Will Greece and Turkey Ever Make Permanent Peace?

Few rivalries in modern geopolitics run as deep and as emotionally charged as that between Greece and Turkey. They are bound by geography, history, and a shared sea — yet also divided by centuries of war, competing national narratives, and bitter disputes over land, air, and water. Their disagreements stretch from the status of Cyprus to maritime borders in the Aegean, from minority rights to the militarization of islands.

And yet, in moments, the prospect of reconciliation has appeared tantalisingly close. When earthquakes have struck — whether in İzmit in 1999 or central Turkey in 2023 — Greek rescue teams rushed in. After wildfires scorched Attica in 2021, Turkish officials sent messages of solidarity. The two nations trade, travel, and even vacation across each other’s shores. In 2023, bilateral relations warmed considerably following a thaw in rhetoric between Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis, culminating in renewed dialogue and cooperative agreements.

But can Greece and Turkey ever reach a permanent settlement? Can centuries of mistrust be definitively put aside? To answer, one must examine both the case for optimism — that history could finally bend toward reconciliation — and the counter-argument, which insists that the structural obstacles are simply too great.

The Case for a Permanent Peace

Shared Membership in NATO and Western Institutions

Both Greece and Turkey are NATO members, and while this has not prevented tensions, it has repeatedly acted as a brake on outright war. Washington, Brussels, and other Western capitals have historically intervened to de-escalate crises — such as the 1996 standoff over the uninhabited islets of Imia/Kardak. Shared institutional commitments make it harder for either side to cross the line into full-scale conflict.

Economic Interdependence and Tourism

Despite their quarrels, economic links between the two countries have grown. Greek shipping magnates use Turkish shipyards. Turkish tourists fill hotels on Greek islands, while Greeks enjoy affordable travel packages to Istanbul and the Turkish Riviera. Both sides have an interest in sustaining and expanding trade, particularly as Greece seeks stable growth after its debt crisis and Turkey looks for foreign investment. A permanent peace deal could unlock energy cooperation, especially in the Eastern Mediterranean, where joint projects on gas pipelines or renewable energy could turn competition into shared prosperity.

Natural Disasters and “Earthquake Diplomacy”

Perhaps the most powerful arguments for peace come not from politicians but from the raw forces of nature. The outpouring of Greek aid after the 1999 Turkish earthquake is credited with a major thaw that lasted several years. Similarly, Turkey’s solidarity after Greek tragedies has softened public opinion. In both countries, polls suggest that ordinary citizens do not desire war. These moments highlight a deeper truth: humanitarian impulses often eclipse political disputes, suggesting that underlying goodwill can be mobilised into permanent cooperation.

International Pressure and EU Incentives

The European Union looms as a powerful driver of peace. While Turkey’s EU membership bid has stalled, Brussels remains a mediator. Greece, as an EU member, can wield veto power but also has incentives to use its influence constructively. Were Turkey to re-engage seriously with EU accession criteria, improved relations with Greece would be essential. Conversely, Greece would benefit from a stable neighbourhood and the chance to act as a bridge between Turkey and Europe.

A Generational Shift in Leadership

The current generation of Greek and Turkish leaders grew up in the shadow of bitter conflicts like Cyprus 1974 and the Aegean crises of the 1980s and 1990s. But younger politicians and civil society leaders may be less tied to those traumas. Exchanges between universities, cultural festivals, and joint business chambers point toward a constituency for peace that may one day wield real power.

In short: The case for optimism rests on the belief that material interests, shared institutions, and the human instinct for cooperation will ultimately outlast nationalist rhetoric.

The Case Against Permanent Peace

Deep-Rooted Historical Grievances

The weight of history cannot be dismissed. From the Ottoman conquest of Constantinople in 1453 to the Greek War of Independence in the 1820s, from population exchanges in the 1920s to the 1974 invasion of Cyprus, both nations carry centuries of grievances. Each episode is remembered not as a distant event but as a living wound, retold in schoolbooks, literature, and political speeches. These entrenched narratives make compromise politically toxic: any concession can be framed as betrayal.

Cyprus: The Frozen Conflict

No issue has been more enduring than Cyprus. Since 1974, the island has been divided between the internationally recognised Republic of Cyprus (Greek Cypriot south) and the Turkish-controlled north, recognised only by Ankara. UN peace talks have repeatedly stalled. For Greece, any permanent settlement requires reunification under a federal structure. For Turkey, recognition of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus is the bottom line. These positions remain irreconcilable. As long as Cyprus remains unresolved, the idea of a final Greek-Turkish peace seems elusive.

Maritime Disputes and Energy Resources

The Eastern Mediterranean is a tinderbox of competing claims. Greece argues for wide maritime zones around its islands under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Turkey, which has not signed UNCLOS, rejects this, claiming it would box in its coastline. The discovery of natural gas deposits has heightened the stakes. Joint development could be a win-win, but mistrust means every drilling operation becomes a test of wills. Maritime borders are notoriously difficult to settle permanently, especially when energy riches are at stake.

Militarisation and Arms Races

Far from disarming, both nations continue to modernise their militaries. Greece has purchased advanced Rafale fighter jets from France and upgraded its F-16 fleet. Turkey, meanwhile, develops its own drones and naval capabilities. In the Aegean, each side accuses the other of violating airspace or waters daily. This militarised environment keeps tensions on a knife’s edge and makes accidents or miscalculations ever more likely.

Nationalist Politics and Domestic Audiences

Both Greek and Turkish leaders face domestic pressures that incentivise hardline stances. In Turkey, nationalist rhetoric plays well with key constituencies. In Greece, any suggestion of “appeasement” can spark backlash. Even when leaders privately favour compromise, the political cost of selling it at home may be prohibitive. As long as nationalism remains a central organising principle, politicians may find it safer to preserve conflict than to risk peace.

In short: The pessimistic case insists that structural factors — frozen conflicts, irreconcilable legal claims, nationalist politics — make permanent peace unrealistic, at least in the foreseeable future.

Optimists point to a Europe that has overcome once-bloody rivalries: France and Germany fought three wars in 70 years, yet today form the backbone of the European Union. Why not Greece and Turkey? Skeptics counter that unlike post-war Europe, there is no overarching framework compelling deep integration, no Marshall Plan or supranational authority strong enough to bind them together.

Both views contain truth. There is a credible path to a permanent settlement — it would likely involve phased agreements: maritime boundary compromises, energy cooperation, gradual demilitarisation, and a Cyprus settlement brokered by the UN and EU. But each of these steps requires immense political will and timing. The record shows that whenever one side extends an olive branch, domestic politics or regional crises quickly reignite suspicion.

What the Future May Hold

Three scenarios emerge when looking ahead:

1. Managed Rivalry — Most likely: sparring diplomatically, occasional sabre-rattling, but no war.
2. Breakthrough Settlement — Possible under new leadership and mediation, but politically costly.
3. Crisis and Escalation — Less likely but dangerous: a miscalculation leading to clashes.

Will Greece and Turkey ever resolve their differences permanently? The honest answer is: perhaps, but not soon. The incentives for cooperation are real and growing, but so are the obstacles. The history of the relationship is not linear; it cycles between hostility, détente, and back again. The dream of lasting peace is not naive — after all, Europe’s bloodiest enemies have become allies — but it demands a reckoning with hard realities.

For now, what matters most is maintaining dialogue, building trust where possible, and preventing crises from spiralling. Permanent peace may be a long way off. But every flight that crosses the Aegean without incident, every student exchange, every handshake after an earthquake — these are the small, steady steps that keep the possibility alive.