AI summarized this perfectly, i think both side should focus on themselves rather than talking about others. Quote;

“”” The Reddit post shows a flight path map of a Turkish military aircraft taking a noticeable detour to avoid entering the Athens Flight Information Region (FIR) in the Aegean Sea. Instead of flying a straighter route that would cross areas under Greek air traffic control responsibility, the plane curves around it.0 This is a classic symptom of the long-running Aegean dispute between Greece and Turkey—two NATO allies with deep historical, territorial, and strategic rivalries. Why Turkey does this (the FIR avoidance and related actions) Turkey’s behavior here stems from a deliberate policy of not fully accepting Greek administrative control over large parts of the Aegean airspace as a way to push back against what Ankara sees as Greek attempts to “enclose” or limit Turkish access to international waters and airspace. Here’s the core reasoning from the Turkish perspective: • FIR vs. sovereignty: The Athens FIR is an air traffic control zone (for safety and coordination), not sovereign Greek airspace. Turkey argues that Greece abuses its FIR responsibility by demanding flight plans from Turkish military/state aircraft as if it grants extra sovereign rights. By routing around it for military flights, Turkey avoids submitting plans or coordinating in ways that could imply acceptance of broader Greek claims. Turkey says it still communicates when needed but treats military flights differently to minimize risk and bureaucracy amid tensions.17 • Broader Aegean grievances: Turkey strongly objects to: ◦ Greece’s potential extension of territorial waters from the current 6 nautical miles to the full 12 miles allowed under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (which Turkey has not ratified in this context). Doing so would turn much of the Aegean into Greek waters, severely restricting Turkish naval and air access—effectively “landlocking” Turkey in a sea it sees as semi-enclosed and historically shared. Turkey has declared this a casus belli (cause for war). ◦ The militarization of Eastern Aegean islands (e.g., Lesbos, Chios, Samos, Rhodes, Kastellorizo). These were ceded to Greece under the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne and 1947 Paris Peace Treaty on the explicit condition that they remain demilitarized (no fortifications, heavy weapons, or permanent military bases close to the Turkish coast). Turkey accuses Greece of violating these treaties, especially in recent years with new deployments, autonomous units, and foreign (e.g., U.S., French) cooperation. If the demilitarization clause is broken, Turkey questions the legal basis of Greek sovereignty over those islands.30 ◦ Greek claims to a 10-mile national airspace over only 6-mile waters, and FIR practices that Turkey views as overreach. • Pattern of pushback: This fits into routine Turkish military activity—overflights, armed flights near disputed zones, and “dogfights” when Greek jets scramble to intercept. Greece records hundreds of such violations annually (e.g., 225 cases with 366 aircraft in 2025). Turkey often frames these as responses to Greek “provocations” or as asserting freedom of navigation. Both sides accuse the other of escalating, and dangerous close encounters have caused crashes and deaths in the past.18 From the Greek perspective (dominant in the Reddit thread): This is classic Turkish revisionism and bullying. Avoiding the FIR denies Greek sovereignty and FIR authority. Overflights are illegal violations of Greek airspace, and Turkey’s island claims threaten actual Greek territory. Greece points to international law, EU/NATO support, and sees Turkey as the aggressor trying to revise post-WW1 borders and treaties. They also reference Cyprus (1974 Turkish intervention, ongoing division) as evidence of Turkish willingness to use force. Deeper context • Historical roots: Ottoman legacy, population exchanges after 1922, Cyprus, and competing national narratives (Byzantine vs. Ottoman, etc.). Both sides have long memories and domestic politics that reward toughness on the “other.” • Strategic reality: The Aegean is narrow; many Greek islands hug the Turkish coast. Greece wants to secure them and extend maritime/EEZ rights for resources, defense, and connectivity. Turkey, with a much longer coastline and larger military, refuses to be hemmed in and leverages its size and geography. • Recent dynamics (as of 2026): Tensions fluctuate. There have been periods of dialogue, but issues like Greek defense deals with Israel/France/U.S., island militarization announcements, and Turkish NAVTEX warnings keep it simmering. Neither wants full war (economic and NATO costs would be huge), but accidents or miscalculation remain risks. Turkey often uses gray-zone pressure (flights, research vessels, rhetoric) to keep Greece defensive and deter unilateral moves. In short, Turkey does this because it views the status quo as unfairly tilted toward Greece and uses military aviation (and other tools) to contest Greek maximalist interpretations of treaties and maritime rules without crossing into open conflict. Greece sees it as repeated aggression undermining its security. It’s a classic security dilemma: each side’s defensive moves look offensive to the other. The Reddit comments reflect exactly this polarized view—Greeks calling it denial of reality/provocation, Turks calling it pragmatic self-defense against being squeezed. Solutions would require compromise on demilitarization, territorial waters, and FIR practices, but trust is low and nationalism high on both sides. “””