site banner
PaperclipPerfector  8hr ago (text post)   91 thread views

Transnational Thursday for May 28, 2026

Transnational Thursday is a thread for people to discuss international news, foreign policy or international relations history. Feel free as well to drop in with coverage of countries you’re interested in, talk about ongoing dynamics like the wars in Israel or Ukraine, or even just whatever you’re reading.

Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Mildly amusing spat between Greece and Turkey:

Convention Regarding the Regime of the Straits (1936-07-20)

Desiring to regulate transit and navigation in the Straits of the Dardanelles, the Sea of Marmora and the Bosphorus comprised under the general term "Straits" in such manner as to safeguard, within the framework of Turkish security and of the security, in the Black Sea, of the riparian States, the principle enshrined in Article 23 of the Treaty of Peace signed at Lausanne on the 24th July, 1923;…

Security Council, 10145th meeting (the safety and protection of waterways in the maritime domain), resumption 2 (2026-04-29)

Mr. Yıldız (Türkiye): Today’s topic is of high priority for Türkiye, being positioned in a region that is essential to global trade and energy routes. Türkiye, as a maritime country, places utmost importance on maritime security, freedom of navigation, open sea lines of communication and the rule of law at sea. Preserving freedom of navigation and ensuring the peaceful use of seas and oceans remain primary objectives of Türkiye.

Türkiye actively participates in joint operations against maritime piracy, armed robbery and terrorism. We see regional cooperation as complementary to multilateral efforts. Türkiye is uniquely positioned at the crossroads of the Black Sea, the Aegean and the Mediterranean—a region that is essential to global trade and energy routes.

The Turkish Straits connect continents and carry a significant portion of global maritime traffic. Türkiye takes every step in ensuring the safe and secure passage of vessels through these waterways. The regime of passage through the Turkish Straits is regulated by the Montreux Convention Regarding the Regime of the Straits, which has established a political and military balance in the Black Sea between littoral and non-littoral countries since 1936. Türkiye will continue to implement the Convention strictly, transparently and impartially, which has been the case for the past 90 years. We continuously invest in advanced traffic monitoring systems, search and rescue capabilities and maritime surveillance to ensure maritime safety and protect all ships and seafarers.

Türkiye believes that ensuring freedom of navigation and maritime security is an international effort requiring constant collaboration among States. However, the current state of conflict in our region and the complexities regarding the Strait of Hormuz have reminded the whole world of the critical importance of freedom of navigation. Türkiye has been making intensive efforts to reach and maintain a ceasefire and to achieve de-escalation through dialogue and diplomacy. The joint initiatives launched by Türkiye, Pakistan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia played a significant role in paving the way for the success of negotiations. Unfortunately, the situation had severe repercussions, including naval safety and maritime security, mostly linked to the blockade in the Strait of Hormuz.…

The President: The representative of Greece has asked for the floor to make a further statement.

Mr. Stamatekos (Greece): Greece would like to make the following point regarding the statement made earlier by the representative of Türkiye. The Montreux Convention of 1936 is the only international legal document regulating navigation through the Straits of Dardanelles, the Sea of Marmara and the Bosphorus and guaranteeing the freedom of navigation through them. Thus, respect for the terminology of the Montreux Convention is aimed at preserving and confirming this freedom enshrined therein. The use of the term “Turkish Straits” is not consistent with the Montreux Convention of 1936 regarding the regime of the Straits. The terminology, in accordance with the Montreux Convention, is the Straits, and namely, Straits of Dardanelles, the Sea of Marmara and the Bosphorus.

Letter from the Permanent Representative of Türkiye to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General and the President of the Security Council (2026-05-08)

First, Türkiye considers the objection raised by Greece to be unfortunate, as it diverted attention from substantive issues under discussion and appeared to aim at serving domestic considerations rather than contributing to the objectives of the meeting.

Second, Türkiye firmly and totally rejects Greece’s unfounded assertions. Attempts to politicize a widely used geographical term do not contribute to constructive dialogue, regional stability or the proper understanding of the 1936 Montreux Convention regime. The term Turkish Straits is a well-established geographical expression referring collectively to İstanbul Strait and Çanakkale Strait, all of which are situated within and under the sovereignty of the Republic of Türkiye. The use of the term has historical, political and legal justification, including respect for long-standing and current general practice, as well as due regard to Türkiye’s sovereign rights and jurisdiction. The term Turkish Straits is descriptive, geographically accurate and fully compatible with the continued application of the Montreux Convention.

Established international practice and principles concerning the standardization of geographical names affirm the precedence of official national forms. Accordingly, where a geographical feature lies entirely within the sovereignty of a State, the official name designated by the competent national authority may naturally be used in official statements. In this regard, the term Turkish Straits has also been conventionally and consistently used in numerous international documents, including resolutions and documents of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).

Third, Greece’s assertion that the use of this term is inconsistent with the 1936 Montreux Convention and the legal regime therein has no basis in the letter and spirit or purpose of the Convention. The Convention establishes the legal regime governing passage through the İstanbul Strait, the Marmara Sea and the Çanakkale Strait. Beyond this purpose, however, the Convention does not aim to standardize geographical names.

The use of the term Turkish Straits is neither relevant nor a challenge to the legal regime established by the Convention. On the contrary, Türkiye has consistently upheld the Convention and will continue to implement it meticulously and impartially, as has been the case for the past 90 years.

Against this background, Greece’s attempt to enforce a terminology other than “Turkish Straits” poses a challenge to Türkiye’s competence to name a place under its sovereignty, which can only be reasoned with historical aspirations. Yet these attempts would change neither the legal nor the political status of the Turkish Straits.

Türkiye will continue to use the term Turkish Straits in accordance with its sovereignty and jurisdiction and expects all Member States, including Greece, to respect this established and legitimate usage.

The minutes for resumption 1 (2026-04-27) and resumption 2 also contain a much less amusing back-and-forth between Japan and China regarding the East China Sea and the South China Sea.

Note: Video recordings of Security Council meetings are available for viewing (resumption 1, resumption 2). When an illustrious diplomatic figure embarrasses himself by speaking multiple paragraphs of barely-intelligible English in front of the highest deliberative body in the world, should we laugh or should we cry? I cannot say.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats