus would mean a weakening of maritime supremacy in the Eastern Mediterranean, pressure on energy corridors, and a narrowing of Turkey’s regional manoeuvre space.

For this reason, Ankara’s resolve on the Cyprus issue must be interpreted not merely as a diplomatic stance, but as a military, political and geopolitical state reflex.

• It is inconceivable that Turkey would remain passive in the new equation emerging in the Eastern Mediterranean today. Because the issue is no longer merely the Cyprus issue.
• The issue is the preservation of the Turkish presence in the Eastern Mediterranean.
• The issue is the defence of the Blue Homeland.
• The issue is the maintenance of national resistance against the encirclement of Anatolia from the south.

For this reason, it is of critical importance that Turkey pursues long-term state policies that do not merely consist of diplomatic statements, but which enhance its military deterrence, strengthen the international visibility of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, and effectively safeguard its strategic rights in the Eastern Mediterranean.

Cyprus is no longer merely an island; it is a strategic geopolitical pivot at the heart of power balances, energy competition and the regional security architecture in the Eastern Mediterranean. This region is not merely an area on a map; it is also a vast arena of struggle shaped by maritime zones of jurisdiction, energy routes and security balances.

Turkey, however, remains steadfast in standing by the Turkish Cypriot people in accordance with its historical responsibilities, legal guarantee rights and national security perspective. The security, existence and political equality of the Turkish Cypriots are not a matter open to debate for Turkey, but a national obligation.

Within this framework, whilst Turkey resolutely safeguards its rights and interests in the Eastern Mediterranean under the Blue Homeland doctrine, it also regards the legitimate rights of the Turkish Cypriot people as an integral part of its own national interests.

How fortunate are the fine people who keep the Turkish presence and culture alive in Cyprus… Now we are all Turkish Cypriots…