Q: Mr. Avramopoulos, in your opinion, what are the objectives of the United States and Israel in the operation against Iran?
Dimitris Avramopoulos: The objectives appear to move on three main levels. First, the containment of Iran’s military and nuclear momentum, which is regarded by the West and Israel as a strategic threat to the balance of power in the Middle East. Second, the limitation of the influence that Tehran exerts through networks of allies and paramilitary organizations across various fronts in the region. And third, the restoration of a balance of deterrence, sending the message that changes in the balance of power through military pressure will not be accepted. However, without a clear political perspective for de-escalation, even a success at the military level may prove temporary.
Q: Is there a risk that tensions between the United States, Israel and Iran could turn into a wider armed conflict?
Dimitris Avramopoulos: The risk is real and should not be underestimated. The Middle East is already operating in an environment of multiple tensions and fragile balances. Under such conditions, a miscalculation or a chain reaction could lead to broader destabilization. Such a development would have serious consequences not only for the security of the region but also for the global economy, particularly with regard to energy and maritime transport. This is why preventing escalation requires responsible political leadership and the return of diplomacy to the forefront.
Q: In the new landscape emerging in the Middle East, who might be considered the “winners,” and what role will Turkey play?
Dimitris Avramopoulos: In crises of this kind, there are no real “winners.” However, there are actors who attempt to take advantage of the fluid situation in order to strengthen their role. Some states will try to present themselves as necessary mediators or as balancing actors. Turkey will most likely move within this logic, seeking to keep open channels with all sides while strengthening its regional role. However, this strategy is often accompanied by ambitions that are not always compatible with the stability of the region.
Q: For Greece, what are the main challenges and how should it act in this constantly changing environment?
Dimitris Avramopoulos: The challenges for Greece are clear: security in the Eastern Mediterranean, the protection of maritime routes, energy stability, and the possibility of new migratory pressures. Our country must act with strategic calm and consistency. It must maintain strong alliances, strengthen its deterrent credibility, and at the same time support dialogue and diplomacy as key instruments of stability. Greece has demonstrated that it can function as a pillar of stability in the region.
Q: How do you assess the stance of the European Union so far toward the new geopolitical crisis?
Dimitris Avramopoulos: The European Union still faces difficulties in expressing a unified strategic voice in high-intensity crises. Its foreign policy largely remains the result of the national priorities of its member states. As a result, it often limits itself to statements rather than exercising substantial geopolitical influence. If Europe wants to be a real factor of stability, it needs greater cohesion, strategic clarity, and political will.
Q: You have spoken about the need for a coherent architecture of stability in the Eastern Mediterranean. What will Greece’s role be?
Dimitris Avramopoulos: The Eastern Mediterranean needs a framework of stability based on respect for international law, cooperation in energy and security, and open channels of communication. Greece can play an important role in this process by leveraging its credibility, its alliances, and its geopolitical position. Our role should be that of a responsible actor contributing to stability and cooperation in the region.
Q: In the field of energy policy, what do the agreements signed with Chevron signify?
Dimitris Avramopoulos: The presence of major international energy companies shows that Greece is gaining increased geoeconomic significance on the region’s energy map. These agreements can strengthen the country’s energy security and development prospects, provided they are implemented with full transparency and respect for international law. The country’s sovereign rights are clear and non-negotiable and must be protected with responsibility and institutional consistency.
Q: Cyprus has come under attack. How should Greece express its support in practical terms?
Dimitris Avramopoulos: Supporting Cyprus is both a national and a European obligation. It must be expressed through immediate diplomatic mobilization at the European and international level, through close coordination between Athens and Nicosia on issues of security and the protection of critical infrastructure, and through strengthening deterrent credibility within the framework of our alliances. Cyprus is a member state of the European Union, and any threat against it concerns the collective security of Europe. What is required is calmness, unity, and strategic consistency, so as to prevent further escalation and bring diplomacy back to the center of developments.