Greece Creates Marine Parks That May Revive Turkey Tensions
The parks will be located in the Ionian Sea and in the Southern Cyclades, an island group in the Aegean Sea, west and east of the mainland, respectively. The Greek government's pledge to create a marine park in the Aegean Sea drew pushback from Turkey last year. The two countries have historically been at odds over sea borders and economic rights in parts of the eastern Mediterranean.
'These parks will be among the largest marine protected areas in the entire Mediterranean,' Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis said Monday in a statement. They will allow the country to meet its target of 'protecting 30% of its territorial waters' by 2030, ahead of schedule, the premier added.
The establishment of the two marine parks is meant to preserve ecosystems, restore balance and set a new standard for marine conservation, Mitsotakis said.
'Unilateral actions should be avoided in enclosed or semi-enclosed seas such as the Aegean and Mediterranean,' Turkey's Foreign Ministry said in a statement in response, adding that Ankara would announce its own projects 'aimed at protecting the environment in marine areas' in the coming days.
The area in the Aegean Sea hosts threatened wildlife plants and species and will cover almost 9,500 square kilometers. The park in the Ionian Sea will extend over 18,000 square kilometers and will include locations used by endangered animals like certain sea turtles.
'They will be vast sanctuaries for life beneath the waves,' Mitsotakis said, adding that 'most importantly, inside these marine zones the hugely damaging practice of bottom trawling will be banned.'
(Adds Turkish statement in fifth paragraph.)
More stories like this are available on bloomberg.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
3 hours ago
- Mint
Boeing Defense Workers Reject Contract in New Labor Turmoil
(Bloomberg) -- Boeing Co. faces the risk of a strike at its St. Louis defense hub after union workers rejected a contract offer that would boost their wages by 20% over four years. The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers Local 837, which represents 3,200 Boeing defense workers in Missouri and Illinois, voted overwhelmingly against the new terms Sunday. The Boeing proposal 'fell short of addressing the priorities and sacrifices' of the company's skilled workforce, the union said in a statement. 'Our members are standing together to demand a contract that respects their work and ensures a secure future.' While the present contract expires at 11:59 p.m. Central Time on Sunday, management still has a chance to win over rank-and-file members by sweetening its offer during a seven-day 'cooling off' period. If that's unsuccessful, IAM Local 837 workers will walk off the job and shut down manufacturing in Boeing's military aircraft hub. The aerospace manufacturer is seeking to avoid another labor standoff after a strike by a Seattle-based Machinists union crippled manufacturing at its commercial jet factories for more than two months last year. Boeing could not be immediately reached for comment. Any labor strife would be costly for Boeing's defense division, which hasn't earned an annual profit since 2022 and is in the middle of a turnaround. A strike would shut down assembly lines for Boeing's F-15 and F/A-18 fighter jets, T-7A trainer, MQ-25 drone refueler and other weapons systems. The labor uncertainty will be a focus for analysts when Boeing reports quarterly earnings on Tuesday. It's also a bellwether as GE Aerospace launches contract negotiations with a separate IAM local on Sunday. St. Louis workers last went on strike in 1996 and don't have a history of activism, unlike Boeing's unions in the Pacific Northwest, according to Scott Mikus, an analyst with Melius Research. Union members initially rejected management's offer during the last negotiation with Boeing in 2022, before accepting a three-year deal with a 14% general wage increase and cost-of-living adjustments. While Puget Sound labor leaders endorsed Boeing's initial offer last year, they were rebuffed by rank-and-file members embittered by an earlier 10-year contract that stripped away pensions and locked in low wage increases while inflation soared. The lengthy strike squeezed the company's working capital and spurred Boeing to sell equity worth almost $24 billion. --With assistance from Bill Haubert. (Updates with comments from labor union in third paragraph, attempt to reach Boeing in fifth paragraph.) More stories like this are available on
The Hindu
3 hours ago
- The Hindu
Understanding Russia's Taliban gauntlet
On July 3, 2025, the Russian Foreign Ministry announced the recognition of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (IEA) government, representing the culmination of Russia's recent overtures toward the Taliban. This followed the decision to upgrade diplomatic ties and officially accredit the Taliban's new ambassador, Gul Hassan, to Moscow. Now that the IEA flag is flying over the Afghan Embassy in Moscow, questions remain about the rationale behind Russia's choice to legitimise the Taliban regime. A change, two decades later Moscow's eagerness to cultivate diplomatic relations with the Taliban government stands in stark contrast to Russia's approach to the IEA's first iteration from 1996 to 2001. At that time, the Taliban were seen as hostile towards Russia. Moscow did not acknowledge their government and was forced to wind down its diplomatic presence in Afghanistan in 1997. Further, Russia provided military assistance to the Northern Alliance and helped its Central Asian allies stabilise the situation along the Afghan border against the terrorist threat. Complicating matters further, the Taliban, in 2000, recognised the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria as an independent state and urged the Muslim world to declare a holy war on Russia to force it to stop its counter-terrorist operation in Chechnya. With an estimated 2,500 Chechen militants undergoing training in Taliban-controlled territories, Moscow considered launching 'preventive strikes' on terrorist camps in Afghanistan. In this context, it was unsurprising that Russia joined forces with the United States to adopt the United Nations' sanctions against the Taliban and provided logistical support to the U.S.-led Operation Enduring Freedom, which was launched after 9/11. In 2003, the Taliban were included in the Russian list of terrorist organisations. As the international counter-terrorism mission in Afghanistan reached an impasse and the U.S. began to consider withdrawal, Moscow established unofficial contacts with the Taliban through its closer engagement with Pakistan in the early 2010s. This enabled Russia to protect its security interests in Afghanistan (with a focus on ensuring the safety of Russian citizens), collaborating against the Islamic State Khorasan Province (IS-K) and combating drug trafficking. Additionally, in a balance act between the Afghan government and the Taliban, Russia stepped up its diplomatic efforts to position itself as a venue for resolving the Afghan crisis. Despite being blacklisted by the UN and outlawed in Russia, the Taliban representatives were invited to participate in the Moscow Format and intra-Afghan conferences, as Russia attempted to increase its own regional influence and edge the U.S. out from Afghanistan. With the Taliban's takeover of Kabul in August 2021, even as many other countries evacuated diplomatic personnel amid the lingering turmoil, the Russian Embassy in Kabul remained in operation — Moscow remained confident that the Taliban are capable of putting things in good order. Despite Russia's good rapport with the Taliban's dispensation, the persistent instability in Afghanistan has severely compromised its security interests, with terrorist attacks against the Russian Embassy in Kabul in September 2022 and the Crocus City Hall in Moscow in March 2024, purportedly carried out by the IS-K. There has been no meaningful progress in the economic projects either, though the Russian authorities continue to harbour hopes that Afghanistan will emerge as a conduit for Russian exports to South and Southeast Asia. The basis Russia's official recognition of the IEA government reflects Moscow's conviction that the Taliban are 'an objective reality' and the only political force capable of controlling power in Afghanistan. This is further reinforced by the perception of the Taliban as Russia's 'allies in countering terrorism', which seemingly laid the foundation for their de-listing in April 2025. It should be noted though that the Russian Supreme Court only suspended the ban on the Taliban activities, and the grouping is still on the Russian unified federal list of terrorist organisations. This suggests that the Russian security apparatus is not fully convinced by the Taliban's track record in combating terrorism, leaving scope to reverse the decision if the alliance with the Taliban proves to be a false dawn. The IEA's recognition is a symbolic gesture that does not bring Russia any immediate benefits and does not guarantee any upgrade to Moscow's position in Afghanistan or the wider region. While some Russian officials are insisting on supporting the Taliban, including 'arming them', it remains to be seen how far Moscow is willing to go and whether the joint fight against the IS-K will yield tangible results. As Russia has set a precedent by recognising the IEA, some Central Asian states and even China may well follow suit, especially given that the Taliban's expectations of their partners will certainly increase. Moscow's free pass to the Taliban regarding the inclusivity of their government, as well as women's and minority rights, may become a new template for other regional players who will prioritise pragmatism over value-based approach. Ties with India India will unlikely be seriously affected by the Russian move. New Delhi has fostered its own incremental improvement in diplomatic ties with the Taliban, having recently found common ground with them on the issue of terrorism in Kashmir. It is likely that New Delhi will keep up diplomatic communications, trade and humanitarian cooperation with the IEA, without deviating from its stance on the legitimacy issue. Engagement without formal recognition still seems to be the likely trajectory of India's Afghanistan policy. Harsh V. Pant is Vice President, Observer Research Foundation (ORF), New Delhi. Aleksei Zakharov is Fellow, Eurasia, Observer Research Foundation
The Hindu
4 hours ago
- The Hindu
New ground handling firm to be hired at Chennai airport as replacement for Turkish firm Celebi
Airports Authority of India (AAI) will bring on board a new ground handling firm in about three months at Chennai airport after the departure of the Turkish ground handling service provider Çelebi Airport Services Private Limited recently. Chennai airport currently has two firms—AI Airport Services Limited and Bird Airport Services—which airlines have been deploying for their numerous in ground handling needs like moving passenger baggage between terminal and aircraft, aircraft servicing and cleaning, support services in flight operations and maintenance among others. The company had bagged contracts for several airports like Chennai, Goa, Kochi, Hyderabad, Bengaluru, Mumbai, Delhi and Kannur a few years back. In the city airport, the company managed a fairly significant volume of ground handling and the airlines including US Bangla, British Airways, Cathay Pacific, Scoot and SpiceJet had opted for the services of Çelebi until the license was cancelled by the Bureau of Civil Aviation Security (BCAS). Revoking this company's license came when security concerns emerged following military strikes and tensions between India and Pakistan. In May, when the BCAS withdrew the license to this Turkish-based firm, AAI said, airlines using their services quickly chose to go with the two other firms without causing any inconvenience for passengers. Officials of AAI said, after the ban of Çelebi, they have now issued a Request for Proposal for ground handling services at Chennai airport. 'It is a mandatory requirement from the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) that major airports must have three firms for ground handling support. This way, duopoly is avoided and in case of any crisis like what happened in May, there are always two firms available at an airport and the operations are not disturbed. If only one firm is available, then the firm may scramble for manpower and as a result, baggage delivery may be delayed, and passengers will be affected. Hence, it is ideal to have three firms,' an official said.
