Russia vs Azerbaijan

Status
Not open for further replies.

s3kiz

New Member
Ok, whatever tatars turks or not from your POV doesnt matter the slightest - the important what tatars in Russia think themselves. They are generally fully integrated in russian society and have nothing in common with turks. 70% do not even speak tatars language.
Soviet regimes ruthless ethnic cleansing of Tatar Turks:
http://www.euronet.nl/users/sota/statshist.html

Tatar Turks trying to keep their identity in Crimea:
http://www.pravda.com.ua/en/news/2007/11/19/9451.htm

We'll if my POV doesnt matter the slightest, what makes you think your POV mattered allowing you to derail this thread from its main point.

But nevertheless I respect your point of view, which is why i answered and provided factual information to who these Tatar Turks were/are and their situation with some links and evidence.

-Its good that they are fully integrated into the Russian society like you say, thats what I would want because they are living under Russian rule in lands which they are aborigines of, although some may want it that still doesnt take away or change their history, heritage, nationality (not in sense of citizenship) and who they are.

-Your claim that Tatar Turks share nothing with Turkiye Turks is explained in my above posts and the links and the few examples there that you can search, the history, traditions, beliefs, stories, ethnicity, "great men" they see in history, folklore, foods, music, arts, way of life etc etc are the same, although politicalls segregated.

-My uncles wife and her family is from Crimea, she is a Tatar Turk, my uncle is a Turkiye Turk. And hundreds and thousands of Tatar Turks escaping the Russian persecution, forced exodus and ethnic cleansing live in Turkiye and other parts of the world just like her.

-You claim 70% dont speak the Turkish language, but I didnt have any trouble what so ever speaking with them when I toured Tataristan, I spoke Turkiye Turkish and they spoke Tatar Turkish, the difference was like that is between American English and a South African English.

-Here in Republic of Turkiye we call the parliment "Millet Meclisi", the Tatar Turks call the parliment of their autonomous lands "Millet Mejlisi".


The historical, scientific and factual evidences proving that your claims are false are immense, no matter how much you think my POV is wrong.

Politics and history are two different things, too bad history is sometimes tried to be manipulated due to political ambitions.

Cheers.

I guess we did enough off-topic discussion here, wouldnt you agree Chrom?
 
Last edited:

eliaslar

New Member
@s3kiz
There is no autonomous tatar Crimean state, have you ever been there? There is an autonomous Crimean Republic, which is part of Ukraine and Crimean Tatars compose only the 12% of it's whole population.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimea

Also if there are Tatars in Greece, their number is so small, even smaller than 0,5% of the whole population.

Maybe your political and historical links are inacurate or have other goals than to inform people in the right way.

I will not make any more comments on this topic about such things because i really believe this conversation must be over and continue on it's strategic path than to become another Greek-Turkish or Russian-Turkish war.
 

s3kiz

New Member
Ok lets go step by step.

No eliaslar.

"Crimea is the homeland for the Crimean Tatars, an ethnic minority who now make up about 13% of the population. The Crimean Tatars were forcibly expelled to Central Asia by Joseph Stalin's government."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimea

True, because of:
Soviet regimes ruthless ethnic cleansing of Tatar Turks:
http://www.euronet.nl/users/sota/statshist.html
Tatar Turks trying to keep their identity in Crimea:
http://www.pravda.com.ua/en/news/2007/11/19/9451.htm

Etc etc, lets wind back in history:

Crimean Turkish Tatar Khanate (State) of 1441-1783:
"A number of Turkic peoples, now collectively known as the Crimean Tatars, have been inhabiting the peninsula since the early Middle Ages.
The Crimean Tatars controlled the steppes that stretched from the Kuban and to the Dniester River, however, they were unable to take control over commercial Genoese towns. After the Crimean Tatars asked for help from the Ottomans, an Ottoman invasion of the Genoese towns led by Gedik Ahmed Pasha in 1475 brought Kaffa and the other trading towns under their control."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimea

Lets come back to our time:

@s3kiz
There is no autonomous tatar Crimean state, have you ever been there?
.
Are you sure?
...and...
Yes, I have.

Crimean Tatar State Parliment of 2008:
"On June 30, 1991, the Mejlis declared its sovereignty over the Crimean Tatars, and adopted the Crimean Tatar's national anthem and the national flag.[2] Also, the Crimean Tatars elected 14 Crimean Tatar Deputies to the Verkhovna Rada of Crimea. These 14 deputies were the first Crimean Tatar representatives in the Crimean Parliament for over 50 years."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mejlis_of_the_Crimean_Tatar_People

Tatar Turks under Russian rule in 2008:
And here is a Russian official site of the Republic of Tataristan within current day borders of Russia, the Tatar Turks are aborigines of the lands they live in, albeit under a foreign rule like the Soviets before and now Russians.
www.tatar.ru

@s3kiz
Also if there are Tatars in Greece, their number is so small, even smaller than 0,5% of the whole population.
.
You are not sure yet "if there are any", however "just in case" there are some "they must be small, becasue if they are big it would be trouble for Greece" and so you give us a number? which is it they dont exist or 0.5% of the population? maybe you just dont know and just trying to save the moment?

Anyway, regarding the Turks i mentioned in Greece, pls re-read my post I was clearly referring to other tribes of Turks not the Tatars while mentioning Greece and some other countries that have aboriginal Turkish populations belonging to various Turkish tribes.

Reading undesirable proofs surfacing about ones self sometimes causes panick and panick can cause cognitive faults. Perhaps this was one such incident, who knows.

There are currently between 300 000 and 500 000 Turks living in Greece, whom the Greek government throws into prison for calling themselves "Turk", they are not even allowed to call themselves "Greek citizens of Turkish ethnicity", the Greek government only recognizes them as "Greek muslims" trying to oppress and slowly ethnically cleanse them.

Sure some will say "hey but what about Kurds in Turkiye", unlike the propaganda made by those who would like to see Turkiye in turmoil, the Kurds do not have a recognition problem in Turkiye, anyone can speak, publish, teach, broadcast in their ethnic language/culture etc, as long as they obey the law and order.

People can and do say "I am from such and such ethnicity", anyone holding Turkiye citizenship has equal rights and there is no segregation or seperate laws according to your ethnicity like there is in Greece, against the ethnic Turks and Macedonians.

We have ministers, generals, foreign ministers, ambassadors even presidents of various ethnicities, Kurdish included, everyone has the right to express their ethnicity.

And this freedom of expression is not limited to laymen. President Turgut Ozal could/did express he was of Kurdish ethnicity while President of Turkiye. NATO ISAF civilian chief from Turkiye Mr Hikmet Cetin can express he is a citizen of Turkiye with Kurdish ethnicity, 20%+ members of the Republic of Turkiye parliment can/do express they are ethnically Kurdish and still feel passionate as been a citizen of Republic of Turkiye and serving it.

Turkiye has more freedom than what some people who want it in turmoil make it out to be, supporting false propaganda and even terror organizations like PKK, whose ringleader was caught in a Greek Embassy with a Greek Cypriot passport issued to him, on him.

An EU country, harbouring and fostering a terrorist and supporting his terror organization as recognized by EU, USA and U.N.

But Turks dont have the same freedom in Greece, you want proof?:
"Ethnic Turks have resided in Thrace since at least the fourteenth century (this date is for muslim Turks, its actually centuries earlier than that if we are to consider the pre-Islamic migration of Turks namely the Hun Turks).....In 1923, under the Treaty of Lausanne, the Turkish minority of Thrace was granted a wide array of rights to ensure protection of their religion, language, culture, and equality before the law. In addition, as Greek citizens, ethnic Turks also enjoy the protection of Greek law, as well as of the European Convention of Human Rights. Despite such protections, however, ethnic Turks suffer a host of human rights violations.
Greece’s attitude toward the ethnic Turkish minority is nowhere more evident then in its continued official denial of the Turkish identity of the community. Greece only accepts the existence of a “Muslim” minority in Thrace and aggressively prosecutes and bans organizations and individuals who seek to call themselves “Turkish.”
A number of discriminatory measures have been enacted either to force ethnic Turks to migrate to Turkey or to disrupt community life and weaken its cultural basis. The most egregious example was Article 19 of the Citizenship Law, which, until it was abolished in 1998, allowed the state to revoke the citizenship of non-ethnic Greeks unilaterally and arbitrarily. Between 1955 and 1998, approximately 60,000 lost their citizenship under the article. As a result of Article 19 and other discriminatory measures, the ethnic Turkish minority today numbers approximately 80-120,000.2 In 1951, forty-seven years ago, the official census reported 112,665. Given an annual 2 percent growth rate, not high for a poorly-educated and rural community, the Turkish minority, using 1951 as a base, would have been expected to number closer to 300,000 today."

http://www.hrw.org/reports/1999/greece/
http://www.hrw.org/reports/pdfs/g/greece/greece908.pdf
http://www.hrw.org/reports/pdfs/g/greece/greece924.pdf

@s3kiz
Maybe your political and historical links are inacurate or have other goals than to inform people in the right way.
Right! Evidence speaks for its self.
Ever wonder maybe that maybe what you are programmed to think may be incorrect or biased?
And perhaps that you are (both in person and country:Greece) are doing what you are accusing me of?
Objective analysis of this thread & history can answer that very well.

@s3kiz
...this conversation must be over and continue on it's strategic path than to become another Greek-Turkish or Russian-Turkish war.
Thats what I have been saying all along.
But Chrom made misinformed claims about a whole nation, almost to the extent to resemble Soviet regimes' ethnic cleansing politics of the various Turkish tribes.
I merely presented proofs.
And you came along not liking the proofs.
But truth isnt about liking or disliking.
Its there, even if you close your eyes or deny it.

@s3kiz
...I will not make any more comments on this topic...
I think thats a wise decision.

For a better world.

Cheers.
 

s3kiz

New Member
Anyway, my new signature tells it all, just "google" each of the names there if you are interested in history and are justfull in your reasoning.

Sometimes what we get to know as history is merely "his-story".

But thruth has a tendency to resurface.

PS: This thread went way-off topic, but nevertheless im sure it will be a good source of brain gymnastics for some and new knowledge for others.

Cheers.
 

Atilla [TR]

New Member
Okay way off topic (not necessary because we are discussing how the Turkish population in Russia may counter a attack on Azerbaijan and me and S3kiz where trying to help defend the rights of the Tatars to still call them selves Turks) also do release that not only do Turks live in Russia and Azerbaijan they also live in from Turkey all the way to Mongolia and there are several Turkic nations that would defend Azerbaijan. Plus Turkey can rally more support from Nato (who seems mad at Medvedev for what he said about Georgia and Ukraine going into Nato).
 

s3kiz

New Member
Atilla you mentioned Georgia, who are not just sharing a border with Turkiye, but would share the same feelings with Turkiye if Azerbaijan was to be invaded by Russian brute.

There is a close coorperation between Turkiye and Georgia (and Azerbaijan), with many Georgian officers training at Turkish defence academies, and multitude of excersis/trainings between the two country on all levels, police-military. Not mentioning the cultural, political & economic ties.

Lets not forget the Baku(Azerbaijan)-Tiblisi(Georgia)-Ceyhan(Turkiye) pipeline.

Russia is very much unwanted in the caucauses, only supported by Armenia which is isolated due to its agressive and offensive stance on its neighbours, including attempts to sieze neighbours lands via brutal cleansing when it can, and when it cant officially showing chunks of lands belonging to and in the borders of Turkiye, Georgia and Azerbaijan in her official Armenian maps and worded as hers by leaders of various levels with the support of Armenian diaspora internationally for global propaganda.

An expantionast ultra-nationalistic nation, willing to be agressive when they have the chance.

In a geography like the causcusus, perfect Russian bate, hence the Russian-Armenian packt.

Nevertheless, the world has changed alot, old Russian bear does not have the free will as it once did, to rummage the forest like it wanted.

There is too much obstacles, not only to deter it, but even stop it if needed be.

I find Russia is over exaggerated sometimes, and believe that she will be contained in her current borders, and even perhaps shrink a bit more considering the multitude of aboriginal Turkish populations in it that belong in the Turkistan geography but currently under Russian rule, as i highlighted in the thread named "Balance of Power":

http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7459

Cheers.
 

s3kiz

New Member
Basically, Turkiye with USA are trying to sustain and further develop the current situation in the caucauses and central asia, supporting the democracy, economy, education and peace of the (relatively) new independent Turkish states there, including Azerbaijan.

But Russia is forming a block with Armenia, Greece and Serbia, as Russia to them are the "Orthodox big-brother" and their counter measure against their sworn-enemy Turks (I dont see anyone as an enemy my self).

So this "Orthodox-brotherhood" and the "enemy-of-my-enemy-is-my-best-friend" mentality resulting into a Russian-Greek-Armenian-Serbian cooperation has/does/and could provide some problems in the future to non-Orthodox Christian and Muslim people of the region and the world in general.

If such a Russian-Greek-Armenian-Serbian orthodoxy axis gets hyper-excited, not just the caucasus but whole of humanity will be walking on thin ice.

Cheers.
 

Atilla [TR]

New Member
LOL yeah Georgians are having lots of problems with Russians also complicated by the De Facto state of Ahbahzia where the U.N put Russian soldiers :confused: I was shocked. So Georgia would fall very fast but they have strong backing from the U.S so the U.S would end up backing Azerbaijan and Georgia and no matter what you say U.S has a upper hand vs Russia. Also there are Turkish people in Georgia (DO not fight this with me I am a Turkish, but my family came from Georgia from Kazakhstan, I still have family there), Also everyone knows that when you invade a neighbor to get to another nation the nation you invaded might use Gurilla Tactics (Hit and run) to dry up your supply lines to the front line. Not to mention the part of Russia that is next to the black sea get there overseas goods through the Istanbul Bosporus and with this line cut that might slightly dry out the supplies.
 

eliaslar

New Member
I don't think there will be a war between Russia and Azerbaijan.

If there was a war to happen in this region, it would happen because of Azerbaijan's gas resources, but if Russia would attack Azerbaijan then it would ruin everything about it's strategy to deliver in Europe the Gas needed for her energy supply.

In the south part of Europe there are two main rival planned pipelines
1) the Nabucco pipeline, which will deliver Azeri, among other countries, gas to Europe through Turkey to Europe and which is backed from the US.

2) the South stream pipeling, which will deliver Russian gas and gas from central Asia to Europe, through European countries, leaving Ukraine and Turkey outside of the energy transfer game and which is obviously backed from Russia.

Also in the region there is another smaller pipeline, but very significant, the Burgas-Alexandroupoli pipeline, which will transfer Russian and Caspian oil to Europe, bypassing the Bosporus, making the transfer really fast and without making the ships pay a fare to Turkey for the passing through the straits.

At this point the South stream has gained an advantage on Nabucco. This happened after Bulgary, Hungary and Austria decided to join the South stream pipeline, leaving their initial intention for the Nabucco pipeline. So the countries that the South stream will pass from are Greece, Italy, Serbia, Bulgary, Hungary and Austria.
Also another blow to the Nabucco pipeline was from French energy company Gaz de France, which decided to back up the South stream pipeline, instead of Nabucco.

This all makes me think that the possibility for a Russian attack on Azerbaijan is very small, but on the contrary i think that Azerbaijan will come closer to Russia because of the need to transfer it's gas through Russian pipelines to Europe.

This Oil/Gas transfer game will have a significant and strategical effect on Russian influence in the Balkans and generally in Europe, thus strengthening ties between the contributing countries and making Balkans not such a fragile region of the world.

The energy game is not over yet, all the most recent news show that South stream has beatten Nabucco, leaving Ukraine and Turkey out of the energy transfer game at this point, but especially for Turkey things might change because there are still oil pipelines that pass through her.

The final outcome is uknown, there are still very important energy reserves in various countries of this region especially in the Autonomous Kurdistan Region in North Iraq, which will make things pretty interesting in the years to come, about it's exploitation.

The sources used are:
http://www.messenger.com.ge/issues/1561_march_7_2008/1561_econ_one.html
http://www.jamestown.org/edm/article.php?article_id=2372856
http://acturca.wordpress.com/2007/0...eatens-turkeys-role-in-gas-transit-to-europe/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burgas-Alexandroupoli_pipeline
http://www.ameinfo.com/95595.html
 

s3kiz

New Member
"The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline (sometimes abbreviated as BTC pipeline) is a crude oil pipeline that covers 1,768 kilometres (1,099 mi) from the Azeri-Chirag-Guneshli oil field in the Caspian Sea to the Mediterranean Sea. It connects Baku, the capital of Azerbaijan; Tbilisi, the capital of Georgia; and Ceyhan, a port on the south-eastern Mediterranean coast of Turkey, hence its name.

It is the second longest oil pipeline in the world after the Druzhba pipeline. The first oil that was pumped from the Baku end of the pipeline on May 10, 2005 reached Ceyhan on May 28, 2006.

The Caspian Sea lies above one of the world's largest groups of oil and gas fields. As the Caspian Sea is landlocked, the transportation of oil to Western markets is complicated. During Soviet times, all transportation routes from the Caspian region were built through Russia.

The collapse of the Soviet Union started a search for new routes. Russia first insisted that the new pipeline should pass through Russian territory, then declined to participate. A pipeline across Iran from the Caspian Sea to the Persian Gulf would have provided the shortest route, but Iran was considered an undesirable partner for a number of reasons: its theocratic government, concerns about its nuclear program, and United States sanctions that greatly restrict Western investment (especially by American companies) in the country. The United States government opposed any route that would pass through Iran.

At the time, Turkey called for energy transit through Turkey, insisting that this would be the safest and most economic route for export. In the spring of 1992, the Turkish Prime Minister Suleyman Demirel made this proposal to Central Asian countries and Azerbaijan. The first document on the construction of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline was signed between Azerbaijan and Turkey on 9 March 1993 in Ankara.

The South Caucasus, previously seen as Russia's backyard, is now a region of great strategic significance to other great powers. The U.S. and other Western nations have consequently become much more closely involved in the affairs of the three nations through which oil will flow.

The countries themselves though have been trying to use the involvement as a counterbalance to Russian and Iranian economic and military dominance in the region. It is seen similarly by Russian specialists claiming that the pipeline is aimed to weaken the Russian influence in Caucasus. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan_pipeline

It is because of the above reasons, that Russia is been supported by Greece and Serbia for the "South Stream Pipeline". The USA-UK-Turkiye-Azerbaijan-Georgia alliance is targetted by an opposing axis involving Russia-Greece-Serbia-Armenia alliance like i mentioned in my previous posts.

This "Russian front" been strategically supported by Greece, Serbia and Armenia is aiming to weaken USA-UK-Turkish power balance in the Balkans and the Caucasus, and strengthen the Russians on all fields, as both Greece, Serbia and Armenia see Russia as an "orthodox-big-brother", their "member-of-family" and their counter against USA-UK-Turkish presence in these regions and their gaurantee for their possible military conlicts in the region.

This is an interesting picture considering Greece is a member of Nato, however aligning her self with Russia to support Russian involvement in the Balkans and Caucasus to counter even USA when it sees it necessary. Alliances are changing and will become more evident in time.

It seems the USA-UK alliance is already aware of this importance and are actively positioning themselves close with the Turkistan geography and its people. A parallel discussion went on the thread entitled "Balance of Power" where I touched on the global power rivalries and how this geography will play a pivotal role in such developments in the future, here: http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7459

Just as a final note, other Turkistan countries; Kazakistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan are joining up on the BTC pipeline, expanding an energy route from the heartlands of Turkistan all the way to the Meditteranean and into Europe, further cementing the independence of the Turkistani countries, away from a Russian dominance.

A modern day Silk-Road if you will, thats what the BTC is connecting Turkistan energy resources with the West, reducing Russian-Iranian monopoly, opposed by the Russia-Greek-Serbia-Armenia alliance.

Anyway the current share-holders in BTC are:
BP (United Kingdom): 30.1%
State Oil Company of Azerbaijan (SOCAR) (Azerbaijan): 25.00%
Chevron (USA): 8.90%
StatoilHydro (Norway): 8.71%
Türkiye Petrolleri Anonim Ortaklığı (TPAO) (Turkey): 6.53%
Eni/Agip (Italy): 5.00%
Total (France): 5.0%
Itochu (Japan): 3.4%
Inpex (Japan): 2.50%
ConocoPhillips (USA): 2.50%
Hess Corporation (USA) 2.36%

The world needs to prevent Russia from having a monopoly on natural resources, and BTC is the right answer for that.

Cheers.


Souce:
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2002/12423.htm
http://jamestown.org/edm/article.php?article_id=2369812
http://bridge.aznet.org/bridge/files/BTCpipespolitik.htm
http://www.hydrocarbons-technology.com/projects/bp/
http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=9006669&contentId=7015093
 

s3kiz

New Member
The Cold-War, unlike common belief…........is not over.

Now having said that, before I continue on sharing my thoughts, let me explain that initially it will seem like I will transgress the scope of this thread with what I continue to write, which is about the possibilities of a Russian agression towards Azerbaijan, but I hope that I will do justice to explain how what I write is in fact in relation to this matter.

Continuing on with my thought, Cold-War is not over. Quite the contrary Cold-War has transformed itself into what I personally label as the Complex-Cold-War, thats why I divide this long lasting rivalry between USA and Russia into two segments, the (simplified) Classical-Cold-War which we had witnessed nearly all of this passed century and the (multi-faceted) Complex-Cold-War that we will face in the coming decades and perhaps close into next century.

The disintegration of USSR and the loss of Russian direct influence on East Europe and Turkistan (Central Asia) has resulted into the evolution of this coming Complex-Cold-War that we are gradually seeing and will see more of as its multiple-facets will bring complicated frictions in this rivalry.

The Classical-Cold-War was a simple rivalry, between two opposing polarities, the USA (Nato) and USSR (Warsaw Packt), its ending is merely a tactical victory for the USA and her allies but the war it self is not over, instead continuing on a multi-faceted, complicated manner.

The Complex-Cold-War is not so simplified and easier to recognize as the Classical-Cold-War.

Firstly the reasons for this is that what may seem “white” will infact be black and what may seem “black” will in fact be white. In other words our settled understanding about various countries’ affiliations and alliances and thus their interests will be criss-crossing into a matrix like interest grid. Also, the Complex-Cold-War will be more covert than its previously simplified bi-polar classical version.

Above all this no matter how long the uni-polarity of USA global power balance is to continue the world is heading towards a multi-polarity, with a European entity developing and drifting away from USA to rival it and on the other spectrum the rising of China, further adding to the complexities of the evolved Complex-Cold-War.

Rather than re-write the summary I wrote on post number 6 on the thread titled “Balance of Power” at: http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7459 I recommend a brief read of my thoughts there.

China will rival USA in the coming future, perhaps past around and past mid-century. But what is of great interest is the rivalry Europe will bring.

The Complex-Cold-War is bringing with it new alliances, in contrast and fundamentily different than the alliances we had become accustomed to in the Classical-Cold-War.

Nato I suspect will go through a major change as the sole unity of “Western” alliance. We are already seeing various EU countries that are members of Nato talking about creating a European Military Force, independent of Nato, the aim of this is to draw Europe away from the USA dominance resulting into “independence” in European military and thus international affairs. This venture is head by France and Germany, and supported by various other EU countries like Greece. This Franco-German venture is due to the projected European Empire which is envisaged in the coming decades, as such a European Empires interests are projected to be in conflict with that of USA due to energy resource demands I highlighted in the “Balance of Power” thread I linked above.

It is because of this projected seperation of roads between USA and European Empire drawn by Franco-German architects that USA is trying to further bolster Nato and also establish her self in various European countries with military bases (including missile shield efforts etc albeit it been against Russia is also a way for USA presence in Europe) and political presence, and the independence of Kosovo is just a small part of this. We all know that USA is in full support and pressuring EU for Turkiyes accession into the European Union, and that too is part of USA plans to keep its presence in the EU, and prevent/slow the development, drifting and creation of a Franco-German led European Empire, because Turkiye been a close ally of USA is been aimed to be utilized like a Trojan horse in EU by USA. Another such example can be the extreme close alliance between USA and UK, we all know UK’s concept of EU is very different to that of the Franco-German envisaged European Empire, and the USA-UK alliance is beyond the spectrums of EU. These are all small proofs of how European Empire will be a rival of and in conflict over interests with USA in the the projected future.

While this is going on, we are seeing Russia with a loss of influence it once had due to Soviet empire, trying to undermine the USA efforts. While trying to increase her dominance in the world independently, we are seeing Russia attempt and draw closer relations with EU, once again to reduce USA dominance and form a projected Russia-European Empire alliance in the future. Due to Cold-War psychology most European populace are not so warm on this, but some are gradually accepting this scenario, even on state level with increase in coorperation between them. While some European countries are distant from such a coming together, others including EU and non-EU countries are welcoming a European-Russian block that will be ultimately against USA, with open arms like Greece, Serbia and Armenia.

The “South Stream Pipeline” bypassing USA allies Turkiye and Ukraine, and delivering Russian gas and oil to Europe, like user eliaslar mentioned in his above post is part of the projects of our days for this planned Russian-European Empire alliance of future. Another simple example can be seen in the procurement of military products, or the change of such products. Previously reliant on USA defence industry we are seeing Greece gradually moving towards completely fitting out her armed forces with now European products and perhaps in time with Russian products, drifting away from USA reliance. Another simple example to this alliance can be seen in the avatar DefenceTalk forum user named “Kosovo=Serbia” uses, with Serbian and Greek flags hand to hand in front of the Russian flag that makes the background.

These are all just simple examples of reflection of the transition EU is going through, towards the creation of a European Empire, with some/parts of it gradually forming an alliance with Russia (and Armenia been part of this gathering), perhaps in time resulting into a Russian (including Armenia)-European Empire block against USA in many conflicting interests.

I highly suspect that future decades will bring a multi-polar world with USA, European Empire-Russia and China contending for partial-whole world domination with rivalries in interest, and the conflicting matter that will cause major frictions between these three polarities will likely be energy resources.

Like I highlighted in the above linked “Balance of Power” thread, the origins and transition paths of the majority of world energy resources are located in and around the vicinity of Anatolia and Turkistan, populated by Turkish peoples, namely by such countries as Turkiye, Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan, Kirgizistan, Kazakistan and Turkmenistan.

The Turkish people living in these countries are gradually realizing the geostrategical importance of their homelands and are steadily forming a unison between them, just recently announcing the Turkish Union Parlimant, composed off all these mentioned independent countries, with selected ministers from each country representing their individual countries, to gradually create a singular body in politics, economy, education, international affairs and defence much like what EU was/is.

And it is on this point that the coming rivalry which will be part of the Complex-Cold-War between USA, European Empire and China will be differentiated by. All the Turkish countries have close political and military ties with USA, with Turkiye been one of the founding members of Nato back in the 50s.

However I think it is an intricate path that awaits us all, with the ending of Classic-Cold-War, the tactical gains of USA over Russia caused a euphoria in the American populace and thus reflecting in her domestic politics. With the engineered inhumane tradegies we witnessed on 9/11 and also in other USA allies namely UK, Turkiye and Spain (another EU country with different views to Europe against the Franco-German European Empire plans), the American populace was as I personally see “steered” into a mindframe serving the New World Order patrons, resulting into a more agressive USA foreign military ventures further sabotaging her rightfull global dominance and image.

I personally believe and have proven to my self that instead of planning and taking steps to further the USA global power upper and her peoples prosperous lives, the NWO via the neo-con governance has and is drifting USA away from its ability to make use of her advantages that she has and could have. Neo-con NWO is displacing USA’s global-dominance out of context, and into the hands of the patrons that are and plan to make organization/personal gains, damaging the USA as whole and her future power capabilities.

The populace of USA need to realize the coming rivalry/threat of the European Empire-Russia and China, and apply her force more delicately and intricately in the world, further developing the alliance with the upcoming Turkish Union, not been kept busy “artificial enemies” like the engineered “islamoterrorizm” and not fall for the NWO ambitions no matter how patriotic and “pro-American” they may seem at face value.

Like I said at the start, “black” sometimes can be made to look “white” and vice-versa.

Without wanting to sound arrogant, as I have experienced/witnessed/suffered/lived in the 12 000 years of documented Turkish history, that with sureness and ease visiual/cognitive deceptions are easy to create and hard to distinguish and solve, but it is the responsibility of all of us humans to do so, because many times in history countries have warred, humanity have suffered and empires have come to an end because of such deceptions.

If you managed to read to here, thank you, if I bored you, I’m sorry, if I managed to open a window in your thinking, I'm glad, that was the aim.

Now, did somebody ask “will Russia invade Azerbaijan, and what will its consequences be?”.

For a better world.

Cheers.
 
Last edited:

s3kiz

New Member
For those who have not read this thread from the beginning i suggest that you do to get the bigger picture. For those who have read this from the beginning will recall eliaslars comment in post #22:

“Maybe your political and historical links are inacurate or have other goals than to inform people in the right way.”

Referring to my statements and the various links and proofs I had put forward regarding the Tatar Turks and other Turkish tribes’ situation in Russia and also Greece.

Well we have a new occurance that have happened on the 27th of March 2008. As I had said that since the creation of the Greek state, the ethnic Turks a part of and under Greek rule were not allowed their ethnic recognition, continually denied their rights to self expression and prosecuted by the Greek governement for using the name “Turk” on an individual and organizational basis (amoung other violations of human rights), which are detailed in the various links in my previous posts here.

Anyway on 27 march 2008 the European Court of Human Rights has heard one of the complaints of the Turkish community in Greece and has found and prosecuted Greece guilty of human rights violations against her Turkish minority which she rejected to recognize.
The details of this matter can be found at:

http://www.echr.coe.int/echr/
http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/v...t=34144/05&sessionid=6552169&skin=hudoc-pr-fr

Another proof on top of the many proofs I provided in my previous links to show that I’m not providing “inacurate links or have other goals than to inform people in the right way” like eliaslar had suggested in his post # 22.

Anyway, considering the Turkish minority in Greece are slowly freeing themselves of the Greek state persecution and human right violations, maybe we will see the ethnic Macedonians in Greece gain their rights and recognition in time too.

According to the organization Human Rights Watch the ethnic Macedonians in Greece are no better off than the ethnic Turks there, not been recognized and persecuted since the creation of Greek state. The Greek state stance against its Macedonian minority is continued on the international arena with their attitude towards the Republic of Macedonia:

http://www.hrw.org/doc?t=europe&c=greece&document_limit=20,20
http://www.hrw.org/reports/pdfs/g/greece/greece945.pdf

Now one might ask how all this ties with the threads topic, simple;

1) it was brought up by other commenters who did not recognize Tatar Turks (amoung other Turkish tribes).

2) and more importantly because all these facts go hand in hand with whether Russia can invade Azerbaijan or not, as this is highly dependent on the power-balance games in the caucasus and the balkans including the minorities and the development of Turkish-USA-UK alliance rivalled by the Russian-Greek-Serb-Armenia alliance that we have seen in history and will see more of in the coming future.

Anyway, I highy recommend those interested with the power balances of caucasus (and the balkans) and future Russian and world power games/balances to thoroughly read this thread (and accompaniying links) from the beginning.

Cheers.
 

eliaslar

New Member
Everything you write my friend s3kiz is very interesting even very provocative. I don't have the intention to start another war here, but some things must be put in order. I don't want to blame you but you may don't know some things, of course a man cannot know everything, personally i always try to learn new things and open my spiritual horizons and you help me in this direction.
The links i will refere to will be mostly from the wikipedia because i think it's a really reliable source from all sides.

About the muslim minority in Thrace, indeed there is such a minority which is comprised by muslims of various ethnic groups and which numbers about 97,604 people or 0.95% of the total population.
If someone makes a little search he will find that there were muslim members of the Greek parliament in the recent years, that means that this "minority" had legal rights and many more rights also there are 235 minority primary schools and two Islamic theological seminaries also 0.5% of places in Greek higher education institutions are reserved for members of the minority, so it isn't so much depressed, unless depression for you means that the Greek Prime Minister isn't muslim :)
Maybe this will help
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_minority_of_Greece

Also with a little google search about Human Rights in Turkey and in Greece, someone will see the differences and the violations, i wouldn't like to refere to the Kurdish minority in Turkey and the genocides of Armenians and Greeks in Turkey, such info can easily be found in google.
http://www.hrw.org
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_Genocide
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontic_Greek_Genocide

About Human Rights and how Turkey behaved to the Greek minority in Istanbul maybe i should refere to the Istanbul Pogrom in 1955.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Istanbul_Pogrom

I think that some days ago, Turkish police attacked Kurdish people who were celebrating the Newroz, 2 people were killed in this attack. Very interesting i didn't know that people in Turkey don't have the right to celebrate their customs and religions. Or shall i refere to the attack with 3 dead in a christian publishing house?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7310503.stm
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/04/18/europe/EU-GEN-Turkey-Bible-Attack.php

At least in Greece we have the right to speak freely and not fear with our lives, maybe i have to remind you the writter Hrant Dink who was murdered outside his office.
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2008/01/18/turkey17817.htm
Or shall i refere to Orhan Pamuk, who left Turkey because he spoke about the Armenian genocide?

Maybe it's the political system between our countries that don't let us cooperate and make something really great for this part of the world, Greece has a stable Democracy after the WW2 with a black stain of the junta (1967-1974) and in Turkey the army has intervened a bit more even in most recent years, very democratic right?
Also as i can read in articles the Governing party in Turkey is to be banned and the Prime minister to lose his political rights.
http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,2462367,00.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7298291.stm

Even youtube is banned twice in Turkey
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article1483840.ece
http://www.p2pnet.net/story/15282

About the macedonian minority as you mention it, of course there is no macedonian minority in Greece, unless you mention the Macedonians who are named after the name of the Northern Greece Periphery. But they are Greeks and of course they speak the Greek language as also Alexander the Great spoke and the ancient Macedonians before him spoke. A little walk in the Vergina museum or in every single archaelogical site in Macedonia and generally in Northern Greece will help you understand many things.
Maybe i should also remind you that in Ancient Greece in the Olympic games, there could take part only Greek people. It's very interesting that the Ancient Macedonians took part in those games and also King Philip II who happened to be the father of Alexander the Great won 3 times in the Olympic games.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Macedonians
http://www.antibaro.gr/national/marths_olumpiakoi.php
Here also is a litte list of inscriptions from Ancient Macedonia which happens to be in Greek.
http://www.cc.ece.ntua.gr/~conster/English/PageData/list_of_inscriptions.htm

Maybe the future will show all of us who is right and who is wrong because historical evidence hasn't shown it to all of us yet or some of us don't want to understand it yet.

I am sorry for being so much off topic and i am more even sorry if i am provocative or insulting for someone.

I trully would like this to end here and this topic go back in it's normal route. There is no point in arguing about who is better or who is right, i hope you agree with that.
 

s3kiz

New Member
Dear eliaslar:

1)You talk about a “pontian-Greek” genocide by Turks, but when you read objectively the link (wiki) you give as evidence, you find out that it was a population exchange between Greece and Turkiye, you deported majority of Turks from Greece, and we did the same with Greeks in Turkiye. If that’s genocide you are equally responsible for it. So easy to raise a finger and point at someone "guilty" without looking into the mirror.

“In 1923, a population exchange between Greece and Turkey resulted in a near-complete elimination of the Greek ethnic presence in Anatolia and a similar elimination of the Turkish ethnic presence in much of Greece.”
“The 1923 population exchange between Greece and Turkey is the first large scale population exchange, or agreed mutual expulsion in the 20th century. It involved some two million people, most forcibly made refugees and de jure denaturalized from homelands of centuries or millennia, in a treaty promoted and overseen by the international community as part of the Treaty of Lausanne. The document about the population exchange was signed at Lausanne, Switzerland in 1923, between the governments of Greece and Turkey. The exchange took place between Turkish citizens of the Greek Orthodox religion established in Turkish territory, and of Greek citizens of the Muslim religion established in Greek territory.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_exchange_between_Greece_and_Turkey

2) You talk about the tradgic murders of Turkish-Armenian journalist Mr. Hrant Dink and the 3 Christian missionaries like its an everyday event. Many in the “west” dont know that Mr. Hrant Dink was a strong advocate of Turkiye-Armenia peace, always calling upon both countries to build a friendlier relations, this was something the Armenian diaspora (hanchacks and dashnacks) did not like very much, the Armenian diaspora uses and is fuelled by hate and anything and everything anti-Turkish which is a lucrative economy for them also, so the ideas put forward by Mr. Hrant Dink werent welcomed by them.

Sure a Turk (-citizen) pulled the trigger, but Armenian secret services are behind his murder, the 17 year old kid that was caught on tape and charged is named O. Samast, the word making up his surname does not have Turkish language rules to it, it is non Turkish word, i suspect that its an abbreviation of Samast-ian “-ian” is the equilavent of John-son (english), Ahmet-oglu (turkish) etc. He was just used.

No one in Turkiye cheered the murder of Mr. Dink, everyone protested including patriots like me because we know it, including the 3 Christian missionary murders are work of foreign services, giving them a chance to do international propaganda “Turks kill Christians-Armenian” etc etc like you are doing now eliaslar. Would the murder of an ethnic minority in Turkiye serve me a Turkish patriot? no, will it serve Greece and Armenia? yes.
www.tallarmeniantale.com

3) It seems no matter how much evidence I bring forward you seem to follow your Greek state policy to ethnically cleanse the Turkish minority in your country even in 2008. Against all the evidence I provided, even the 27 march 2008 ruling of European Court of Human Rights pointing out Greek persucution and violation of human rights of its Turkish minority, by holding on to a wiki-link that has the title “Muslim minority in Greece” you come to assumptions that you have the right to deny the presence of Turkish minority in Greece, however if you cared to read the the same wiki article it talks of this “muslim minority” been Turkish and the Greek objections to recognize them as that, you seem to miss that part, selectively showing what suits you:

“Another controversial issue was Article 19 of the Greek Citizenship Code, which allowed the government to revoke the citizenship of non-ethnic Greeks who left the country. According to official statistics 46,638 Muslims (most of them being of Turkish origin) from Thrace and the Dodecanese islands lost their citizenships from 1955 to 1998, until the law was non-retroactively abolished in 1998.

The final grievance is the Greek government's restrictions on the usage of the terms "Turk" and "Turkish" when describing the minority as a whole. A number of organizations, including the "Turkish Union of Xanthi", have been banned for using those terms in their title.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_minority_of_Greece

Greek human rights abuses over its minorities:
http://www.hrw.org/reports/1999/greece/
http://www.hrw.org/reports/pdfs/g/greece/greece908.pdf
http://www.hrw.org/reports/pdfs/g/greece/greece924.pdf
http://www.echr.coe.int/echr/
http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/vi...in=hudoc-pr-fr

4) You talk about the hard times of democracy in Turkiye yet interpret the military juntas of Greece between 1967-197 as “normal”, just “a black stain” nothing more, dramatizing Turkish un-democratic past events and playing down Greek un-democratic past events.

The Greek military junta of 1967-1974 is more than “a black stain”. It resulted in the Greek invasion of Cyprus island, overthrowing the Cyprus Government co-founded by Turkish and Greek Cypriots there, the Greek junta ethnically cleansed the islands Turks into %3 percent which they used to live in 30% of the island and attempted genocide on the Turks which was one of the reasons why Turkiye interviened as one of the three guarantoor-state of this island states soveregnty when the international community did nothing. All because of the “stable democracy” in Greece that created juntas, invasions of soverign countries and ethnic cleansing of Turks. “A black stain” indeed.
http://www.ataa.org/reference/trnc/genocide_trnc.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_military_junta_of_1967-1974

5) You said that :
“I think that some days ago, Turkish police attacked Kurdish people who were celebrating the Newroz, 2 people were killed in this attack. Very interesting i didn't know that people in Turkey don't have the right to celebrate their customs and religions.”
Yet you forget to realize that Nevruz is actually a celebration of spring by all Turkish people from mongolia to the balkans for 5000 years, persians and kurds celebrate it as well. Its not like “ people dont have the right to celebrate their customs and religions” like you put it, the Nevruz celebration are been used by the internationally recognized seperatist marxist terror organization PKK, whos head was caught by American and Turkish secret agents in the Greek Embassy in Nairobi with a Greek-Cypriot passport on him.

PKK has a handfull of support locally, specifically buying few children and women in protests like this where they chant pro-terror organization slogans, with civilian dressed PKK members vandalising cars/shops and aim for a spectacle. Their aim isnt celebration, but a programmed propaganda and tactics to get a civilian collision. They are trying to get other people who had enough of them including Kurds to attack them so they can start a riot. Yet you cant see that on your side of the Aegean because Turkiye in turmoil is a Greek state/cultural policy.

Instead of trying to make smart claims like “i didn't know that people in Turkey don't have the right to celebrate their customs and religions.” You should search on how your state supports and fosters international terrorist that operate against your Nato ally, causing the deaths of 30 000 babies, children, women, doctors, teachers, civil servants and all. How the leader of PKK was caught by American and Turkish secret service personel in Greek Embassy in Nairobi with a Cypriot Greek passport on him, while he was deemed an international terrorist by UN. How the Greek army officers were in Syria and North of Iraq training PKK terrorist to blow up shopping centers, schools, tourist resorts in Turkiye killing anyone and everyone, whatever age and ethnicity, a considerable number of people killed by PKK are of Kurdish ethnicity.

While we have this going on in Turkiye, people in Greece are been put in prison for calling themselves Turk or opening a civil organization with the name Turk in it.

Interesting isnt it, on one side (Turkiye) we have a country against which you (Greece) support a terror organization, have it try to create civil unrest and call any reasonable effort been made by that country to bring law and order as undemocratic, and on the other hand we have (Greece) that puts people in prisons for calling themselves Turks.

Before you go ahead and start making propaganda that “Turkiye bans Nevruz” etc etc, inform your self of what it is before you try to use it for your political ambitions against Turks.

http://www.turkishpress.com/news.asp?id=221680
http://www.discoverturkey.com/english/kultursanat/h-nevruz-ortaasya.html
http://www.nevruzdc.com/nevruz.html
http://www.nevruz.gen.tr/nevruz.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norouz
http://www.byegm.gov.tr/on-sayfa/nevruz.htm

6) Oppression of Macedonians:
Your obviously strıng denial claims is continued with these your words:
About the macedonian minority as you mention it, of course there is no macedonian minority in Greece

Wrong!

Greeks call the Macedonians under Greek rule as the “Grekomani” that’s is “pretending to be Greek, not Greek
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grkomani

“It should be noted that the Greek claims are a new political development. Just a few years ago the Greeks preferred not to use the name Macedonia at all. The Macedonian news magazine (Skopje, February 15, 1992, pp. 20-2 1) claims that "there were periods in Greece when use of the name 'Macedonia' was avoided with administrative measures.

After the Balkan wars (191213) the area of Macedonia under Greek rule was called ... the 'New territory' while the Ministry in Salonika was called the Ministry of Northern Greece. Whence such zeal to pre-empt the names 'Macedonia' and 'Macedonian' today when so recently they avoided them as the devil avoids church?"

“The name Macedonia was not used until the second century B.C., and it was applied to the country by the Macedonian king, not by a Greek. The term "Macedon' and the expression "land of the Macedons" were used long before that time, though there is debate about the origins of the word "Macedon."

Philologists are not certain of its derivation, though Greeks prefer to think that the word comes from Greek. In any case, neither the ancient Macedonians nor the ancient Greeks thought that the Macedonians were Greek; thus the name the Macedonians used for their land must surely belong to them alone.


http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/MacedonianGreekConflict/shea.html
http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/ConciseMacedonia/timeline.html
http://faq.macedonia.org/history/11.13.html
http://umdiaspora.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=203&Itemid=9
http://www.hrw.org/doc?t=europe&c=gr...nt_limit=20,20
http://www.hrw.org/reports/pdfs/g/greece/greece945.pdf
http://books.google.com/books?ie=UT...ns%22+Poulton&sig=NobKDU7Unvc2AqCZLCn0vSM5VIo
http://www.florina.org/html/2000/2000_discrimination/2000_discrim_docs.html
http://www.florina.org/html/2006/macedonian_language_primer.html
http://www.florina.org/html/2007/2007_greek_irredentism.html
http://www.florina.org/html/2000/2000_minority_language/2000_minority_language.html
http://www.maknews.com/html/articles/begalci/begalci_mhrmc_2003.html
http://www.maknews.com/html/articles/begalci/begalci_mainpage.html

Macedonians trying to get their right back from the Greek government:
http://www.maknews.com/html/articles/begalci/begalci_resolution_2005.html

Greece's Continued Blacklisting of Ethnic Macedonians:
http://www.maknews.com/html/articles/begalci/begalci_mhrmc_2003.html

“Exiles bring Greek guilt home” Scotland on Sunday:
http://www.maknews.com/html/articles/begalci/exiles_bring_greek_guilt_home.html?id=985302003

Macedonians Once Again Denied Democratic Rights by Greece:
http://www.maknews.com/html/articles/begalci/begalci_3_2003.html


As a Turk, no Turk will claim to be as pure as an angel, we are not, no nation, no human is, Greeks are not either. But your personal and national attitude towards history and politics seems like you hold yourselves above everyone else.

It would be a better world if the Greek attitude was to get off the hig-pedestal they see themselves on and see that they too have just as many “dirty sheets” as anyone else, especially just as much as the people they see as the enemy and build a national sense of beign on the hatred they breed against them.

For nearly a century in all around the world we had Greek migrants, getting educated, making money, improving themselves while assimilating into the local countries they live in, been active in the media and politics. I dont have the exact numbers but 11 million population of Greeks within Greece is less than the total Greek migrants outside Greece, if I remeber correctly Australian city Melbourne is home to more Greeks then Greek capital Athens is.

This diaspora of Greece has allowed them to explain the shared events of old and near regarding Turks, Macedonians subjectively, a one way road, Greek road, only presenting their view of history and events generation after generation, they managed to create generations of Greeks that get an “alergy” when they hear the words “Turk” or “Macedon” and also managed to create a scewed perception amoung westerners about Turks and Macedons. This was all because of the uncomparable largeness of Greek migrants in foreign countries compared to Turkish or Macedonian migrants.

Both Turkish and Macedonian migrants have started to occur but only recently in the last 30 years, been between 20-60 years behind Greek migration, who already hold more influential status then Turks and Macedonians combined, and multiple folded, in USA, Australia etc.

All this has resulted in a deep rooted psyche where everything and anything viewed/presented by Greek side is dominant, been the hero, at the same time as been the sufferers, completely innocent and angelic. But the reality couldnt be further from the truth. Its not going to happen, but with time the Greeks and those who got used to listening just their stories will come to realize that there is another version to the stories.

And perhaps one day, eliaslar and likeminded people and the Greek government will come to realize that there is an ethnic Turkish and Macedonian minority in Greece they until that point had rather not see, talk about, or think about, but only oppress and ethnically try to cleance them of their identity.

You said:
"I trully would like this to end here and this topic go back in it's normal route. There is no point in arguing about who is better or who is right, i hope you agree with that."
Yes so do I, but then why do you continue bringing up false arguments, previously you stating there were "no (Tatar) Turks in Greece" which I proved you wrong in the previous posts with facts, which you didnt like resulting in you to post the above writing of your with lots of Greek national propaganda of 3rd rate stuff trying to literally do "who is better", which you are requesting we dont do.

Thats not what I did, I presented facts about questions/false claims that came up by Chrom, you got it all wrong, and jumped in and you seem to be the only contender in the "who is better" race.

And lastly:
I don't have the intention to start another war here, but some things must be put in order. I don't want to blame you but you may don't know some things, of course a man cannot know everything.
-Whos "order"? or you mean by what you "like"? That I can understand, but can not accept, I'm all for reason & justice, not "putting in order", according to who? Not a good approach.

-And I never claimed to "know everything" and never will, but when I state something I make sure im certain of it. You try to do that too.
That way the thing you try "put in order" will be trutfull, just and good for world peace.

Not just pleasuring the "Greek sides' " ego & national politics.

Hoping you will see that too, we hope, for a better world.

Cheers.
 
Last edited:

Atilla [TR]

New Member
Also with a little google search about Human Rights in Turkey and in Greece, someone will see the differences and the violations, i wouldn't like to refere to the Kurdish minority in Turkey and the genocides of Armenians and Greeks in Turkey, such info can easily be found in google.
http://www.hrw.org
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_Genocide
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontic_Greek_Genocide
My family is from this "Pontic" region of Turkey, and I live there right now. I know what happened here better then you who is 1000 km away. Let me tell you this, my family is part Georgian yet all the Georgians in Turkey (all most all live in the "pontic" region) are more nationalistic then a lot of the Turks, Georgians and Turks get a long really well as shown by my family as an example we are a mix why would enemies become one family? Laz (which are distant cousins of Georgians) live in this "pontic" region they are also very nationalistic and Turks and Laz get along really well. You think that if the Greeks and Armenians where nationalistic would they be making those fake allegations? If Turks where doing this ethnic cleansing wouldn't they have killed the Georgian minority in the "pontic" region? My great grandfather went looking for gold around the region I lived they did not find any gold and a only a few bones that where 1 to 3000 years old there are no mass grave sites here like are shown on the pictures of the allegations. Everyone is listening to the Greeks and the Armenians why does not anyone listen to the us Turks? Why is it that the Georgians who are Orthodox Christian have better relations with us Turks (Muslims) then there orthodox neighbors Armenia & Russia? Has anyone cared to think about this?
 

Atilla [TR]

New Member
Everything you write my friend s3kiz is very interesting even very provocative. I don't have the intention to start another war here, but some things must be put in order. I don't want to blame you but you may don't know some things, of course a man cannot know everything, personally i always try to learn new things and open my spiritual horizons and you help me in this direction.
The links i will refere to will be mostly from the wikipedia because i think it's a really reliable source from all sides.

About the muslim minority in Thrace, indeed there is such a minority which is comprised by muslims of various ethnic groups and which numbers about 97,604 people or 0.95% of the total population.
If someone makes a little search he will find that there were muslim members of the Greek parliament in the recent years, that means that this "minority" had legal rights and many more rights also there are 235 minority primary schools and two Islamic theological seminaries also 0.5% of places in Greek higher education institutions are reserved for members of the minority, so it isn't so much depressed, unless depression for you means that the Greek Prime Minister isn't muslim :)
Maybe this will help
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_minority_of_Greece

Also with a little google search about Human Rights in Turkey and in Greece, someone will see the differences and the violations, i wouldn't like to refere to the Kurdish minority in Turkey and the genocides of Armenians and Greeks in Turkey, such info can easily be found in google.
http://www.hrw.org
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_Genocide
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontic_Greek_Genocide

About Human Rights and how Turkey behaved to the Greek minority in Istanbul maybe i should refere to the Istanbul Pogrom in 1955.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Istanbul_Pogrom

I think that some days ago, Turkish police attacked Kurdish people who were celebrating the Newroz, 2 people were killed in this attack. Very interesting i didn't know that people in Turkey don't have the right to celebrate their customs and religions. Or shall i refere to the attack with 3 dead in a christian publishing house?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7310503.stm
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/04/18/europe/EU-GEN-Turkey-Bible-Attack.php

At least in Greece we have the right to speak freely and not fear with our lives, maybe i have to remind you the writter Hrant Dink who was murdered outside his office.
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2008/01/18/turkey17817.htm
Or shall i refere to Orhan Pamuk, who left Turkey because he spoke about the Armenian genocide?

Maybe it's the political system between our countries that don't let us cooperate and make something really great for this part of the world, Greece has a stable Democracy after the WW2 with a black stain of the junta (1967-1974) and in Turkey the army has intervened a bit more even in most recent years, very democratic right?
Also as i can read in articles the Governing party in Turkey is to be banned and the Prime minister to lose his political rights.
http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,2462367,00.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7298291.stm

Even youtube is banned twice in Turkey
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article1483840.ece
http://www.p2pnet.net/story/15282

About the macedonian minority as you mention it, of course there is no macedonian minority in Greece, unless you mention the Macedonians who are named after the name of the Northern Greece Periphery. But they are Greeks and of course they speak the Greek language as also Alexander the Great spoke and the ancient Macedonians before him spoke. A little walk in the Vergina museum or in every single archaelogical site in Macedonia and generally in Northern Greece will help you understand many things.
Maybe i should also remind you that in Ancient Greece in the Olympic games, there could take part only Greek people. It's very interesting that the Ancient Macedonians took part in those games and also King Philip II who happened to be the father of Alexander the Great won 3 times in the Olympic games.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Macedonians
http://www.antibaro.gr/national/marths_olumpiakoi.php
Here also is a litte list of inscriptions from Ancient Macedonia which happens to be in Greek.
http://www.cc.ece.ntua.gr/~conster/English/PageData/list_of_inscriptions.htm

Maybe the future will show all of us who is right and who is wrong because historical evidence hasn't shown it to all of us yet or some of us don't want to understand it yet.

I am sorry for being so much off topic and i am more even sorry if i am provocative or insulting for someone.

I trully would like this to end here and this topic go back in it's normal route. There is no point in arguing about who is better or who is right, i hope you agree with that.
Let me tell you something. I talked to an Azeri man who told me this. "In Turkiye there are armenians and they have there churches and they go there when ever they feel like it. But in Armenia there are muslims and there are no Mosques and Azeri`s do not dare go there because they are scared."
 

s3kiz

New Member
Dear eliaslar:

1)You talk about a “pontian-Greek” genocide by Turks, but when you read objectively the link (wiki) you give as evidence, you find out that it was a population exchange between Greece and Turkiye, you deported majority of Turks from Greece, and we did the same with Greeks in Turkiye. If that’s genocide you are equally responsible for it. So easy to raise a finger and point at someone "guilty" without looking into the mirror.

“In 1923, a population exchange between Greece and Turkey resulted in a near-complete elimination of the Greek ethnic presence in Anatolia and a similar elimination of the Turkish ethnic presence in much of Greece.”
“The 1923 population exchange between Greece and Turkey is the first large scale population exchange, or agreed mutual expulsion in the 20th century. It involved some two million people, most forcibly made refugees and de jure denaturalized from homelands of centuries or millennia, in a treaty promoted and overseen by the international community as part of the Treaty of Lausanne. The document about the population exchange was signed at Lausanne, Switzerland in 1923, between the governments of Greece and Turkey. The exchange took place between Turkish citizens of the Greek Orthodox religion established in Turkish territory, and of Greek citizens of the Muslim religion established in Greek territory.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_exchange_between_Greece_and_Turkey

2) You talk about the tradgic murders of Turkish-Armenian journalist Mr. Hrant Dink and the 3 Christian missionaries like its an everyday event. Many in the “west” dont know that Mr. Hrant Dink was a strong advocate of Turkiye-Armenia peace, always calling upon both countries to build a friendlier relations, this was something the Armenian diaspora (hanchacks and dashnacks) did not like very much, the Armenian diaspora uses and is fuelled by hate and anything and everything anti-Turkish which is a lucrative economy for them also, so the ideas put forward by Mr. Hrant Dink werent welcomed by them.

Sure a Turk (-citizen) pulled the trigger, but Armenian secret services are behind his murder, the 17 year old kid that was caught on tape and charged is named O. Samast, the word making up his surname does not have Turkish language rules to it, it is non Turkish word, i suspect that its an abbreviation of Samast-ian “-ian” is the equilavent of John-son (english), Ahmet-oglu (turkish) etc. He was just used.

No one in Turkiye cheered the murder of Mr. Dink, everyone protested including patriots like me because we know it, including the 3 Christian missionary murders are work of foreign services, giving them a chance to do international propaganda “Turks kill Christians-Armenian” etc etc like you are doing now eliaslar. Would the murder of an ethnic minority in Turkiye serve me a Turkish patriot? no, will it serve Greece and Armenia? yes.
www.tallarmeniantale.com

3) It seems no matter how much evidence I bring forward you seem to follow your Greek state policy to ethnically cleanse the Turkish minority in your country even in 2008. Against all the evidence I provided, even the 27 march 2008 ruling of European Court of Human Rights pointing out Greek persucution and violation of human rights of its Turkish minority, by holding on to a wiki-link that has the title “Muslim minority in Greece” you come to assumptions that you have the right to deny the presence of Turkish minority in Greece, however if you cared to read the the same wiki article it talks of this “muslim minority” been Turkish and the Greek objections to recognize them as that, you seem to miss that part, selectively showing what suits you:

“Another controversial issue was Article 19 of the Greek Citizenship Code, which allowed the government to revoke the citizenship of non-ethnic Greeks who left the country. According to official statistics 46,638 Muslims (most of them being of Turkish origin) from Thrace and the Dodecanese islands lost their citizenships from 1955 to 1998, until the law was non-retroactively abolished in 1998.

The final grievance is the Greek government's restrictions on the usage of the terms "Turk" and "Turkish" when describing the minority as a whole. A number of organizations, including the "Turkish Union of Xanthi", have been banned for using those terms in their title.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_minority_of_Greece

Greek human rights abuses over its minorities:
http://www.hrw.org/reports/1999/greece/
http://www.hrw.org/reports/pdfs/g/greece/greece908.pdf
http://www.hrw.org/reports/pdfs/g/greece/greece924.pdf
http://www.echr.coe.int/echr/
http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/vi...in=hudoc-pr-fr

4) You talk about the hard times of democracy in Turkiye yet interpret the military juntas of Greece between 1967-197 as “normal”, just “a black stain” nothing more, dramatizing Turkish un-democratic past events and playing down Greek un-democratic past events.

The Greek military junta of 1967-1974 is more than “a black stain”. It resulted in the Greek invasion of Cyprus island, overthrowing the Cyprus Government co-founded by Turkish and Greek Cypriots there, the Greek junta ethnically cleansed the islands Turks into %3 percent which they used to live in 30% of the island and attempted genocide on the Turks which was one of the reasons why Turkiye interviened as one of the three guarantoor-state of this island states soveregnty when the international community did nothing. All because of the “stable democracy” in Greece that created juntas, invasions of soverign countries and ethnic cleansing of Turks. “A black stain” indeed.
http://www.ataa.org/reference/trnc/genocide_trnc.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_military_junta_of_1967-1974

5) You said that :
“I think that some days ago, Turkish police attacked Kurdish people who were celebrating the Newroz, 2 people were killed in this attack. Very interesting i didn't know that people in Turkey don't have the right to celebrate their customs and religions.”
Yet you forget to realize that Nevruz is actually a celebration of spring by all Turkish people from mongolia to the balkans for 5000 years, persians and kurds celebrate it as well. Its not like “ people dont have the right to celebrate their customs and religions” like you put it, the Nevruz celebration are been used by the internationally recognized seperatist marxist terror organization PKK, whos head was caught by American and Turkish secret agents in the Greek Embassy in Nairobi with a Greek-Cypriot passport on him.

PKK has a handfull of support locally, specifically buying few children and women in protests like this where they chant pro-terror organization slogans, with civilian dressed PKK members vandalising cars/shops and aim for a spectacle. Their aim isnt celebration, but a programmed propaganda and tactics to get a civilian collision. They are trying to get other people who had enough of them including Kurds to attack them so they can start a riot. Yet you cant see that on your side of the Aegean because Turkiye in turmoil is a Greek state/cultural policy.

Instead of trying to make smart claims like “i didn't know that people in Turkey don't have the right to celebrate their customs and religions.” You should search on how your state supports and fosters international terrorist that operate against your Nato ally, causing the deaths of 30 000 babies, children, women, doctors, teachers, civil servants and all. How the leader of PKK was caught by American and Turkish secret service personel in Greek Embassy in Nairobi with a Cypriot Greek passport on him, while he was deemed an international terrorist by UN. How the Greek army officers were in Syria and North of Iraq training PKK terrorist to blow up shopping centers, schools, tourist resorts in Turkiye killing anyone and everyone, whatever age and ethnicity, a considerable number of people killed by PKK are of Kurdish ethnicity.

While we have this going on in Turkiye, people in Greece are been put in prison for calling themselves Turk or opening a civil organization with the name Turk in it.

Interesting isnt it, on one side (Turkiye) we have a country against which you (Greece) support a terror organization, have it try to create civil unrest and call any reasonable effort been made by that country to bring law and order as undemocratic, and on the other hand we have (Greece) that puts people in prisons for calling themselves Turks.

Before you go ahead and start making propaganda that “Turkiye bans Nevruz” etc etc, inform your self of what it is before you try to use it for your political ambitions against Turks.

http://www.turkishpress.com/news.asp?id=221680
http://www.discoverturkey.com/english/kultursanat/h-nevruz-ortaasya.html
http://www.nevruzdc.com/nevruz.html
http://www.nevruz.gen.tr/nevruz.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norouz
http://www.byegm.gov.tr/on-sayfa/nevruz.htm

6) Oppression of Macedonians:
Your obviously strıng denial claims is continued with these your words:
About the macedonian minority as you mention it, of course there is no macedonian minority in Greece

Wrong!

Greeks call the Macedonians under Greek rule as the “Grekomani” that’s is “pretending to be Greek, not Greek
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grkomani

“It should be noted that the Greek claims are a new political development. Just a few years ago the Greeks preferred not to use the name Macedonia at all. The Macedonian news magazine (Skopje, February 15, 1992, pp. 20-2 1) claims that "there were periods in Greece when use of the name 'Macedonia' was avoided with administrative measures.

After the Balkan wars (191213) the area of Macedonia under Greek rule was called ... the 'New territory' while the Ministry in Salonika was called the Ministry of Northern Greece. Whence such zeal to pre-empt the names 'Macedonia' and 'Macedonian' today when so recently they avoided them as the devil avoids church?"

“The name Macedonia was not used until the second century B.C., and it was applied to the country by the Macedonian king, not by a Greek. The term "Macedon' and the expression "land of the Macedons" were used long before that time, though there is debate about the origins of the word "Macedon."

Philologists are not certain of its derivation, though Greeks prefer to think that the word comes from Greek. In any case, neither the ancient Macedonians nor the ancient Greeks thought that the Macedonians were Greek; thus the name the Macedonians used for their land must surely belong to them alone.


http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/MacedonianGreekConflict/shea.html
http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/ConciseMacedonia/timeline.html
http://faq.macedonia.org/history/11.13.html
http://umdiaspora.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=203&Itemid=9
http://www.hrw.org/doc?t=europe&c=gr...nt_limit=20,20
http://www.hrw.org/reports/pdfs/g/greece/greece945.pdf
http://books.google.com/books?ie=UT...ns%22+Poulton&sig=NobKDU7Unvc2AqCZLCn0vSM5VIo
http://www.florina.org/html/2000/2000_discrimination/2000_discrim_docs.html
http://www.florina.org/html/2006/macedonian_language_primer.html
http://www.florina.org/html/2007/2007_greek_irredentism.html
http://www.florina.org/html/2000/2000_minority_language/2000_minority_language.html
http://www.maknews.com/html/articles/begalci/begalci_mhrmc_2003.html
http://www.maknews.com/html/articles/begalci/begalci_mainpage.html

Macedonians trying to get their right back from the Greek government:
http://www.maknews.com/html/articles/begalci/begalci_resolution_2005.html

Greece's Continued Blacklisting of Ethnic Macedonians:
http://www.maknews.com/html/articles/begalci/begalci_mhrmc_2003.html

“Exiles bring Greek guilt home” Scotland on Sunday:
http://www.maknews.com/html/articles/begalci/exiles_bring_greek_guilt_home.html?id=985302003

Macedonians Once Again Denied Democratic Rights by Greece:
http://www.maknews.com/html/articles/begalci/begalci_3_2003.html


As a Turk, no Turk will claim to be as pure as an angel, we are not, no nation, no human is, Greeks are not either. But your personal and national attitude towards history and politics seems like you hold yourselves above everyone else.

It would be a better world if the Greek attitude was to get off the hig-pedestal they see themselves on and see that they too have just as many “dirty sheets” as anyone else, especially just as much as the people they see as the enemy and build a national sense of beign on the hatred they breed against them.

For nearly a century in all around the world we had Greek migrants, getting educated, making money, improving themselves while assimilating into the local countries they live in, been active in the media and politics. I dont have the exact numbers but 11 million population of Greeks within Greece is less than the total Greek migrants outside Greece, if I remeber correctly Australian city Melbourne is home to more Greeks then Greek capital Athens is.

This diaspora of Greece has allowed them to explain the shared events of old and near regarding Turks, Macedonians subjectively, a one way road, Greek road, only presenting their view of history and events generation after generation, they managed to create generations of Greeks that get an “alergy” when they hear the words “Turk” or “Macedon” and also managed to create a scewed perception amoung westerners about Turks and Macedons. This was all because of the uncomparable largeness of Greek migrants in foreign countries compared to Turkish or Macedonian migrants.

Both Turkish and Macedonian migrants have started to occur but only recently in the last 30 years, been between 20-60 years behind Greek migration, who already hold more influential status then Turks and Macedonians combined, and multiple folded, in USA, Australia etc.

All this has resulted in a deep rooted psyche where everything and anything viewed/presented by Greek side is dominant, been the hero, at the same time as been the sufferers, completely innocent and angelic. But the reality couldnt be further from the truth. Its not going to happen, but with time the Greeks and those who got used to listening just their stories will come to realize that there is another version to the stories.

And perhaps one day, eliaslar and likeminded people and the Greek government will come to realize that there is an ethnic Turkish and Macedonian minority in Greece they until that point had rather not see, talk about, or think about, but only oppress and ethnically try to cleance them of their identity.

You said:
"I trully would like this to end here and this topic go back in it's normal route. There is no point in arguing about who is better or who is right, i hope you agree with that."
Yes so do I, but then why do you continue bringing up false arguments, previously you stating there were "no (Tatar) Turks in Greece" which I proved you wrong in the previous posts with facts, which you didnt like resulting in you to post the above writing of your with lots of Greek national propaganda of 3rd rate stuff trying to literally do "who is better", which you are requesting we dont do.

Thats not what I did, I presented facts about questions/false claims that came up by Chrom, you got it all wrong, and jumped in and you seem to be the only contender in the "who is better" race.

And lastly:
Quote: Originally Posted by eliaslar:
"I don't have the intention to start another war here, but some things must be put in order. I don't want to blame you but you may don't know some things, of course a man cannot know everything."

-Whos "order"? or you mean by what you "like"? That I can understand, but can not accept, I'm all for reason & justice, not "putting in order", according to who? Not a good approach.

-And I never claimed to "know everything" and never will, but when I state something I make sure im certain of it. You try to do that too.
That way the thing you try "put in order" will be trutfull, just and good for world peace.

Not just pleasuring the "Greek sides' " ego & national politics.

Hoping you will see that too, we hope, for a better world.

Cheers.
Atilla stop posting whole lengths of quotes just to write a one liner "emotions" like you did before.

Emotions when discussing issues with people who have a conflicting view with you will not help, bring forward facts, proofs, like my above if you want to add to this discussion pls.

Cheers.
 

Atilla [TR]

New Member
S3kiz read what i said carefully. Now can we go back to on the subject also remember people for Russia to launch an attack on Azerbaijan also means that Russia would have to pull troops from Checnyia which they cannot due or else the area will yet again unstabilized. You have to deal with the internal issues first. May I ask why was this thread started why would Russia attack Azerbaijan?
 

s3kiz

New Member
PART 1/4 OF MY LONG POST

Atilla [TR];137952 said:
S3kiz read what i said carefully. Now can we go back to on the subject also remember people for Russia to launch an attack on Azerbaijan also means that Russia would have to pull troops from Checnyia which they cannot due or else the area will yet again unstabilized. You have to deal with the internal issues first. May I ask why was this thread started why would Russia attack Azerbaijan?
Dear Atilla I have read your previous post and I understand you clearly, but you have to realize that neither sides to a conflict can over come their disagreements (whether it is a Turk-Greek one or of matters relating to other nations) with simple emotional claims you made there of an Azeri Turks statment, sure it is true, we know it like the “back of out hands” whats true and not, but when discussing your disagreements with others especially with those you are in disagreement with, merely mentioning emotional individual claims like that wont solve or get your contention too far.

This is because the opposing side can and does bring forward such subjective claims aswell, resulting into both sides to be emotionally burried in their perspectives, not solving the conflict at all, perhaps even escalating it.
Like the saying goes “TELL A LIE ENOUGH TIMES AND IT BECOMES THE TRUTH”, thats what has been going on with the many issues relating to the conflict between Turks and our neighbours Greeks, as one can see in the previous posts.

For example, many unknowing people of the world think and believe that Turks out of nowhere, with no reason, no justification, just out of pure agression and brutality invaded the island of Cyprus. We all know thats the public opinion that has been created fort he last 3 decades since Turkish intervention on the island. This is due to the many reasons I gave in the previous post, higlighting the propaganda machine the Greek state and Greek diaspora has done globally, similarly to what they are doing about the Turkish and Macedonian minorities in Greece that they have tried to ethnically cleanse even to our times in 2008, this effort to subdue minorities in Greece is continued on international level with the attitude towards Republic of Macedonia.

So merely writing about an Azeri Turks comments about their peoples situation under Armenian oppression, I think it would be beter to provide facts, links and proofs to support it, which is what I said before.
Going back on the “tell a lie enough times and it becomes the truth” mentality, Turks are viewed as the agressors and invaders when the issue of Cyprus comes up right, but you cant overcome this with just claims you have to prove facts. How many people reading this thread or following this forum do you think know indept about the causes, history and developments regarding any of the problems discussed in this thread?

How many do you think have the complete Picture of the Cyprus problem? Do you your self Atilla as an 18 year old man know the below facts? Without knowing, recognizing and been objective on the causes of a disput, solutions can not be reached, it will only escalate and add to the continuation and further complication of such problems :

[continued on part 2/4 of my long post]
 

s3kiz

New Member
PART 2/4 OF MY LONG POST

Cyprus Conflict and the Distorted Facts
(or A POST-MODERNIST (STRUCTURALIST) STUDY OF THE DOMINANT GREEK CYPRIOT DISCOURSES)

Cyprus Conflict is one of the problematic and long-lasting conflicts that has kept the international community busy for a long time. The conflict has been in the UN's agenda for 30 years. The UN peace keeping forces (UNFICYP) have been in Cyprus to obstruct violent confrontation of the two communities since 1964.

In this paper, we are going to analyze some texts - mainly Greek Cypriot, and try to account on the type of discursive practices used by the Greek Cypriot governments both in the 1960's and in the 1990's.

We shall use discursive practices in a hermenutical approach to account on the change of the Greek Cypriot government's 1960's main discourse after 1974 (Greek coup d'Žat and the successive Turkish military intervention/invasion) which created a distorted reality and how the current discourse influences the negotiation process, between the two communities, under the auspices of the UN.

Before we analyze the texts it is useful to give a brief history of what happened in Cyprus between the periods 1960 and 1974 from the perspectives of two sides, so that the events and concepts in the texts will be clear to the reader.

In 1960 the island was granted its independence by the British. With the Treaties of Zurich, London and Nicosia, an independent, bi-communal state was established in 1960. The state, i.e., the Republic of Cyprus, was comprised of the Turkish Cypriot and the Greek Cypriot communities which had the status of co-founders and equal partners, having 20% and 80% of the population, respectively. A constitution which safeguards the rights of the people of both communities was established. According to the constitution, the President was to be a Greek Cypriot and the Vice-President a Turkish Cypriot; the Turks was to get 30% of the seats in the parliament while the Greek Cypriots 70%; the President and the Vice-President was to have veto power separately on all governmental issues; each community was to have the right to decide by itself on issues concerning only that community; issues concerning both sides were to require separate majority of each community in the parliament.

It was a compromise solution by both sides among the other alternatives: two separate states, a condominium, division of the island between Greece and Turkey, or continued British rule.

The life of this partnership (i.e., the Republic of Cyprus), however, lasted only three years. It is very difficult to find the real story of what really happened after the establishment of the Republic of Cyprus. Each side has its own version of the history and the events in these two separate histories have internal coherence that make them logical within each version.

In 1963 the Greek Cypriot side wanted to make 13 amendments to the Constitution of 1960 which, according to the Turkish Cypriots, would deprive the Turkish Cypriots of the status of equal partner of the Republic. Even eight of them were so fundamental that they were included in the unalterable Basic Articles of the Constitution, such as that of [Turkish Cypriots'] having veto power over governmental decisions, of having their own municipalities, etc. The main objective of the amendments, according to the Turkish Cypriots was to put the Turkish Cypriots into the status of minority (from the status of co-founder and politically equal partner of the Republic) - i.e., to change the bi-communal republic into a unitary state in which the voting power [of the Greek Cypriots] would be paramount.*1.

However, according to the Greek Cypriots, the 1960 Constitution and the international treaties (London, Zurich and Nicosia) were imposed by the external powers (Britain, Greece and Turkey) and that they were signed by the Greek Cypriot leadership under force of the Guarantor powers.

The Turkish Cypriot leadership rejected the amendments. In one instance the Turkish Cypriots took the issue of "establishing separate municipalities" (Article 173) to the Supreme Constitutional Court. On 25th April 1963 the Court ruled that Article 173 had not been complied with, but [President] Archbishop Makarios declared that he would ignore it, and did ignore it (Cyprus Mail 12.2.63)*2. On 21st May the neutral President of the Court who was a West German citizen resigned. At that time, according to the Turkish Cypriots, Makarios dismissed the Turkish Cypriot cabinet ministers, members of the House of Representatives and all the Turkish Cypriot civil servants. He also discharged all the Turkish Cypriot diplomats at the United Nations and in foreign capitals3.

The story is again different from the Greek Cypriot perspective. They believe that the Turkish Cypriot cabinet ministers and the members of the House left their positions voluntarily in order to protest the Greek Cypriot proposal of the thirteen amendments, and that the Turkish civil servants were forced by those ministers to leave their jobs in order to form a separate Turkish Cypriot administration.

From 1963 to 1974 the Turks were forced or, according to the Greek Cypriot claim, chose to migrate and form their homogeneous enclaves. Due to this migration the Turkish Cypriots left their land and homes which constituted 30% of the registered ownership of the island in 1960 and migrated to the Turkish Cypriot enclaves which constituted 3% of the island.

On July 15, 1974 a coup organized and sent from the then military regime in Greece to Cyprus to overthrow the (Greek Cypriot) President and to unite Cyprus with Greece (Enosis). On July 20, 1974 Turkey, under Article 4 of the Treaty of Guarantee (1960) sent troops to the island to drive away the coup d'Žat from Greece.

In the 1960's the Greek Cypriot leadership wanted to unite the island with Greece (i.e., Enosis). For them, that was perfectly legal and justifiable since they formed 80% of the population. So, basically their struggle was not to establish a bi-communal Republic (of Cyprus) but to gain the right of self determination so that they can unite with their motherland (Greece).

However, the earlier mentioned Agreements gave the two communities the right of self governemnt separately and instead, gave both communities in the island the right of "sovereignty" to share4. The below texts clearly shows the type of discourse which was dominant among the Greek Cypriot leadership in the 1960's:

ENOSIS (union with Greece)discourse before 1974 :
"Unless this small Turkish community forming part of the Turkish race..is expelled, the duties of the Eoka *5 can never be considered terminated." (President Makarios' Statement, Circa 1960's) (Negotiating for Survival. p. 7).
"The aim of the Cyprus struggle was not establishment of a republic. These Agreements only laid the foundations." (President Makarios' Statement, March 13, 1963).

"Union of Cyprus with Greece is an aspiration always cherished within the hearts of all Greek Cypriots. It is impossible to put an end to this aspiration by establishing a republic." (President Makarios' Statement, London TIMES, April 9, 1963).

"It is true that the goal of our struggle is to annex Cyprus to Greece." (President Makarios' Statement, Uusi Soumi of Stockholm, September 1963). "Freedom for us means only the integration of this souther outpost of Hellenism into the national entity..." (Tasos Papadopoulos' Statement, October 23, 1967).

"The struggle of Cyprus is the struggle of all Hellenism. Cyprus, where the Greek virtue is being tested, is today the place where the Greek history and Greek struggle are continuing..." (Foreign Minister Spyros Kyprianou's Statement, March 24, 1971).

As can be seen from the above texts, the island was claimed to be a Greek island by the largest of the two "partners". Since the 1963 constitutional crisis the Turks had been absent from the government and they had been living in their homogeneous enclaves. So the Greek Cypriot side was enjoying a de facto "unitary state" in terms of government machinery and territory. Also, the Turkish Cypriots were, then, the de facto "minority."
Clearly, there was "Enosis Discourse" which dominated the texts that were produced by the Greek Cypriot leadership.

However, when we look at the texts below which were also produced by the Greek Cypriot leadership - yet, this time in the 1990's, we should be able to distinguish a totally different discourse that dominates the texts:


INVASION AND INDEPENDENCE DISCOURSE AFTER 1974 :
"Independence came to the Cypriots after centuries of foreign rule and after a hard guerrilla war against the colonial power. Makarios, the leader of the anti-colonial struggle, and first President of the Republic of Cyprus, welcomed it as the herald of a new age for the people of Cyprus: According to the 1960 Cyprus constitution, which is still the constitution under which the Cyprus governemnt and house of representatives function and the courts dispense justice, the Turkish Cypriots were guaranteed a privileged position as a minority. They were guaranteed full cultural and religious autonomy and reinforced political representation..." (Cyprus After the Turkish Invasion, "They Make a Desert and They Call It Peace," 1991. p.37).

"For hundreds of years Greek and Turkish Cypriots lived in social harmony and economic interdependence in the villages and towns of Cyprus. This web of interdependence was only disturbed after protracted and violent attacks against it. Even after incidents, planned and instigated to prove that Greek and Turkish Cypriots could not live together, ordinary people again and again proved the opposite until they were torn apart by the Attila Operation*6 1974. [The Turkish Cypriots]' interdependence with the rest of the population of Cyprus is indicated by the fact that until 1974 they lived intermingled in towns and villages all over Cyprus. The mass of Greek and Turkish Cypriots lived and cooperated peacefully in an atmoshpere of religious and cultural tolerance." (Cyprus After the Turkish Invasion, "They Make a Desert and They Call It Peace," 1991. p. 26).

"The Cyprus problem primarily is a question of Turkey's attack on the Cyprus and invasion of part of its territory which was undoubtedly made possible by foreign powers and the coup which constituted a betrayal." (Letter from Greek Cypriot President Vassiliou to EDEK party leader Lyssarides, February 1988)

Here, we see that the "Enosis" discourse was replaced by the "Invasion" discourse. Makarios, who was giving clear and blunt "Enosis" messages and calling on Greek Cypriots to struggle for Enosis in the 1960's, is now shown as if he "welcomed [THE REPUBLIC OF CYPRUS] as the herald of a new age for the people of Cyprus" The Turkish Cypriots are portrayed as the lucky "minority" who enjoyed vast rights and privileges of living under the Republic of Cyprus until 1974, when the Turks from Turkey "invaded" the island.

The general picture one gets from the above texts is that there was "social harmony," "cultural and religious tolerance" and "interdependence" between the two communities, and that they were living together intermingled. So, the Turkish Cypriots are no longer the "this small Turkish community forming part of the Turkish race..[should be] expelled" (1960's), but a happy "minority." There was also a little mention about the "coup d'Žat" that was sent by Greece to unite the island with Greece (Enosis) which caused the landing of the Turkish troops in Cyprus five days later (July 20, 1974). So, basically the Turkish "intervention" or "invasion" was shown to happen without any reason which also gives one the implication that it was an action of pure aggression and violence of an imperialist (expansionist) power.

The events which was portrayed above (1963-74) by the 1991 Greek Cypriot government are in great conflict with what Glafcos Clerides (present Greek Cypriot President) stated in his memoirs which were published in the early the 1990's:

CONTRADICTING DISCOURSES WITHIN GREEK CYPRIOT COMMUNITY :
"It was by the virtue of equality of powers vested in the Greek President and the Turkish Vice-President that the partnership of the two communities was created by the Zurich agreements." ("My Deposition" by Glafcos Clerides [present President of Greek Cypriot Republic of Cyprus], Vol.2, p. 382)
"The constitutional crisis of the year 1963 disrupted the constitutional order, the continuity, and the partnership status of the two communities, which was created by the the Zurich Agreements. Because of the disruption of constitutional order a peculiar situation was created by virtue of which the state authority, on the other hand, became under the absolute control of the Greeks, and though the government was recognized internationally, yet internally Turkish enclaved were created within the territory of the Republic which at first, an elementary organization for the purpose of governing the Turkish Cypriots was established, the main characteristic of which was the confusion of military and political powers and functions, and the prevailing of military power.

After the crisis of 1967 (Kophiniou Crisis) the above disruption of constitutional order became more clear and showed tendencies of permanency. Thus in December 1967, the elementary military-political organization of the Turks in the enclaves developed into a "temporary Administration" on the basis of a charter, and at the same time the political and military authorities were seperated.

In the years that followed a steady, stage by stage development is noted in the Turkish administration, with the seperation in its legislative, executive and judicial powers. An administrative organization is created, as well as police force and an army. The increase of the financial resources of the Turkish Cypriots through economic aid from Turkey permitted the functioning of their administration on a more permanent basis, a fact which they made clear, by renaming their "Temporary Turkish Cypriot Administration" to "Turkish Cypriot Administration.

Thus there exist today [END OF THE 1960'S] in Cyprus two poles of power on a seperate geographical basis i.e. the government of the Cyprus Republic, controlling the largest section of the territory of the state and internationally recognized, and the Turkish Cypriot administration, which controls a very limited area and is not internationally recognized, but has already taken almost all the characteristics of a small state." ("My Deposition" by Glafcos Clerides [present President of Greek Cypriot Republic of Cyprus], Vol.3, pp. 236, 237).

The reality of what actually happened in the 1960's and 1970's in the above texts is in great conflict with the portrayal of the reality in the government's texts in the 1990's (presented before).
Clerides stated that "[A] lot of wrongs have been done to Turkish Cypriots" and that "the Greek Cypriot side has tried to do away with the agreements and to deprive the Turkish Cypriots from their rights," that "the Enosis road was followed". He also stated that the Turkish Cypriots were living in their homogeneous enclaves (3%) and that they were absent from the government of which they were once the equal co-founder *7. This argument is also in conflict with the reality pictured by the Greek Cypriot government in the 1990's: that the Turkish and the Greek Cypriots were living intermingly in harmony until Turkish "invasion."

The attempt of Greek Cypriot government to present the Turkish "military operation" similar to the "Invasion" of Kuwait by Iraq was also commented on by Clerides: "I am sorry that it is wishful thinking and a false dream to believe that we will be successful in such a thing. Such an evaluation is not realistic. Why? There is no Security Council resolution that recognizes that an invasion took place in Cyprus. The Security Council has not condemned Turkey as an occupationist so far. If we are lead to such a recourse, they will tell us at the Security Council that there was a (Greek) coup in Cyprus, the legal government was overthrown, the constitution was violated and Turkey (AS A GUARANTOR POWER) had the right of intervention. The things that count are arguments, not slogans."

[continued on part 3/4 of my long post]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top