Talk:Greek prime minister reaffirms EastMed pipeline project is open for other countries to join

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Reporter's notes[edit]

I have reported on this a little late, and now it is on the verge of becoming stale. The list of sources is long, but the articles were added one after another, so history (old revisions) can be used to check on them. I will be on IRC if help would be needed with the review. - Xbspiro (talk) 13:47, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Review of revision 4537754 [Not ready][edit]

Newsworthiness[edit]

The article might be restructured in the near future to cover US or Egyptian support for the pipeline:

I will try to address other issues later today. - Xbspiro (talk) 09:10, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Two events happened out of three - the Pompeo trip got postponed because of the Iran issue. Erdogan has referred to the EastMed project during the opening ceremony of TurkStream. - Xbspiro (talk) 06:02, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Refocus attempt[edit]

Notes on the Atlantic Council talk[edit]

I have not found any transcription for the linked Youtube video, so here are a few remarks:

  • @0:00:15: (Atlantic Council president) Fred Kempe: "So, Mr. Prime Minister we have a standing-room-only crowd. They are also out in the lobby; we have got our live streaming also in the lobby."
  • @0:00:50: Fred Kempe: "We are delighted you are starting your Washington agenda here with us before you meet with the IMF and with President Trump at the White House. It is an honor to host you here in our DC quarters, after you have met our international advisory board in September in the sidelines of the UN General Assembly. The Prime Minister joins us this morning as part of the Future Europe Initiative Leadership Series; in the series we welcome key European heads of government, heads of state, ministers to discuss political developments in their home countries and across Europe, challenges facing the transatlantic community and opportunities for deeper engagement."
  • @0:24:50: Mitsotakis: "I should also point out, you mentioned it in your introductory comments, that EastMed Act which was signed into law by President Trump on December 20th is a milestone legislation that very clearly lays out why the Eastern Mediterranean is important for the Unites States, who the partners are and how these partners should be supported given the context of a highly volatile region."
  • @0:31:40: Mitsotakis: "Let me first of all point out, and I made this point also in my remarks during the EastMed ceremony, that we don't seek to exclude anyone from energy cooperation in the Eastern Mediterranean provided they respect international law and play by the rules of the game. So, this is not an agreement that goes against Turkey or any other country. We have a framework of cooperation of countries that think in the same way. Turkey clearly does not think along those lines. And I will be very-very happy if Turkey were to reconsider its overall approach. You mentioned the two agreements with Libya. As far as the agreement regarding the delimitation of maritime zones is concerned it is clearly null and void, but also geographically ridiculous. You just need to look at the map to understand that there is no connection between Turkey and Libya. And of course, the agreement assumes that our islands, including our biggest island Crete, does not have an exclusive economic zone, which goes against everything we know in international law. And it has the additional problem that it has not been ratified by the Libyan House of Representatives. So, it is an agreement that clearly has no legal basis. We don't consider it to produce any legal ramifications vis-à-vis Turkey is concerned. But it is an indication of how Turkey, you know, thinks in terms of the Eastern Mediterranean. We have our differences with Turkey, but at the same time we are very open to keep the lines of communication open. There is a political dialog that is taking place between the secretary-generals of our ministries. It will start again in a couple of days. And as far as our differences regarding the delimitation of maritime zones, which we consider to be our main difference with Turkey in the Aegean and in the Eastern Mediterranean, I have publicly stated that if we cannot sort out our differences we are open to discuss going to the Hague, and having the court decide on our behalf. But in order to reach, you know, this, which I think is a very fair and logical approach to solve our differences assuming that we all believe in international law, but in order to get to that point we need to refrain from any activities that clearly add degrees of escalation and regional tension. So, I think we have been extremely reasonable in terms of addressing the situation. We had also made it very-very clear that we will not accept any infringement upon Greece's sovereign rights within our exclusive economic zone."

A part starting at 0:24:25 might be of interest. - Xbspiro (talk) 23:47, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

New title[edit]

Adding all three recent events might make the title too long, I suggest Cairo Summit denounces Turkish-Libyan agreements, but Greek prime minister reaffirms EastMed project is open to join for Turkey, but don't want to move the page yet. Opinions are welcome. - Xbspiro (talk) 05:37, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

This looks EPIC! I hope it passes. To simplify/narrow the focus on a news EVENT, I'm going to maybe tweak the title and lede paragraph just a stitch. There is a lot going on here.--Bddpaux (talk) 17:45, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
I decided to leave the title alone but did some scattered tweaking. --Bddpaux (talk) 17:53, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Review of revision 4539175 [Not ready][edit]

Review of revision 4539636 [Passed][edit]

Re[edit]

I have tried to implement the inverted pyramid idea here, but the best I could come up with was presenting the main events leading to the signing ceremony in a backwards order, then adding opinions on feasibility, then mentioning a few alternative/competing solutions. Might have been better to streamline the article with cutting info on the signing (which was the original focus of the article). However, cutting the rest would have been hard, as it seemed important for me to say something about the Turkish standpoint and to cast a shadow on the project on feasibility grounds, but then I had explain why and how would they sign up on something which might not be a good idea financially. Then it was already too long to add anything more trivial. I am still getting used to this structure - the articles I usually read follow a causality thread, but not backwards.

Thank you for the review. - Xbspiro (talk) 10:08, 11 January 2020 (UTC)