The Alternate Minister of National Defence Dimitris Vitsas in an interview that he gave for HELLENIC DEFENCE AND TECHNOLOGY to journalist Dimitris Manakanatas stated the following:
1st QUESTION: Given that the government has ruled out the possibility of an obligatory enlistment of conscripts at the age of 18, is there an alternative framework which you have been considering, along with HAGS, so as to increase the staffing percentage of units which, in any case, in critical areas (e.g. Evros), are significantly lower than the Turkish forces across the river?
ANSWER: Firstly, it is not true that the staffing percentage of units on our Eastern borders and on the islands are low or are outnumbered by the Turkish forces. Really, when does this information come from? The opposite is true. There are units with availability higher than 110% and the power of fire and tanks of the Armed Forces is crucial. At the same time, we remain alert. The Staffs are always concerned with augmenting the force of the front line units with personnel and material. Besides, it is to this direction that the reconstruction plan of the Armed Forces is oriented. On the other hand, I cannot realize what the point of the debate about enlistment at the age of 18 is. Such an action would increase the number of conscripts for one year, at the best case, and then everything would be the same again, with the same problems. In parallel, it would change many other issues, e.g. admission to universities and deferments of enlistment, level of maturity of conscript’s behaviour etc. There is a certain attitude regarding the age of enlistment related to the entire social life and I believe that it should not change.
2ND QUESTION: Do you consider the probability of increasing the duration of the military service providing also some benefits to the conscripts, or of recruiting professional soldiers, so as to mitigate the problem of the poor staffing of units and also use this as a measure to reduce unemployment?
ANSWER: There is no possibility of increasing or reducing the duration of service, nor do we discuss it. This is not the problem. The point is to rationalize the operation of the entire system; that is further adaptation of the Armed Forces’ structure to modern conditions, as they are defined by both the threats that they are called on to face and the assets they possess in order to maximize their performance. And in the modern world, knowledge, training, capable weapon systems are more important than the figures which – allow me to say this – I have been hearing since the time I was a conscript myself, 36 years ago.
I mentioned the matter of the reorganization which is in a good level of progress, yet there are still many things to be done. In the Army, reorganization means planning in relation to modern threats and not maintenance of structures based on the needs we had 70 years ago (e.g. civil war). In training, reorganization means orientation towards major formations. The consolidation of jointness is a challenging bet for the Armed Forces which is constantly won and has started to produce results. It is the same about the maintenance and upgrade of the existent weapon systems and targeted purchases.
Moreover, we try to make the time of service useful for both the community and the conscript; that is a conscript may receive military training, as well as gain skills which will be useful in his life as civilian. For example, the possibility provided to doctors to fulfil their obligatory service in rural areas, to lawyers to perform their practice, the possibility for conscripts to gain knowledge and certification of the capability to handle PCs or knowledge of technical subjects, are some of the measures that either we have already adopted or we are considering to adopt.
3RD QUESTION: As far as Greek Defence Industry is concerned, do you believe that it is competitive at a global level? What about the case of the Hellenic Defence Systems?
ANSWER: We believe that the defence industry, in total, whether it is under government’s control or it belongs to the private sector, along with the Shipyards, is a strong asset for our country’s productive reconstruction and we are working towards this direction. At the same time, it contributes to the autonomy of the Armed Forces, whenever this is feasible.
Our first concern was to save these units of our country’s defence and heavy industry, including the shipyards in as far as the Ministry of National Defence was involved. We kept the Hellenic Defence Systems, the Hellenic Aerospace Industry, the Hellenic Shipyards and Elefsis Shipyards, securing, at the same time, the respective employment posts. We are upgrading the military factories since they are a significant tool in our hands.
At present, our efforts are focused on planning a strategic development and reconstruction of the entire defence industry, which takes into consideration the extroversion and the international markets. Ensuring a place in the international competition is what we seek for, and it is a prerequisite for the survival of the domestic defence industry. The orders made by the Hellenic Armed Forces may be and are a good contribution but they are not enough, they do not offer any perspective by themselves. At an EU level, there are two interrelated notions, autonomy and complementarity. We pay attention to Small and Medium sized Enterprises because they ensure flexibility, adaptability and velocity.
In particular, regarding the Hellenic Defence Systems, we should not forget that they come out of a situation of constant shrinking and depreciation which would definitely lead to their closure. We reverse this situation and the messages that we receive are positive, yet much work is still needed. Particularly at this period, we take specific initiatives to this direction aiming to restore normal conditions for the first time. The recent amendment which was voted by the parliament is a step towards a new start. There are many obstacles set by difference sides, yet we fight them and we move on.
4th QUESTION: How do you comment the way that Turkey “uses” refugees and migrants to achieve other objectives?
ANSWER: The refugee issue has one and only aspect for us, the humanitarian aspect, which is, of course, deeply political because humanitarianism is not a neutral notion. Many scenarios are discussed and threats of “using” refugees and refugee flows as a means of leverage or as a weapon against the European Union, as well as against our country, have been expressed by Turkey. We want to be clear; such an action would be a hostile action. I prefer to think that we will not have to face such a situation.
It would not be useful for anyone, it would be much less useful for Turkey which is today in an unstable situation due to internal, as well as external problems which Turkey itself created. I do not think that the Turkish leadership has such illusions that it believes that it could achieve its objectives by such kind of threats. It knows very well that the only manner for it to continue playing its role in the area and to deal with its problems is to keep doors open to Europe. It is primarily Turkey itself that aggressiveness and isolation will harm.
5TH QUESTION: Although competent for the refugee issue is Mr. Mouzalas, it is certain that the engagement of the Armed Forces is important. Do you believe that in case the situation comes out of control on an island (e.g. Moria, Lesvos) in such a manner that the security corps will not be able to face it should the Armed Forces be further engaged? Do you believe that the contribution of the Armed Forces to the refugee issue is an impediment for their main mission or is it useful for them?
ANSWER: The role of the Armed Forces is clearly defined and this is not just a political choice of ours, yet it emanates from the very role and mission of the Armed Forces. The fact that beyond their main mission which is to defend the national independence and territorial integrity of our country, they also offer a social work, such as their crucial contribution to managing the refugee crisis, does not mean that they can assume more roles. The internal security issue is an exclusive responsibility of the Security Forces which have also the personnel and the means and have been trained to this end.
As for what you are asking me, whether the engagement of the Armed Forces created problems for their main mission, my answer is no. The engagement of the Armed Forces in the refugee issue is by no means an impediment for their main mission. Besides, it is only a part of them that has been engaged, whereas the financial cost of this participation is paid by the European Union and does not consume any resources of our National Defence. Could somebody claim that the engagement of the Armed Forces in dealing with natural disasters (floods, fires, earthquakes) distracts them from their primary objective? Or do air evacuations of patients from the islands deprive the Armed Forces of their capabilities? Of course, not. On the contrary, I believe that the participation of the Armed Forces solved hard problems and at the same time it raised people’s esteem and respect to them.
It should be noted that the refugee issue, in the manner in which it came up in early 2015, was a top priority national issue for our country. It would be impossible, then, for our country’s Armed Forces which are the most organized structure and are always in a constant readiness, to stay out of this huge national effort that assumed the characteristics of a patriotic duty. We should not forget that the immediate and effective engagement of the Armed Forces in creating accommodation camps on the border islands and in the Greek mainland was the base for the application of the European Union – Turkey agreement, a result of which is the shrinking of the refugee flows after March 2016. We should also take into account that NATO too has been engaged in the refugee-migrant issue. So, the Hellenic Armed Forces had many more reasons and much more serious reasons to be engaged.
6TH QUESTION: How do you interpret Turkey’s actions so far in relation to finding a solution for Cyprus’ issue and how do you evaluate Erdogan’s blustering not only on this issue, but also on questioning the validity of the Treaty of Lausanne, as well as in conjunction with the close cooperation which he has with the Albanian Prime Minister Rama who recently formulated provocative claims calling Ionian Sea a “disputed” area?
ANSWER: Turkey’s strategy, as far as Cyprus issue is concerned, has always been the same. What changes are the circumstances which, in their turn, define the framework within which the Turkish side can make its decisions. It is obvious that if Turkey wanted a fair and sustainable solution to this problem, this solution would have been found decades ago. However, things are changing; the republic of Cyprus is a member of the European Union which gives it some advantages for this negotiation.
In parallel, time does not always favour the fact of the Turkish invasion and occupation. It is very important that, 42 years later, we still have this issue discussed in international fora, namely that Cyprus’ issue is primarily an issue of invasion and occupation. All this, along with the instability in Turkey itself and its surrounding countries, form a framework which might lead to a commonly accepted and sustainable solution without any occupation troops and third guarantors.
As for the statements by Turkish officials, I think that they mostly express their insecurities. In particular, about the Turkish leadership calling the Treaty of Lausanne in question, what I would like to say is that, more than any other country, it is Turkey that should defend this particular treaty on which the very existence of the Turkish state is based.
For us, observing international treaties is a matter of principle and a prerequisite so as to preserve peace and security in our region. The territory that constitutes the Greek state cannot be violated, it is not the result of a concession provided for by some treaty, but the outcome of a liberation war which the conventions confirmed and ratified. The Hellenic Armed Forces, with their deterrence force, are a guarantee for the observation of treaties, peace and stability in our wider region.
Specifically regarding the issue of Albania that you are asking me about, and also in general, I have to say that we do not discuss inexistent issues and for Greece there are no grey zones, there are our sovereignty rights.
