Analysing Greek-Turkish disaster-related cooperation: A disaster diplomacy perspective

Abstract

This article contributes to the disaster diplomacy literature in examining the conditions under which disasters can lead to long-term disaster-related collaboration (e.g. in disaster response, recovery or risk reduction) at both governmental and non-governmental level among states in conflict. In particular, the article focuses on the role of the 1999 earthquakes in enhancing such collaboration between Greece and Turkey over the past decade. While acknowledging the diversity and complexity of disaster diplomacy situations, the article suggests that disasters can lead to long-term disaster-related cooperation among states in conflict when: (1) one party providing disaster relief to another party is followed by a similar reciprocal gesture (i.e. tit-for-tat diplomacy); (2) there is a realization and acceptance that neighbours should come to each other’s assistance in times of disaster; and (3) there is an enabling broader context (e.g. a rapprochement process) conducive to sustaining the long-term cooperation.

Greece–Turkey disaster diplomacy from disaster risk reduction

“…Examples of subsequent scholarly work include a focus on India and Pakistan [1] [39]; Iran and the USA after the 2003 Bam earthquake [36] [75]; the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunamis affecting conflicts in Sri Lanka and Aceh, Indonesia [15] [19] [45] [48]; and the Philippines [44]. The evidence provided by these authors confirmed the initial findings that 'disasters can catalyse but do not create cooperation among states in conflict' [20]. Apposite critiques of this work explain that it does not fully draw on previous literature while lacking succinct and consistent definitions, demonstrating a wide research agenda to still be tackled especially to improve the theorisation around disaster diplomacy [68] [78].…”

“…Nevertheless, the numerous disaster-related initiatives at difference governance levels illustrate that Greece and Turkey acknowledge that hazards, vulnerabilities, and disasters can be transboundary and hence require cross-border and international efforts regarding coordinated disaster risk reduction and disaster response. The 1999 earthquakes were key in forcing that realisation at both theoretical and operational levels, as shown by the limited interaction that Greece and Turkey had on disaster-related matters prior to the earthquakes [20]. But limited interaction is not the same as no interaction, plus the links extend back several years [52].…”

Responding to Catastrophe

“… 4. In at least one case, a natural disaster increased cooperation between two rival states (Greece and Turkey; Ganapati, Kelman, and Koukis 2010). …”

Bridging international relations and disaster studies: the case of disaster–conflict scholarship

“…Per definition, disaster diplomacy is concerned with relations among states and the impact of disasters on existing international amity and enmity. Yet, disaster diplomacy studies often include domestic‐level issues (Gaillard, Clavé, and Kelman, ; Waizenegger and Hyndman, ) or feature the importance of (non‐executive) trans‐governmental and transnational cooperation between states (Emel Ganapati, Kelman, and Koukis, ). However, the lack of any multi‐level framework, which clarifies different process and their inter‐relations, places limits on the analytical clarity of some of these studies.…”