Alexis Papachelas
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio described the prospect of a Greek-Turkish conflict as “unthinkable” in an interview with Kathimerini. He also said the United States would work behind the scenes to avert a potential crisis over the electricity interconnector with Cyprus, stressing “to all sides how important the project is from our perspective.”
On Ankara’s request for approval to acquire F-35 fighter jets, he confirmed that President Trump would like Turkey to receive the aircraft it has already paid for.
However, he said U.S. law is clear: that cannot happen until the issue of the S-400 air defense missiles Turkey purchased from Russia is resolved.
Another key issue discussed yesterday in Athens was the Greek government’s intention to acquire advanced missiles for its own F-35s, similar to those supplied to Israel.
Rubio said the request was being examined across the relevant U.S. agencies and that President Trump would make the final decision. He appeared receptive to the prospect, however, praising the strategic relationship between Greece and the United States and Greece’s role in the region “when the United States was threatened.”
— Why did you choose to visit Greece at this particular moment?
— We should have come here as soon as possible. I do not travel to a country unless we have ambassadors in place. Now we do here, so that was a factor. Our relationship with Greece is deep and longstanding. We have had opportunities to speak with the prime minister and foreign minister at international meetings and to host them for bilateral meetings in the United States.
I hope we will return many times in the future, because U.S.-Greek relations are an area I have worked on extensively. I never had the opportunity to come here as a senator, but this is something I have been involved in since my time in the Senate and continue to work on.
— The United States supports a new energy architecture in the region, including the Vertical Corridor and the GSI electricity interconnector. Will the United States support the latter, particularly in the Aegean, where it faces many…?
— …obstacles. If one thing has become clear in recent months, it is that we need to diversify how the world obtains its energy. The Russia-Ukraine war, developments involving Iran in the Strait of Hormuz, and the Houthis in the Red Sea all remind us of that.
We need diversity in our supply chains. This is a very important priority for us and another example of how U.S. and Greek interests overlap. So we are very committed to it.
We understand that there are potential obstacles, things standing in the way. We intend to use our diplomatic efforts to remind all parties how important this is to us and why it matters. And I hope we will find solutions.
As I said at the news conference a little earlier, some of these issues are clearly not best resolved through the media. They are better handled privately and quietly through diplomacy. But this is very important, because we need to prioritize commitments from several countries.
— President Trump has a personal relationship with President Erdogan. You are very active in the region. Will we see mediation on your part?
— I always avoid discussing sensitive matters in the media because that makes them harder to resolve. That said, we are in constant contact with Turkey, which is a NATO member and has been involved in many other issues, including hosting talks between Russia and Ukraine in the past.
Our relationship with Turkey is one we have invested in, and perhaps that investment can help us with these discussions.
On matters like these, if you want to make statements, you can make statements. But if you want to reach a solution, it is often better to deal with them through direct, private conversations. That is how diplomacy works best.
— This is a question I have put to many of your predecessors. If relations with Turkey take a turn for the worse in the Aegean or Cyprus, would there be a commitment from the United States? Would you intervene to prevent a serious escalation?
— To me, it would be unthinkable for something like that to happen. These are two NATO allies and partners, so it simply cannot happen. It would not be good for anyone—not Turkey, not Greece and not the United States.
I would say it is something I find unthinkable, something we could never allow to happen and something I do not believe will happen.
— One of the biggest and most sensitive issues is whether Turkey will acquire F-35 aircraft. As a senator, you supported the CAATSA legislation. What is your assessment now?
— Well, here is the situation. First, Turkey is a NATO member. Second, President Trump has expressed a desire—if it is possible—to proceed with aircraft deliveries, because the Turks have already paid for some of them.
Obviously, delivery is still many years away, but these are aircraft that have already been paid for.
However, there is a law passed by the U.S. Congress. There is also a provision in the National Defense Authorization Act that sets very strict conditions. Until those conditions are met, the sale cannot go ahead.
That has been communicated to the Turkish side. They know it, and I think they are trying to find solutions. The issue revolves around the S-400 system.
For now, therefore, the matter cannot be resolved, and legally the transfer cannot take place until that issue is settled. Perhaps it will ultimately be resolved—there are various options for how that could happen—but at this point it has not been.
— Greece has developed a close defense relationship with Israel. How do you view that relationship?
— We view it positively. Obviously, the challenge—and everyone knows this—is not simply the relationship with Israel, but how to maintain good relations with other Middle Eastern countries that may not have such a positive relationship with Israel.
We face the same challenge, of course, and managing our relationship with Israel is important. It is a deep and historic relationship. I am speaking with you today on the third anniversary of one of the most horrific terrorist attacks of all time, which truly changed the entire world, not just Israel.
So it is an important relationship, one we invest in. And, of course, we have to manage it while taking account of places affected by developments surrounding Israel, such as Syria and Lebanon.
As you know, we maintain contact with all the countries in the region. I think Greece is trying to play a similar role: maintaining strong relations with Israel but also with many other countries in the region.
The president will decide on the F-35 weapons systems
— I understand that Greece has requested specific weapons systems for its F-35s, some of which are the same as those supplied to Israel. Is there anything you can tell us about that request at this stage?
— There is no official answer. The matter is being considered very seriously. Obviously, a country like Greece is an important defense ally.
We already have a high degree of defense interoperability, and Greece took a very strong defensive stance at times when our presence in the region was threatened.
Its request will therefore receive very careful consideration. Naturally, though, the decision involves a process with more than one agency. Ultimately, it rests with the president, but we obviously also want to take the Department of War’s recommendations into account.
Iran will never acquire a nuclear weapon
— Turning to Iran, the situation in the Gulf has become more complicated. What is the ultimate goal? And when do you think this war will end?
— The ultimate goal is for them not to acquire a nuclear weapon. They must never obtain a nuclear arsenal. That was clear from the beginning.
What people perhaps do not fully appreciate or understand is that Iran was trying to conceal so many missiles and drones that it would have been capable of wiping out the entire Middle East.
They wanted to put our troops at risk without us having the defensive capacity to respond and then do whatever they wanted with their nuclear program. Essentially, they were trying to build a conventional “shield” behind which they could develop that program.
President Trump was never going to allow that to happen. That is why he destroyed their missile program. That is why he is targeting their drone manufacturing program. That is why he destroyed their air force.
At this stage, the Strait of Hormuz is open, and Iran does not control it. Oil shipments are now at about 80% of their pre-conflict levels.
Iran is under crushing economic pressure, which will increase exponentially over the coming weeks. For example, all the oil they shipped out while the memorandum of understanding, or MoU, was in force, and which is now in the Pacific Ocean, is going to be sold. After that, there will literally be no Iranian oil available anywhere in the world. They will no longer have that source of revenue.
So, when we talk about the eventual outcome, I can tell you where we will be in just a few weeks: They will be facing the most devastating economic catastrophe in modern Iranian history, and all of it will be the fault of the radical Shiite clerics who govern the country.
They will then have to make a decision: Do they want to be a state, or do they want to be a revolution?
I think they should have made that decision a long time ago. Now they will be forced to confront it.
I do not know which choice they will make. But I can tell you which choice they will never be allowed to make: acquiring a nuclear weapon. That simply is not going to happen.
— But are you not concerned that, after all this, some form of militant regime will remain in place?
— Look, there is a military regime there at the moment. Ultimately, we did not begin this effort with regime change as our objective. We wanted what was best for the Iranian people, but we certainly wanted the regime to change its behavior and, essentially, stop funding terrorism.
You have to understand that every dollar they earned — for example, when the MoU was signed and they were able to sell oil — was not invested in rebuilding the country.
Instead, they used that money to strengthen Shiite militias in Iraq, Hezbollah and Hamas, and to build more missiles and drones. That is where they spent it. That is where they have been spending it for 20 years, and it has to stop. Otherwise, they will remain a threat.
They are the world’s leading financier of terrorism, and every dollar they obtain is used for that purpose. So that had to change.
But I return to the original objective of this operation: never to allow these people — these radical, militant Shiite clerics — to acquire a nuclear weapon. And as long as President Trump is in office, they will not acquire one.
— There is another war underway, in Ukraine. You have said that, essentially, it is not America’s war, but it continues nonetheless. Is there a possibility that this is deliberate?
— This war is entering its fifth year, which was never the original plan. I do not think that was Putin’s plan for the conflict, so things have not unfolded as he intended.
We are now in a strategic stalemate, and that carries risks. Strategic stalemates are resolved in only two ways: through negotiation, or through escalation by one or both sides that ends up spreading beyond the boundaries of the original conflict.
At the moment, there do not appear to be prospects for a negotiated settlement. We are ready to play whatever role we can to achieve one. We have tried before, but so far that goal remains out of reach because the Russians insist on full control of Donetsk, a condition Ukraine rejects as unacceptable.
We remain ready to play a constructive role in securing a diplomatic solution. At the same time, we are watching the possibility of escalation with great concern.
Just yesterday, there were further attacks on ships in the Black Sea in a coordinated drone assault. We are concerned about the possibility of a sabotage operation in a neighboring country that could spiral out of control.
There are also clear indications that Russia intends to use the coming winter to destroy what remains of Ukraine’s electricity grid and force it to capitulate.
At the same time, Ukraine has strengthened its ability to launch long-range strikes deep inside Russian territory.
So we share the concern felt around the world that the conflict could escalate in a way that affects other countries and perhaps develops into a wider war.
We remain ready to facilitate the process and continue exploring the possibilities. If an opportunity arises — if there is a chance of a negotiated settlement — we truly believe that would be good for both Russia and Ukraine.
— In a few hours, you will deliver a speech in the birthplace of democracy. Is this perhaps the right place to consider whether you will run for president of the United States?
— [Laughter] One of the points we are trying to emphasize is that what connects us to Europe — and, to a large extent, to other countries through the things we have in common and our shared heritage — is fundamentally important.
We have strategic relationships with countries around the world. But what makes our relationship with European countries, especially places like Greece, so distinctive is that many features of our country, from our architecture to our system of government, have their roots in our shared cultural heritage. That is the core.
That is what keeps these things alive and flourishing. And we must keep reminding ourselves of it.
We should be proud of Western civilization, rather than apologizing for it. That does not mean we hate other civilizations or cultures, or reject them. But we should be proud — not ashamed — of our shared heritage, because it is the foundation of our system of government and our history.
It is the foundation of our alliance. So I think this is a unique opportunity to remind people of these things in such a historic setting.
