Greek–American relations over the last decade constitute one of the most stable and coherent partnerships in the Eastern Mediterranean.
Greece has chosen to position itself clearly within the Western security pillar, and this choice represents a conscious strategic stance.
It stems from the need for protection in a region where balances shift and where tension, instability, and rivalries coexist.
Within this framework, the country has granted critical military facilities, has strengthened the American presence from Crete to Thrace, and has been transformed into a key gateway for the flow of liquefied natural gas to Europe.
The relationship is presented as a relationship of trust.
The question is whether it is also presented as a relationship of reciprocity.
At a time when Greece’s geopolitical value has increased significantly, one would expect corresponding benefits at the economic and defense level, notes Michalis Sallas, President of Lyktos Group, Honorary President of Piraeus Bank, former university professor, in his analysis.
The reality is complex.
Greece has gained prestige and an upgraded role in Washington.
It has been established as a factor of stability in a region where Turkey often acts inconsistently.
These gains have value, but they remain intangible and do not translate with the same intensity into tangible benefits for the Greek economy and defense.
The energy sector is indicative
Greece buys American liquefied natural gas without preferential pricing and without long-term contracts that would secure price stability.
The country benefits from its geographical position, but not from special bilateral arrangements that could reduce energy costs.
The transformation of Greece into a regional hub is a benefit, but does not constitute reciprocity commensurate with the concessions it offers.
A similar picture appears in the defense sector.
Greece gains access to high technology and enhances its operational capability, but often with significant financial burden.
The delivery of weapons systems is delayed, and the participation of the Greek defense industry remains limited.
The presence of American forces at bases provides deterrent value, but is not accompanied by clear commitments regarding sovereignty issues.
The cooperation is important, but not balanced
This imbalance is also linked to the way Greece participates in negotiations.
The country offers facilitations as a self-evident sign of reliability, without linking them to specific returns.
It appears willing and consistent, but not assertive.
This leads the United States to consider the Greek stance as given.
And a stance perceived as given is rarely rewarded.
In this context, the geoeconomic dimension acquires particular significance.
The American bases in Greece do not serve only regional objectives.
They are part of a broader system that allows the United States to maintain operational capacity in the Middle East and the Gulf, where the world’s most important energy reserves are located.
The bases in Souda and Alexandroupoli facilitate the American presence in a region where not only strategic interests are at stake, but also the stability of oil-producing states.
This stability has direct economic importance for the United States.
The petrodollar system, formed in the mid-1970s, creates a cycle where the security of Arab states is linked to the stability of the dollar.
The Gulf countries price oil in dollars and invest a significant portion of their revenues in American bonds, strengthening the American economy and financing U.S. debt.
Without stability in this region, American monetary power would be far weaker.
In this cycle, Greece functions as a critical hub
Its geographical position gives the United States the ability to intervene directly in an area that is fundamental for the international economic order.
The contribution of Greece therefore does not concern only local security.
It enhances the stability of a system from which the entire Western economy, and especially the American one, benefits.
This observation reinforces the need for a more mature and assertive Greek strategy.
The country contributes to something that goes beyond the bilateral level.
It supports the maintenance of an international mechanism upon which American power relies.
This does not mean that Greece should question its Western orientation.
It means that it has every right to demand reciprocity commensurate with its actual value.
In an era of geopolitical reshuffling, Greece has more to gain from a stance of active assertion than from one of assumed compliance.
The utilization of its diplomatic capital can yield not only stability, but also returns that reflect the extent of its contribution to the international system.
www.bankingnews.gr
Σχόλια αναγνωστών