(by Pasquale Preziosa) The European Community had launched, at the time of Donald Tusk, a "warning" to Turkey for the respect of national sovereignties, after the ships of the Turkish Navy had prevented the ship chartered by our ENI from continuing the path to the exclusive economic area belonging to the Greek Cypriots, to explore the possible presence of submarine gas.
Greece reacted by appealing to the respect of international laws, and invited the other party to desist from any action of force.
For history, the Turkish Cypriot side of the island has the sole recognition of Turkey, while the Greek Cypriot side has the recognition of most of the countries in the world and is part of the European Union: in 1974 Turkey sent its troops to Cyprus in support of the Turkish ethnic group (22%) following the coup that deposed the Greek Orthodox archbishop Makarios and made the "Treaty of Nice" fail.
For the most recent history, Turkey, after the attempted coup of 2016, has radically changed its foreign policy, with a substantial rapprochement with Russia, Iran and Syria and a distance from Saudi Arabia and the USA: it is not with this regime that the European Union can confront itself.
Erdogan wants more financial support for Syrian refugees in his territory and is playing his energetic match in the Mediterranean.
Erdogan's Turkey has reversed the modernization process undertaken by Ataturk, the latter approached, in the West, by the figure of French Gen. De Gaulle (Fabio Grassi-The founder of modern Turkey).
The replacement of Christian religious institutions with the secular institutions led to the Industrial Revolution in Europe (Ariel Durant - The lesson of history).
Turkish action towards Cyprus takes us back in time, in the era of gunner policy: a tactically perfect move, but strategically wrong because it damages the relationship of trust between the diplomats.
Attempts to reunite the two ethnic components of the Cypriot island, have been made repeatedly but without results, the last one ended in January 2017 in Geneva with nothing done.
The insurmountable problem seems to be the safeguard of equal rights to the Turkish Cypriot minority and the compensation for the lands and properties abandoned at the time of the invasion of the island.
Not only that, for the Turks: Cyprus and the Turkish community represent a point of honor for safeguarding the country's reputation.
For Russia, which was not present in Geneva, the reunification of the two Cypriot communities is not positive, as it would represent a victory for the European Union and would favor the entry of the island into NATO; For years the financial center of Cyprus has been used for not clear financial activities of the Russian companies (safe Heaven), Russia, moreover, perceives Cyprus as a focal point for the military control of the Mediterranean and for the strategy of the distribution of natural gas.
From an energy perspective, Gazprom is pushing to accelerate the "TurkStream" pipeline to serve gas to Turkey and Europe to position itself well in the next competition on energy sources.
Israel with the wells of Zohr, Egypt, Israel with Tamar and Leviathan and Cyprus with Aphrodite and Calypso have discovered important deposits of natural gas in the last ten years, with proven reserves of 3500 billion cubic meters (bcm) and estimated 10 mila bcm (source Limes) that could feed both Turkey and the south east of Europe.
The small island of Cyprus is one of the biggest energy games in the southern European theater and has already concluded with Egypt and Israel to create a large integrated network of integrated submarine gas pipelines.
Europe, including Italy, is very interested in gas coming from the Levante area both to diversify supplies, today mainly coming from Russia (350 bcm / year), and to cover a decrease in production from Norway, the Netherlands and UK, both to fuel the increased domestic demand due to economic growth (additional 40 / 60bcm / year).
Turkey is strongly interested in Cypriot gas, currently imports 48 bcm / year, it is only 600 km from the area of interest and there are pipeline projects being completed (Azerbaijan, Turkey, Tana through Turkey itself, Tap towards the Italy, and Russia that would like to connect through the future TurkStream.
This is the very complex frame of reference that will deserve the attention of those having cause.
The distribution of resources between the two Cypriot communities is one of the factors of the ongoing dispute, combined with the transit routes of the pipelines.
Erdogan's turbulent behavior is not new in the geopolitical landscape of the Mediterranean and Middle Eastern areas.
With Russia, in 2015, Turkey began a showdown by breaking down a Su-24 aircraft, the event aroused much concern at the NATO level, it was from the 1952 that there were no downsizing of Russian aircraft.
The diatribes with Greece are on the agenda both on the sea and in the airspace of competence.
Relations with the US are at loggerheads (Cavusoglu) also for the events of Afrin and for the imam in exile, Gulen.
In Sochi, in Russia, the Turks met with Putin and Iranian president Rohani to talk about the future of Syria: a move not shared by the Sunnis who are headed by Saudi Arabia.
The recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel by the US provoked Erdogan's reaction: "Jerusalem represents the red line for Muslims".
These repeated political divergences make the link with NATO more weak every day.
Turkey's entry into the European Union is not on the agenda.
There are, therefore, all the elements for a "geopolitical fire" in both the Mediterranean and Middle Eastern area.
Turkey has assumed a bad geopolitical character with the presidency of Erdogan, less diplomatic and more voted for the showdown.
Outside the US and Russia, today there are no leaders able to handle the test of strength Erdogan wanted.
European countries are united in their messages, but nationalist in their behavior. Cyprus will not be able to manage the problem of the exclusive economic zone alone.
Eni will not be able to move before having clarified the dispute. Italy is always in a continuous electoral campaign and therefore in a moment of political weakness and the future does not look rosy due to the absence, in the electoral programs, of credible and ambitious foreign and defense policy features.
From a historical geopolitical point of view, Italy has always negotiated and never launched different actions for the recognition of its rights (missiles on Lampedusa, STX shipyards, ... ..).
Europe and therefore also Italy seem to live in a historical reality parallel to the real one, geopolitics is spread at great speed but our geopolitical movements seem to be untreatable sloths of the great problems that surround us.