By Mr. Maverick
A flurry of speculation about the future of the renowned city of Constantinople, now known as Istanbul, has recently swept through the ‘tweetosphere’ like a tornado. Anyone actively using the social media platform ‘X’ is likely already familiar with the direction this article is heading.
Very recently, and frankly right out of the blue, a lot of influential accounts and prominent figures in the international public sphere have been fostering the idea of re-establishing Hellenic control over the once Byzantine capital of Constantinople, now Istanbul (a name deriving from the Greek phrase “εις την Πόλιν – to the City”). Various AI generated images have flooded the internet, depicting Greek soldiers in front of the Greek-Orthodox temple – turned – mosque Hagia Sofia, surrounded by battle ruins with a Greek flag waving atop its dome. An interesting fact is that apart from Western oriented profiles, there are also plenty of pro-Kurdish profiles that promote this idea of a Greek reconquest of Constantinople.
Yes, Constantinople still holds a special place in the hearts of all Greeks. It encapsulates their imperial past and the splendor of the Eastern Roman Empire, of which they are unequivocally heirs. Nevertheless, reclaiming this majestic city remains whatsoever a pious wish, the realization of which resides largely in the realm of imagination rather than reality. It is a notion, a thought that stirs the very depths of the Greek psyche, unwilling or unable to rise to the surface of their being. It is, therefore, somehow alarming to witness the emergence and consolidation of what seems to be merely a wishful thought within the public sphere, especially given the recent turn of events in the broader region.
The question that naturally follows is: What lurks behind all this unexpected fuss? Why now, and, more importantly, why is it being so widely propagated?
Just to clarify, there are countless scenarios that could potentially reveal the truth behind this trending hashtag on ‘X’ and other platforms. I don’t intend to fall victim to a black-and-white fallacy, but for now, there are, grosso modo, three possible explanations for this baffling development:
1st Assumption: Turkey, once a staunch ally of the West and, in particular, the US, has completely gone rogue. In short – or as succinctly as one can explain geopolitical perplexities without oversimplifying – the gap between the Euro-Atlantic area and Turkey has grown so wide in terms of strategic objectives that the ties between the two have suffered irreparable damage. This gap, hitherto seen as bridgeable, is now considered insurmountable in Washington. Under Trump, the new establishment in Washington vows to minimize risk and exposure, limit its long-term liabilities and rely more heavily in reliable and predictable partners. Greece, Cyprus and the Kurds of Syria, are three allies in the same region with Turkey that fit this description perfectly, or at least, considerably better than the latter. Washington (and the rest of the West) fosters this conspicuous trend on a communicative level in an effort to accomplish a twofold goal: uplift the moral of its allies (Greece, Cyprus and Kurds) and invoke in Turkey a sense of insecurity, arresting the downward spiral of its egregious revisionism.
2nd Assumption: Various actors actively involved in Syria and the ongoing turmoil in the Middle East (the US, Israel and the Kurds) are fueling this trend, each with the same goal but with slight variations in their approach. Most prominently, Israel and the Kurds aim to gain an advantage in the Syrian theater by gradually cultivating another ‘flashpoint’ to the West of Turkey, thereby disrupting Turkey’s position in Northern Syria.
3rd Assumption: On the basis of its ‘two and a half wars’ military doctrine, Erdogan’s Turkey is ‘too enamored with its own power’ and entertains the idea of initiating a second military operation following the stalemate in Syria. The entire trend of the Greek reconquest of Constantinople on social media platforms serves as a communicative device which, over time, seeks to provide the legitimization for a “preemptive defensive” military strike against its traditional rival, Greece.
Notwithstanding the infinite possibilities and numerous interpretations, the current trend on ‘X’ undoubtedly captures attention and invites further analysis. Which scenario seems more likely to you? Which one would you rather suggest?
