His satisfaction with the progress that appeared in the immigration debate was expressed after the Summit by Kyriakos Mitsotakiswhile he also spoke in Greek, answering the critics of the government that Greece is stronger and can discuss Turkey civilly. “This does not mean that we have agreed,” he stressed. He asked himself, with emphasis… “where were all these super-patriots when we protected the borders of Greece at Evros?”.

The prime minister reported on the Immigrant:

“The fact that we managed to reach an agreement on the conclusions in the migration chapter is a very positive development and if you allow me a more general observation: Greece has been defending a strict but fair migration policy since 2019, placing great emphasis on the external dimension of migration , in the protection of the external borders of the European Union.

And the problems that Poland is facing today with the instrumentalization of the migration problem by Belarus and Russia, Greece faced them first.

I want to remind in March 2020 that we show full support to a country that is facing similar problems.

However, in these years, Europe’s immigration policy changed and came much closer to the Greek positions and this is now a self-evident conclusion. Which results from the conclusions of the European Council itself.

The external dimension of immigration, the protection of European borders, the Pact on Migration and Asylum are successes of Europe and are positions which are close to the Greek positions.

Europe has made a decision. It is a decision which obviously serves Greek interests as well, that it is not possible for traffickers to determine who will enter the European Union.

And what we are now coming to complete as a next step is to launch a European framework for returns.

Because our argumentation will only be complete if we say that we determine who wants to enter the European Union, but whoever cannot and does not have a place in Europe, because they are not entitled to asylum, must return to the country from which they came.

And this is exactly the purpose of the directive we gave to the European Commission to quickly work out new European legislation around the issues of returns.

So, I think that Europe is slowly but surely moving in the right direction and in a direction that definitely serves the Greek positions as well.”

For returns, note:

“Let’s clarify what Italy does and what it doesn’t do, because obviously every country has its own peculiarities. It is a new, I would say interesting solution. I did not reject it in any case for those cases of immigrants, who are collected in international waters. Greece presumably does not have such issues and whose asylum applications will be processed under Italian law.

In Albania, however, these people will eventually, one way or the other, pass through Italy again – and I must emphasize this – it is a bilateral agreement between Italy and Albania and it is not a decision which in this the level has a European dimension.

What is of value is that in Mrs von der Leyen’s letter on returns there is a phrase that we will also consider innovative solutions and among the innovative solutions that can be considered is this idea of ​​centers outside the European Union, in which will send migrants whose asylum applications will be rejected if they cannot be returned directly to their countries of origin.

This is still an idea. It has not been processed. In principle I find it positive and obviously when we see the specific proposals of the European Commission we will be able to position ourselves”.

Referring to the relevant EU-Turkey agreement on returns that never took place, he emphasized:

“I have emphasized many times that our cooperation with Turkey has improved at the level of refugees and migrants. However, this concerns the operational dimension and better cooperation between the state authorities of Greece and Turkey and above all better cooperation with the Coast Guard.

But you are right to point out that returns to Turkey are not being made and should be made and obviously this is an issue that concerns us. We touch it in Turkey. It’s not just us who are bringing it up and I think it’s an issue we need to stick to.

Greece is making returns, but I want to emphasize that returns are a difficult process overall, not only for Greece, but for the European Union. Statistically, only one in five of them, who have to return to their countries of origin, eventually return.

And that’s why it’s so important that Europe and the European Council come and recognize this problem and basically say, to put it very simply, that if you’re not eligible to enter Europe, you have to go back. And this is the only way we can send a message to traffickers as well. But also to those who know they are not entitled to asylum: That if they come to Europe they have increased chances of returning to the country they came from.

It is an absolutely correct policy. Greece insisted for many years on this dimension, which I emphasize that we are coming to supplement with legal immigration agreements, bilateral, like the ones Greece does, but again the conditions under which an economic immigrant will come are determined by us and not the traffickers.

If you enter the European Union illegally, there must be a way to get back to the country you started from. To put it very simply and very simplistically, this is the meaning of the new effort that we must make as a European Union and which must also legislatively supplement, as you know, the Pact on Migration and Asylum, as this chapter we had left it out of the European discussions”.

In response to a question about Greek-Turkish relations and the reactions of Samara and the opposition, he said:

“Let me make a distinction between the views of Mr. Samaras and the rest of the voices that are heard around these issues. For Mr. Samaras, I will say that his opinions are respected. I want to remind you that he was a former prime minister, he was a man who met with Mr. Erdoğan during the administration of Mr. Samara and with Mr. Venizelos as a minister. There were also exploratory contacts just to remind a little of what was happening at that time.

But now I leave this matter aside. I find that there are many extremely extreme voices in Greece from parties that are to the right of New Democracy and from various mass media, which roughly accuse the government and me, the foreign minister, of being compromisers, why are we doing what? Why are we discussing with Turkey?

I wonder where all those super patriots were when we protected Greece’s borders on the Evros? Where were all these super patriots when we extended territorial waters to 12 miles in the Ionian, when we signed the exclusive economic zone with Egypt, creating sovereign rights by seal, by law where were all these super patriots when we bought Rafale the Rafales ; When we placed the order for the F-35s? I have spoken in the past about “lentil patriots”.

And in any case, today Greece is able to discuss with Turkey civilly, but also in a much stronger position than it was in 2019 and we are discussing it. It doesn’t mean we agree or sell out or betray anyone.

And the country has paid very dearly in its history for this extreme rhetoric, which ultimately does not serve the national interest and certainly does not bring any meaningful alternative to the table.

So Greece – in this I fully support the foreign minister – will continue to talk with Turkey as we have already done.

I have met six times with Mr. Erdogan. This does not mean that we have agreed that we are close to an agreement on the maritime zones, EEZ and continental shelf issues. We still have a long way to go to get to that point.

But I wanted to give this slightly more extended answer to all those who consider themselves more patriotic than we all are. I suspect that in a real crisis they would be the first to “put the tail on the legs”.