The robustness of the Aegean Sea
Translation: Paola Vagioni
When we examine the Aegean Sea, we are troubled by it but not solely geostrategically. It has a dynamic which refutes our simplistic views on land. As an area which has not been determined yet transnationally, it apparently constitutes a weak point of geostrategy, while in reality it is critical. The lack of fixed borders has repercussions on the F.I.R. too since the latter coincides, at least theoretically. Some of us would prefer land instead of the Aegean Sea, without understanding the example of Armenia. Because what is currently the land of the three seas? Its same capacity as far as the lack of a dynamic element is concerned, constituted a target and finally a blow. Turkey, as a geopolitical entity, has committed genocide because it was the simplest way to obtain natural borders. The extermination of non-Muslim populations was not only aiming at the sovereignty of an artificial Turkish element but also the creation of a solid and coherent entity. In other words, there was a topological action. In consequence, with such an opponent and with such expansive dispositions, it is preferable to have sea borders. And to be more specific, it is advantageous to have islands on the Aegean Sea. In this stage topological explanations are required. The Aegean Sea does not operate as a single area which can provide easy access to a big army. This was proven historically with the Persians, not only with Thermopylae which constituted a topological gate between the South and the North, but also with Salamis where once again the small space did not allow for wide range movements for the navy. The same property is found in the Aegean Sea and under current facts too, since a naval movement remains a more difficult one than a military movement. And of course, an air movement is even more difficult. In consequence, the Aegean Sea constitutes a natural barrier against a general attack, a thing which did not exist in Smyrna. Moreover the islands, as their name suggests, constitute islets but not solely. They operate, passively at least, also as enclaves in case of an attack, and actively in case of readiness as a network. As a neologism, topostrategy was invented as a synthesis between topology and strategy. For a more theoretical approach on the subject see opus 4573. The Aegean Sea is not only a geostrategic challenge but also a topostrategic resistance which has allowed us for centuries to be here despite the intentions of others and despite the dispositions of our own. Inside this framework we must analyze the new defensive doctrine of Turkey, in order to understand the aims and to use effectively the robustness of the Aegean Sea as long as it exists because topostrategy is not an exclusivity.