Cyprus Conflict: past, present and future.

[s3kiz]

Everyone!

I strongly urge from each and everyone of you to respect this thread and its topic when posting here. I request everyone who wants to post here to:

1)Remember the topic is-> Cyprus Conflict: past, present and future;

2)Please only post if what you write is in context to the origins of this conflict, the events of this conflict and future projections of this conflict, in light of human, economic, military strategies;

3)As I requested in the first post on this thread, lets keep it in a mutually respectfull manner, and ster away from “flame-baiting”, no name callings, no rudeness, no “mud-throwing”, no racism, no “heavy” claims without supporting material, but clean, plain, evindence, proof, reasoning and lots of mutual understanding;

4)Lets do a good job and keep it clean here, unlike some other threads that went haywire.


Have you ever read a UN resolution? Be it a Cyprus related one or not, any? Well if you havent, you will now.

I’ll write the very first UN Cyprus related resolution, “UN Resolution 186" (04March1964) and give you an official United Nations link listing ALL of the issued resolutions for Cyprus Conflict. It will take a lot of screen space for me to write them all here, so pls read through them individually.


The very first resolution:
UN Resolution 186 (04March1964)

"The Security Council,
Noting that the present situation with regard to Cyprus is likely to threaten international peace and security and may further deteriorate unless additional measures are promptly taken to maintain peace and to seek out a durable solution,

-Referring to the constitutional crisis created by the Greek sides attempts to make 13 amendments to the (16 August 1960) Constitution of Republic of Cyprus, with eight of these amendments been so fundamental that they were included in the unalterable Basic Articles of the Constitution, safe-guarding Turkish rights. The main objective of the amendments was to put the Turkish Cypriots into the status of minority from the status of co-founder and politically equal partner of the Republic of Cyprus.

"Considering the positions taken by the parties in relation to the Treaties signed at Nicosia on 16 August 1960,"

-Reminding the above mentioned (16 August 1960) Constitution of Republic of Cyprus and the guarantor positions of Turkiye, Greece and UK.

"Having in mind the relevant provisions of the Charter of the United Nations and its Article 2, paragraph 4, which reads: "All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations."
1. Calls upon all Member States, in conformity with their obligations under the Charter of the United Nations, to refrain from any action or threat of action to worsen the situation in the sovereign Republic of Cyprus, or to endanger international peace;"

-Reminding the various UN articles about all countries respecting each others territorial integrity and political independence, and asking for the guarantor countries (Turkiye, Greece and UK) and all other UN member states not to act, threat in anyway to worsen the situation in Republic of Cyprus, basically calling for restraint on all sides against actions that may harm and fuel the situation on the island creating a bigger international conflict.

"2. Asks the Government of Cyprus, which has the responsibility for the maintenance and restoration of law and order, to take all additional measures necessary to stop violence and bloodshed in Cyprus;"

-Calling upon both sides, Turkish and Greek communities, that had co-founded the government of Republic of Cyprus, to reimplement the law and order of the (16 August 1960) Constitution (which was been changed by the Greek sides efforts to make 13 amendments, 8 of these been part of the unchangable Basic Articles of Constitution stripping the Turkish side of their rights). And implement security measures to stop the violence and bloodshed, namely the start of ethnically cleansing of Turks, from 30% of their registered lands to enclaves that in time would make up only 3% of the island.

"3. Calls upon the communities in Cyprus and their leaders to act with the utmost restraint;"

-The politically equall co-founders of the Republic of Cyprus, the Turkish and Greek communities of the island, as entrusted in the (16 August 1960) Constitution. Because President (Greek) Archbishop Makarios had already started to fuel this conflict with his efforts to make the Constitutional amendments, stripping the Turkish sides rights away reducing them to the level of “minority” in a country they co-founded.

-Which resulted in the Turkish side taking the issue to the Republic of Cyprus Supreme Constitutional Court. On 25th April 1963 the Court ruled that the amendments were in breach of the Constitution , but nevertheless President Makarios declared that he would ignore his own countrys court ruling, and did ignore it pressing ahead with the amendments. (Cyprus Mail 12.2.63). On 21st May the neutral President of the Court who was a West German citizen resigned.

-If these events werent enough, President Makarios was also adding further fuel to the fire with his domestic and international comments and actions:
"Unless this small Turkish community forming part of the Turkish race..is expelled, the duties of the Eoka 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).

The above events further frustrating the Turkish side, drifting the two communities apart (pls check the dates of the above and below statements:

“The Cyprus Constitution is dead. There is no possibility of the Turkish Community living together with the Greek Community” (Turkish-Cypriot Vice-President, Fazil Kucuk, The Times, 31 December 1963).

“The Constitution of Cyprus no longer exists” (Dr. Fazil Kucuk, The New York Times, 5 January 1964)

“I no longer consider myself the Vice-President of Cyprus because a legitimate government no longer exists in Cyprus” (Dr. Fazil Kucuk Special News Bulletin No. 16, 11 January 1964).

-All these events been the precursor to the ethnic cleansing of Turks been killed and driven out of their registered lands totaling 30% of the island, which they once were the co-administrators of, into enclaves constituting only 3% of the lands and gradually starting their armed resistance in defence against attacks from the Greek Cypriot armed forces including terror groups like EOKA under the Akritas Plan and mainland Greek armed forces sent in 1974by the junta in Greece aiming to annex whole of the island under, resulting in Turkiye launching the Operation Atilla, driving out the Greek junta forces, and creating a safe zone for the Turkish community roughly equaling in size to their legaly owned lands prior to conflict.

"4. Recommends the creation, with the consent of the Government of Cyprus, of a United Nations Peace-Keeping Force in Cyprus. The composition and size of the Force shall be established by the Secretary-General, in consultation with the Governments of Cyprus, Greece, Turkey and the United Kingdom. The commander of the Force shall be appointed by the Secretary-General and report to him. The Secretary-General, who shall keep the Governments providing the Force fully informed, shall report periodically to the Security Council on its operation;

5. Recommends that the function of the Force should be in the interest of preserving international peace and security, to use its best efforts to prevent a recurrence of fighting and, as necessary, to contribute to the maintenance and restoration of law and order and a return to normal conditions;
6. Recommends that the stationing of the Force shall be for a period of three months, all costs pertaining to it being met, in a manner to be agreed upon by them, by the Governments providing the contingents and by the Government of Cyprus. The Secretary-General may also accept voluntary contributions for the purpose;

7. Recommends further that the Secretary-General designate, in agreement with the Government of Cyprus and the Governments of Greece, Turkey and United Kingdom a mediator who shall use his best endeavors with the representatives of the communities and also with the aforesaid four Governments, for the purpose of promoting a peaceful solution and an agreed settlement of the problem confronting Cyprus, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, having in mind the well-being of the people as a whole and the preservation of international peace and security. The mediator shall report periodically to the Secretary-General on his efforts;

8. Requests the Secretary-General to provide, from funds of the United Nations, as appropriate, for the remuneration and expenses of the mediator and his staff. "
http://www.un.int/cyprus/scr186.htm

-And thus began the long lasting UN presence on the island.



UN Resolution 649 (12March1990)
“The Security Council "Calls upon the leaders of the two communities to pursue their efforts to reach freely a mutual acceptable solution providing for the establishment of a federation that will be bi-communal as regards the constitutional aspects and bi-zonal as regards the territorial aspects ... and to cooperate, on equal footing, with the Secretary General..."
http://www.un.int/cyprus/scr649.htm

-Another UN resolution calling for both sides to find a mutually acceptable solution, bi-communal, bi-zonal,federative and on equaly footing. Greeks say no, and the last time they said no was in 2004 UN Sponsered Peace Plan referendum.



UN Resolution 1687 (15June2006)
“Urging both sides to avoid any action which could lead to an increase in tension and, in this context, noting with concern sequential developments in the vicinity of Dherinia, the increase in unauthorized construction of building for personal and commercial use in the buffer zone, and developments at certain checkpoints in sector four, including new restrictions on UNFICYP's freedom of movement, and encouraging both sides to engage in consultations with UNFICYP on the demarcation of the buffer zone, and to respect UNFICYP's mandate and operations in the buffer zone, “
http://www.un.int/cyprus/Res1687.htm

-And an excerpt from the latest UN Resolution about Cyprus. Reading the above resolution, I sometimes really worry about what the UN does.



The official “UN Resolutions list on the Cyprus issue”
http://www.un.int/cyprus/resolut.htm



Republic of Cyprus Constitution (16 August 1960)
ICL International Constitutional Law, an organization which archives world constitutions (the below constitution sample is commented to be given to ICL by George Katrougalos, a Greek)
http://www.servat.unibe.ch/law/icl/cy00000_.html


Cheers.

 

[wyoming cowboy]

Wyoming cowboy

Everyone!

I strongly urge from each and everyone of you to respect this thread and its topic when posting here. I request everyone who wants to post here to:

1)Remember the topic is-> Cyprus Conflict: past, present and future;

2)Please only post if what you write is in context to the origins of this conflict, the events of this conflict and future projections of this conflict, in light of human, economic, military strategies;

3)As I requested in the first post on this thread, lets keep it in a mutually respectfull manner, and ster away from “flame-baiting”, no name callings, no rudeness, no “mud-throwing”, no racism, no “heavy” claims without supporting material, but clean, plain, evindence, proof, reasoning and lots of mutual understanding;

4)Lets do a good job and keep it clean here, unlike some other threads that went haywire.


Have you ever read a UN resolution? Be it a Cyprus related one or not, any? Well if you havent, you will now.

I’ll write the very first UN Cyprus related resolution, “UN Resolution 186" (04March1964) and give you an official United Nations link listing ALL of the issued resolutions for Cyprus Conflict. It will take a lot of screen space for me to write them all here, so pls read through them individually.


The very first resolution:
UN Resolution 186 (04March1964)

"The Security Council,
Noting that the present situation with regard to Cyprus is likely to threaten international peace and security and may further deteriorate unless additional measures are promptly taken to maintain peace and to seek out a durable solution,

-Referring to the constitutional crisis created by the Greek sides attempts to make 13 amendments to the (16 August 1960) Constitution of Republic of Cyprus, with eight of these amendments been so fundamental that they were included in the unalterable Basic Articles of the Constitution, safe-guarding Turkish rights. The main objective of the amendments was to put the Turkish Cypriots into the status of minority from the status of co-founder and politically equal partner of the Republic of Cyprus.

"Considering the positions taken by the parties in relation to the Treaties signed at Nicosia on 16 August 1960,"

-Reminding the above mentioned (16 August 1960) Constitution of Republic of Cyprus and the guarantor positions of Turkiye, Greece and UK.

"Having in mind the relevant provisions of the Charter of the United Nations and its Article 2, paragraph 4, which reads: "All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations."
1. Calls upon all Member States, in conformity with their obligations under the Charter of the United Nations, to refrain from any action or threat of action to worsen the situation in the sovereign Republic of Cyprus, or to endanger international peace;"

-Reminding the various UN articles about all countries respecting each others territorial integrity and political independence, and asking for the guarantor countries (Turkiye, Greece and UK) and all other UN member states not to act, threat in anyway to worsen the situation in Republic of Cyprus, basically calling for restraint on all sides against actions that may harm and fuel the situation on the island creating a bigger international conflict.

"2. Asks the Government of Cyprus, which has the responsibility for the maintenance and restoration of law and order, to take all additional measures necessary to stop violence and bloodshed in Cyprus;"

-Calling upon both sides, Turkish and Greek communities, that had co-founded the government of Republic of Cyprus, to reimplement the law and order of the (16 August 1960) Constitution (which was been changed by the Greek sides efforts to make 13 amendments, 8 of these been part of the unchangable Basic Articles of Constitution stripping the Turkish side of their rights). And implement security measures to stop the violence and bloodshed, namely the start of ethnically cleansing of Turks, from 30% of their registered lands to enclaves that in time would make up only 3% of the island.

"3. Calls upon the communities in Cyprus and their leaders to act with the utmost restraint;"

-The politically equall co-founders of the Republic of Cyprus, the Turkish and Greek communities of the island, as entrusted in the (16 August 1960) Constitution. Because President (Greek) Archbishop Makarios had already started to fuel this conflict with his efforts to make the Constitutional amendments, stripping the Turkish sides rights away reducing them to the level of “minority” in a country they co-founded.

-Which resulted in the Turkish side taking the issue to the Republic of Cyprus Supreme Constitutional Court. On 25th April 1963 the Court ruled that the amendments were in breach of the Constitution , but nevertheless President Makarios declared that he would ignore his own countrys court ruling, and did ignore it pressing ahead with the amendments. (Cyprus Mail 12.2.63). On 21st May the neutral President of the Court who was a West German citizen resigned.

-If these events werent enough, President Makarios was also adding further fuel to the fire with his domestic and international comments and actions:
"Unless this small Turkish community forming part of the Turkish race..is expelled, the duties of the Eoka 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).

The above events further frustrating the Turkish side, drifting the two communities apart (pls check the dates of the above and below statements:

“The Cyprus Constitution is dead. There is no possibility of the Turkish Community living together with the Greek Community” (Turkish-Cypriot Vice-President, Fazil Kucuk, The Times, 31 December 1963).

“The Constitution of Cyprus no longer exists” (Dr. Fazil Kucuk, The New York Times, 5 January 1964)

“I no longer consider myself the Vice-President of Cyprus because a legitimate government no longer exists in Cyprus” (Dr. Fazil Kucuk Special News Bulletin No. 16, 11 January 1964).

-All these events been the precursor to the ethnic cleansing of Turks been killed and driven out of their registered lands totaling 30% of the island, which they once were the co-administrators of, into enclaves constituting only 3% of the lands and gradually starting their armed resistance in defence against attacks from the Greek Cypriot armed forces including terror groups like EOKA under the Akritas Plan and mainland Greek armed forces sent in 1974by the junta in Greece aiming to annex whole of the island under, resulting in Turkiye launching the Operation Atilla, driving out the Greek junta forces, and creating a safe zone for the Turkish community roughly equaling in size to their legaly owned lands prior to conflict.

"4. Recommends the creation, with the consent of the Government of Cyprus, of a United Nations Peace-Keeping Force in Cyprus. The composition and size of the Force shall be established by the Secretary-General, in consultation with the Governments of Cyprus, Greece, Turkey and the United Kingdom. The commander of the Force shall be appointed by the Secretary-General and report to him. The Secretary-General, who shall keep the Governments providing the Force fully informed, shall report periodically to the Security Council on its operation;

5. Recommends that the function of the Force should be in the interest of preserving international peace and security, to use its best efforts to prevent a recurrence of fighting and, as necessary, to contribute to the maintenance and restoration of law and order and a return to normal conditions;
6. Recommends that the stationing of the Force shall be for a period of three months, all costs pertaining to it being met, in a manner to be agreed upon by them, by the Governments providing the contingents and by the Government of Cyprus. The Secretary-General may also accept voluntary contributions for the purpose;

7. Recommends further that the Secretary-General designate, in agreement with the Government of Cyprus and the Governments of Greece, Turkey and United Kingdom a mediator who shall use his best endeavors with the representatives of the communities and also with the aforesaid four Governments, for the purpose of promoting a peaceful solution and an agreed settlement of the problem confronting Cyprus, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, having in mind the well-being of the people as a whole and the preservation of international peace and security. The mediator shall report periodically to the Secretary-General on his efforts;

8. Requests the Secretary-General to provide, from funds of the United Nations, as appropriate, for the remuneration and expenses of the mediator and his staff. "
http://www.un.int/cyprus/scr186.htm

-And thus began the long lasting UN presence on the island.



UN Resolution 649 (12March1990)
“The Security Council "Calls upon the leaders of the two communities to pursue their efforts to reach freely a mutual acceptable solution providing for the establishment of a federation that will be bi-communal as regards the constitutional aspects and bi-zonal as regards the territorial aspects ... and to cooperate, on equal footing, with the Secretary General..."
http://www.un.int/cyprus/scr649.htm

-Another UN resolution calling for both sides to find a mutually acceptable solution, bi-communal, bi-zonal,federative and on equaly footing. Greeks say no, and the last time they said no was in 2004 UN Sponsered Peace Plan referendum.



UN Resolution 1687 (15June2006)
“Urging both sides to avoid any action which could lead to an increase in tension and, in this context, noting with concern sequential developments in the vicinity of Dherinia, the increase in unauthorized construction of building for personal and commercial use in the buffer zone, and developments at certain checkpoints in sector four, including new restrictions on UNFICYP's freedom of movement, and encouraging both sides to engage in consultations with UNFICYP on the demarcation of the buffer zone, and to respect UNFICYP's mandate and operations in the buffer zone, “
http://www.un.int/cyprus/Res1687.htm

-And an excerpt from the latest UN Resolution about Cyprus. Reading the above resolution, I sometimes really worry about what the UN does.



The official “UN Resolutions list on the Cyprus issue”
http://www.un.int/cyprus/resolut.htm



Republic of Cyprus Constitution (16 August 1960)
ICL International Constitutional Law, an organization which archives world constitutions (the below constitution sample is commented to be given to ICL by George Katrougalos, a Greek)
http://www.servat.unibe.ch/law/icl/cy00000_.html


Cheers.

Good informative post Attila, if you read through some of those UN resolutions it distinctly specifies that all powers involved have the responsibility to honor the sovereignty of the Republic of Cyprus..this dates from the very first resolution to the latest one. My point is this and im trying to make it short Cyprus was established for both the Greek and the Turkish ethnicities on the island. The island was established in 1960 as a democratic Republic, the Greeks are 80 percent of the population to the Turk 20 percent. With you complaining today that the rights of the Turk cyp were violated with the 13 points of Makarios has no basis because i read through those 13 points and their civil rights were not being violated, the 13 points emphasize a workable smooth government, with all the rights and freedoms to the Turk cyp community on cyprus. Freedom of religion freedom of speech etc etc...i challenge you to find any of the 13 points that took away the Turk cyp civil and human rights..The leaders of the Turk cyp saw this as an opportune time to cause trouble and attempt to destroy the Republic of Cyprus..in having TAKSIM or partition..You cannot make the same case against the Greek cyp for in 1968 election they overwhelmingly voted in Makarios who was running against a candidate who was totally pro enosis makarios received 245,000 votes to this candidates 8,300 votes..but nevertheless after Makarios outlawed EOKA B and imprisoned its members and guaranteed the safety of the Turk cyps the Turk cyp leaders continued to violate the 1960 Zurich agreements in calling for Taksim

 

[Atilla [TR]]

Good informative post Attila, if you read through some of those UN resolutions it distinctly specifies that all powers involved have the responsibility to honor the sovereignty of the Republic of Cyprus..this dates from the very first resolution to the latest one. My point is this and im trying to make it short Cyprus was established for both the Greek and the Turkish ethnicities on the island. The island was established in 1960 as a democratic Republic, the Greeks are 80 percent of the population to the Turk 20 percent. With you complaining today that the rights of the Turk cyp were violated with the 13 points of Makarios has no basis because i read through those 13 points and their civil rights were not being violated, the 13 points emphasize a workable smooth government, with all the rights and freedoms to the Turk cyp community on cyprus. Freedom of religion freedom of speech etc etc...i challenge you to find any of the 13 points that took away the Turk cyp civil and human rights..The leaders of the Turk cyp saw this as an opportune time to cause trouble and attempt to destroy the Republic of Cyprus..in having TAKSIM or partition..You cannot make the same case against the Greek cyp for in 1968 election they overwhelmingly voted in Makarios who was running against a candidate who was totally pro enosis makarios received 245,000 votes to this candidates 8,300 votes..but nevertheless after Makarios outlawed EOKA B and imprisoned its members and guaranteed the safety of the Turk cyps the Turk cyp leaders continued to violate the 1960 Zurich agreements in calling for Taksim

S3kiz posted that, not me. Quoted Newspaper report:

“In a Greek raid on a small Turkish village near Limassol, 36 people out of a population of 200 were killed. The Greeks said that they had been given orders to kill the inhabitants of the Turkish villages before the Turkish forces arrived.”

- Washington Post, 23 July, 1974. You challenged me to find articles from newspapers from that era here you go.

 

[eliaslar]

About Cyprus issue we may not forget who played the dominant role in United States foreign policy between 1969 and 1977. That man was Henry Kissinger, who said the following quote:

"The Greek people are anarchic and difficult to tame. For this reason we
must strike deep into their cultural roots: Perhaps then we can force
them to conform. I mean, of course, to strike at their language, their
religion, their cultural and historical reserves, so that we can
neutralize their ability to develop, to distinguish themselves, or to
prevail; thereby removing them as an obstacle to our strategically vital
plans in the Balkans, the Mediterranean, and the Middle East."
Henry Kissinger, while addressing a group of Washington, D.C.
businessmen in Sept.1974

Maybe if we take a look in the map of the whole region at that time, we will see that Turkey is the only nation of NATO that has a border with the USSR itself and that made Turkey's position not only important but also strategical and vital for the Alliance.

Also according to the new declassified documents of CIA, as was previously said here again, Kissinger not only knew about Turkish invasion but also approved it and supported it. In such a way we may say that the US supported Turkey's game on the island.

At the same time in Greece the Junta as we know it, changed and a counter coup happened which overthrown Papadopoulos and Ioannides took his place, who acted on US part.

Sponsored by Ioannides, on 15 July 1974 the EOKA-B organisation took power on the island of Cyprus by a military coup, in which Archbishop Makarios III, the Cypriot president, was overthrown. Turkey replied to this intervention by invading Cyprus and occupying, after heavy fighting with the Cypriot and Greek ELDYK Forces the northern part of the Island.

Of course all these was planned to happen, the recent facts (i mean the CIA's documents) show us this.

Also today took place in Cyprus one of the most important things of the years after the invasion. This thing is the opening of Ledra street in Nicosia, which will help the two communities come closer, every person will be able to travel through the territories, something very difficult till now. Maybe solution to Cyprus problem is near and the division of the island is over.

@s3kiz
I also sometimes really worry about what the UN does my friend.

In this resolutions we can see clearly that the UN always wanted the withdrawal of all foreign armies and the cessasion of all foreign interference in Cyprus affairs. Also till today the Turkish army is present in the island and not the Greek, except the Greek ELDYK, which in no way can be compared in numbers and quality of equipment with Turkish army.

"Considers the withdrawal of all occupation forces from the Republic of Cyprus as an essential basis for a speedy and mutually acceptable solution of the Cyprus problem. (37/253, 1983)"

"Reiterates its full support for the sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity, unity and non-alignment of the Republic of Cyprus and calls once again for the cessation of all foreign interference in its affairs. (37/253, 1983)"

"Affirms the right of the Republic of Cyprus and its people to full and effective sovereignty and the control over the entire territory of Cyprus and its natural and other resources and calls upon all states to support and help the Government of the Republic of Cyprus to exercise these rights. (37/253, 1983)"

"Recommends that the Security Council should examine the question of the implementation, within a time-frame, of its relevant resolutions and consider and adopt thereafter, if necessary, a11 appropriate and practical measures under the Charter of the United Nations for ensuring the implementation of the resolutions of the United Nations on Cyprus. (33/15, 1978)"

"Demands the immediate withdrawal of all foreign armed forces and foreign military presence from the Republic of Cyprus. (33/15, 1978 & 34/30, 1979)"

"Reiterating, its full support for the sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and non-alignment of the Republic of Cyprus, and calling once again for the cessation of all foreign interference in its affairs. (31/12, 1976)"

"Calls once again upon all States to respect the sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and non-alignment of the Republic of Cyprus and to refrain from all acts and interventions directed against it. (3395 XXX, 1975)"

"Demands the withdrawal without further delay of all foreign armed forces and foreign military presence and personnel from the Republic of Cyprus, and the cessation of all foreign interference in its affairs. (3395 XXX, 1975)"

 

[s3kiz]

With you complaining today that the rights of the Turk cyp were violated with the 13 points of Makarios has no basis because i read through those 13 points and their civil rights were not being violated, the 13 points emphasize a workable smooth government, with all the rights and freedoms to the Turk cyp community on cyprus. Freedom of religion freedom of speech etc etc...i challenge you to find any of the 13 points that took away the Turk cyp civil and human rights..

13 Amendments proposed by Makarios:​

In November 1963 the then President of the Republic, Archbishop Makarios tried to make 13 amendments to the Constitution of Republic of Cyprus which was co-founded by Turkish and Greek communities on equal footing. These amendments although claimed by the Greek side to "smooth the government operations" were infact stripping the Turkish side of her rights and Constitutional (16August1960) equality, of the Republic of Cyprus.

The Turkish side took the issue to the Republic of Cyprus Supreme Constitutional Court. On 25th April 1963 the Court (headed by an independent (non-Turk/Greek/UK as deemed in the constitution) West German citizen) ,ruled that the amendments were in breach of the Constitution , but nevertheless President Makarios declared that he would ignore his own countrys court ruling, and did ignore it pressing ahead with the amendments. (Cyprus Mail 12.2.63). On 21st May the neutral President of the Court who was a West German citizen resigned.

Now lets look at what these amendments were that created the Cyprus Conflict in the 1960s:

1)The right of veto of the President and the Vice-President of the Republic to be abolished.

Even though boths sides veto rights were been removed, the parliament been made up of 70% Greek seats and 30% Turkish seats automatically allowed every law and ruling to be passed against the Turkish sides rights.

2)The Vice-President of the Republic to deputise for or replace the President of the Republic in case of his temporary absence or incapacity to perform his duties. In consequence, therefore, all the constitutional provisions in respect of joint action by the President and the Vice-President of the Republic to be modified accordingly.

Given as a "piece of candy" by the Greeks to the Vice-President (Turk) Dr. Fazil Kucuk, so he would not object to the amendments.

3)The Greek President of the House of Representatives and its Turkish Vice-President to be elected by the House as a whole and not as at present the President by the Greek Members of the House and the Vice-President by the Turkish Members of the House.

Removing the election of Turkish leader to be selected by Turkish Members alone, but by whole members, which includes 70% Greek seats against 30% Turkish seats, totally removing the Turkish side from electing their own leadership, giving it to the Greek dominance, altering the co-founding, equal-sovereign rights given in the Constitution.

4)The Vice-President of the House of Representatives to deputise for or replace the President of the House in case of his temporary absence or incapacity to perform his duties.

5)The constitutional provisions regarding separate majority for enactment of Laws by the House of Representatives to be abolished.

Regarding the laws that relate to only one community (Turkish or Greek) and the voting of those laws by that community, removing the Constitution rights to have such laws voted by that community, instead emposing any and every law adopted in the mixed parlimant with 70% Greek and 30% Turkish members (with the Turkish member leader been chosen by 70% Greeks majority).

6)The constitutional provision regarding the establishment of separate Municipalities in the five main towns to be abolished. Provision should be made so that: (a) The Municipal Council in each of the aforesaid five towns shall consist of Greek and Turkish Councillors in proportion to the number of the Greek and Turkish inhabitants of such town by whom they shall be elected respectively. (b) In the Budget of each of such aforesaid towns, after deducting any expenditure required for common services, a percentage of the balance proportionate to the number of the Turkish inhabitants of such town shall be earmarked and disposed of in accordance with the wishes of the Turkish Councillors.

The Constitution gave the rights to perserve and establish seperate community Municipalities, ether Turkish or Greek. The Turkish community tried to do this, but this was changed with the amendment, forcing no such seperate communities, forcing the Greek presence in every municipiality, in violation to the two seperate sovereign communities making up Republic of Cyprus as envisiaged in the Constitution

7)The constitutional provision regarding Courts consisting of Greek Judges to try Greeks and of Turkish Judges to try Turks and of mixed Courts consisting of Greek and Turkish Judges to try cases where the litigants are Greeks and Turks to be abolished.

Completely altering the sovereingty of each communities judicial systems, initially having Turks been tried in Greek courts and later removing Turkish courts.

8)The division of the Security Forces into Police and Gendarmerie to be abolished, (Provision to be made in case the Head of the Police is a Greek the Deputy Head to be a Turk and vice versa).

The Police usually responsible for the metropolitan municipalities, and the Gendarmerie for the rural areas where majority of Turks were inhabiting, thus making this change was to reduce the effectiveness of Turkish security forces on the Turkish population and give it to the Greeks. Stripping the Turks of their defenses for the ethnic cleansing we saw later.

9)The numerical strength of the Security Forces and of the Army to be determined by Law and not by agreement between the President and the Vice-President of the Republic.

The Constitution regarding the disadvantage of the Turkish community gave them "upto 40%" but not necessarily 40% share holding of the Republic of Cyprus security forces, the Turkish participation in the security forces of Republic of Cyprus was to be between 20% (their population ration) to 40%, thus balancing out. But the Greek side wanted to change this through the Contstitution, giving the ratios to be changed by the parliament which was to be made up of 70% Greeks and 30% Turks (with the Turkish leader been chosen by the dominance of the 70% Greek vote due! due to previous amendments).

10)The proportion of the participation of Greek and Turkish Cypriots in the composition of the Public Service and of the Forces of the Republic, i.e. the Police and the Army, to be modified in proportion to the ratio of the population of Greek and Turkish Cypriots.

Completely removing equality, and turning the Turkish population into a form of minority, neglegting their equaly sovereignty as envisaged in the original Republic of Cyprus.

11)The number of the members of the Public Service Commission to be reduced from ten to either five or seven.

Reducing and removing Turkish members.

12)All the decisions of the Public Service Commission to be taken by simple majority. If there is an allegation of discrimination on the unanimous request either of the Greek or of the Turkish members of the Commission, its Chairman to be bound to refer the matter to the Supreme Constitutional Court.

Removing the communities independent voting on matters about their own respective communities, changing it so to bringing it under the dominance of Greek vote, thus removing the right of Turks from administering their own communities.

13)The Greek Communal Chamber to be abolished.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zürich_and_London_Agreement

The above amendments, was aimed to remove all the rights the Turkish and Greek independently and collectively communities had received in the 16 August 1960 Constitution on which Republic of Cyprus was found, stripping the Turkish side from been a politically equal and co-sovereign founder of the rebuplic, into a pressuring them into a state of minority under Greek rule, to later ethnically cleanse them and establish the foundations to join the island with Greece.

i challenge you to find any of the 13 points that took away the Turk cyprs civil and human rights

Look above, 13 amendments aimed at oppressing and laying the foundations to ethnically cleans the Turks from the country they were co-founders of, the original Republic of Cyprus.

And I challange you to support your claims and and stop misinterpreting events.

Cheers.

 

[s3kiz]

if you read through some of those UN resolutions it distinctly specifies that all powers involved have the responsibility to honor the sovereignty of the Republic of Cyprus..this dates from the very first resolution to the latest one.

Very precisely it does as it should, thats the normal thing UN does.

But before you were saying in your posts that the UN resolutions condems Turkiye for its "ethnic cleansing of Greek Cypriots" etc etc like you have made the some of the world believe the "Turks barbarically invaded Cyprus, a free country" etc etc for the last 30 years.

By hiding what this "Cyprus" was;

-the presence of its Turkish community (due to Greek manipulations some in the world thinks Turks started to exist on Cyprus after the 1974 Turkish "invasion"),
-the legal co-ownership of the (original) Republic of Cyprus by this Turkish community (the other partner been the Greek community),
-how the Greek side tried to take that away this,
-the plans of etnically cleansing the island of Turk (Akritas Plan, EOKA, Makarios),
-the resultant ethnic cleansing of the Turks (I will not post/link bloody pics, I want this thread clean)
-the attempt to annex the island to Greece with junta forces from Greece and Greek Cypriot militia in cooperation,

After ALL this the Turkiye, mainland Turks, interviening in Cyprus as a guarantor country in the 16 August 1960 Constitution of Republic of Cyprus, and the Zurich, Nicosia, Lausanne international agreements.

But I'm glad you are now gradually seeing the truth.

I gave you the official:
"UN Resolutions list on the Cyprus issue”
http://www.un.int/cyprus/resolut.htm

To look and read them all. And I also wrote the very first UN Resolution 186 issued on 04 March 1964 and explained it to you in original context, also the last UN Resolution on Cyprus Resolution 1687 issued on 15 June 2006 in post #21 : http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=138293&postcount=21

I hope you read all of them, because it reflects and summarises events, showing the various discursive practices and manipulations the Greeks have been doing on the issue of Cyprus Conflict, distorting the issues, clouding what the whole world see, totally different than to what it was/is.

All this is a very good example of millenium old "art-form" of Byzantine/Greek Intrigue, which is a method of "manipulative, devious, twisting of facts" to make a situation favourable to ones self, look it up on search engines, look it up on the thesaurusus.

Yes the UN calls for all sides and all forces present forces on the island to withdraw, refrain from causing and escalating any conflicts, that is true, but this does not change the reasons behind the Cyprus Conflict and the continuation of its risks in our days as detailed in this thread and on this post:

Turkish armed forces could not withdraw from the island, as they are the official guarantor of the island and moral guarantor of the people there, when we saw an ethnic cleansing of Turks (im not going to post bloody pics, thats not the aim of this thread), and officially worded by Greeks/Greek Cypriots:

"Unless this small Turkish community forming part of the Turkish race..is expelled, the duties of the Eoka 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 (Greece).."
(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).

Even the former President of the Greek side recognizes the complexities and in reference to the falcities the Greek manipulations try to show to the world the presence of Turkish forces as "invasion" , "occupation" has commented that:

"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 and in 1974 a few days before the Turkish intervention) coup in Cyprus, the legal government was overthrown, the constitution was violated (also violated in 1964 with Greek sides attempts, the co-founded Republic of Cyprus had already ceased to exist in 1964 constitutional crisis) and Turkey (AS A GUARANTOR POWER) had the right of intervention. The things that count are arguments, not slogans."
("My Deposition" by Glafcos Clerides [former President of Greek "Cypriot Republic of Cyprus," the new Greek Cyprus not the orginal Republic of Cyprus co-founded by both Turks and Greeks], Vol.3]

The UN has always called on both sides of theisland and involved parties, Turkiye, Greece and UK to:

“The Security Council "Calls upon the leaders of the two communities to pursue their efforts to reach freely a mutual acceptable solution providing for the establishment of a federation that will be bi-communal as regards the constitutional aspects and bi-zonal as regards the territorial aspects ... and to cooperate, on equal footing, with the Secretary General..."
(UN Resolution 649, March 12, 1990).

But the Greek side (Cypriot Greek and Greece) has always objected to a mutual peace, at best sabotaging UN sponsored talks with discursive practices and at worst ethnically cleansing Turks as show in history and as show in recent intentions, even shown by the words of Greek Cypriot government/military leaders:

"Turks are a barbarous people. They are the last barbarians of civilization. A people with violent instincts and a thirst for blood. We rather live with savage animals than the Turks. Until the Turks digest that Cyprus is Greek they can live in this country only as a minority. And our slogan can not be anything else but "best Turk is a dead Turk." The union of Cyprus with Greece is the only democratic solution for the Cyprus problem. No to the talks, no to the federation, Enosis and let channels fill with the flow of blood."
(Excerpt appeared in Philelephteros, November 11, 1990)

"If the Cretan Greeks (given as example because the Cretan Greeks ethnically cleansed the island of its Turkish population since Greek independence) were living in Cyprus today not a Turkish Cypriot would have been in the North.”
(Statement of the Commander of the Greek Cypriot National Guard General Siradakis, Selides Magazine, October 3, 1992).

“I see the fate of Greece and Cyprus as being intertwined. Because what is Cyprus? is it not Greece. I say to the Greeks who come here "The place that you have come to is not a foreign place, it is Greece.'"
(Statement of the Commander of the Greek Cypriot National Guard General Siradakis, Selides Magazine, October 3, 1992).

Because, like as it was before the creation of Turkish-Greek co-founded/equal/sovereign (original) Republic of Cyprus (with the 16 August 1960 Constituion), like as it was with the Greek attempts to change this Constitution stripping the Turkish side of its rights as co-founders/equal/sovereignty, like as it was in the words of Greek leaders early in 1960s openly both to the domestic and international press stating and claiming ambitions of annexing the island and joining with Greece, like as it was with the Greek Akritas Plan detailing the foundations of the ethnic cleansing of Turks by the Greeks, like as it was with the actually ethnic cleansing (I will not post pics or pic links, its out of the aims of this thread), like as it was with the junta in Greece sending forces to the island and Greek Cypriot cooperation to join forces and annex the island, ALL BEFORE the Operation Atilla, Turkish intervention of 24 July 1974:

The Greek sides only aim was to make the island part of Greece and ethnically cleanse the island of its Turkish heritage.

We saw this in history, ethnically cleansing of Turks by Greeks, on Create, Dodecanese, Lemnos islands, west Thrace and we see it in the Cyrpus Conflict all since the Greek independence, in modern times.

This is the reason why all international peace efforts sponsored and run by UN, USA, UK, EU and Turkiye have not been successfull. But the UN still tries time and time after to find a peaceful solution to the island, trying to get both sides to talk, solve problems and at many times propose UN peace Plans calling on for concession on both Turkish and Greek side to make so both sides would have a win-win scenarion. But the Greek side always rejected the peace, even the latest such international peace effort:

“25 April 2004 -- The United Nations says it will close the office of its peace envoy in Cyprus following the overwhelming rejection by Greek Cypriots of a UN plan to reunify the divided island. Meanwhile, the United States and senior European Union officials are expressing disappointment about the rejection of the plan by the Greek Cypriots.

In a referendum yesterday, more than 75 percent of Greek Cypriot voters voted against the UN plan to end the 30-year division of the island. In a separate vote on the northern side of the island, nearly 65 percent of Turkish Cypriots supported the UN plan. “
http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle...13BEBF08E.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004....unitednations
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3656553.stm
http://www.euractiv.com/en/enlargeme...article-109929

So with all this in mind, I think its time that both sides went their own way, mutually accepting each others decisions for their own future.

Whether it be the "Turkish Republic of Cyprus" and "Greek Republic of Cyprus" or respectively joining with their mainland countries, Turkiye and Greece.

This is the only solution that will bring the longest lasting and mutually beneficial justice to the problem on the island.

Cheers.

 

[s3kiz]

The Akritas Plan

The rising tensions of the early 1960s spurred the formation of paramilitary groups on both sides, and as the constitutional crisis came to a head in 1962-63, both prepared for violence. The Greek Cypriots were better armed and more ideologically driven, and appeared to welcome the crisis---possibly including Makarios's Thirteen Points, which it sets out as a course of action---as a likely provocation to Turkish Cypriots. An expected reaction from the Turkish Cypriot community, either to Makarios's constitutional gambit or some other incident, would in turn set the Greek Cypriot cadres into action. The plan for that action, revealed by a Greek Cypriot newspaper after the fact, was the so-called Akritas Plan, which is reproduced below.

The Akritas Plan: ​

"The recent public statements of His Beatitude have outlined the course which our national issue will follow. As we have stressed in the past, national struggles are neither judged nor solved from day to day, nor is it possible to fix time limits for the achievement of the various stages of their development. Our national cause must always be examined and judged in the light of the conditions and developments of the moment, and the measures which will be taken, the tactics, and the time of implementing each measure must be determined by the conditions existing at the time, both internationally, and internally. The entire effort is trying and must necessarily pass through various stages, because the factors which influence the final result are many and varied. It is sufficient, however, that all should understand that the

measures which are prescribed now constitute only the first step, one simple stage towards the final and unalterable national objective, i.e., to the full and unfettered exercise of the right of self-determination of the people.

Since the purpose remains unalterable, what remains is to examine the subject of tactics. It is necessary to divide the subject of tactics under two headings, that is: internal tactics and external, since in each case both the presentation and the handling of our cause will be different.

A. External tactics (international).

During the recent stages of our national struggle the Cyprus problem has been presented to diplomatic circles as a demand for the exercise of the right of self-determination by the people of Cyprus. In securing the right of self-determination obstacles have been created by the well-known conditions, the existence of a Turkish minority, by the inter-communal conflict and the attempts to show that co-existence of both communities under one government was impossible. Finally, for many international circles the problem was solved by the London and Zurich Agreements, a solution which was presented as the result of negotiations and agreement between the two sides.

a) Consequently, our first target has been to cultivate internationally the impression that the Cyprus problem has not really been solved an the solution requires revision.

b) Our first objective was our endeavour to be vindicated as the Greek majority and to create the impression that:

(i) The solution given is neither satisfactory not fair;

(ii) The agreement reached was not the result of a free and voluntary acceptance of a compromise of the conflicting views;

(iii) That the revision of the agreements constitutes a compelling necessity for survival, and not an effort of the Greeks to repudiate their signature;

(iv) That the co-existence of the two communities is possible, and

(v) That the strong element on which foreign states ought to rely is the Greek majority and not the Turkish Cypriots.

c) All the above has required very difficult effort, and has been achieved to a satisfactory degree. Most of the foreign representatives have been convinced that the solution given was neither fair nor satisfactory, that it was signed under pressure and without real negotiations and that it was imposed under various threats. It is significant argument that the solution achieved has not been ratified by the people, because our leadership, acting wisely, avoided calling the people to ratify it by a plebiscite, which the people, in the 1959 spirit, would have done if called upon.

Generally, it has been established that the administration of Cyprus up to now has been carried out by the Greeks and that the Turks have confined themselves to a negative role.

d) Second objective. The first stage having been completed, we mus programme the second stage of our activities and objectives on the international level. These objectives in general can be outlined as follows:

(i) The Greek efforts are directed towards removing unreasonable and unfair provisions of administration and not to oppress the Turkish Cypriots;

(ii) The removal of these oppressive provisions must take place now because tomorrow it will be too late;

(iii) The removal of these provisions, despite the fact that this is reasonable and necessary, because of the unreasonable attitude of the Turks is not possible bv agreement, and therefore unilateral action is justified;

(iv) The issue of revision is an internal affair of the Cypriots and does not give the right of military or other intervention;

(v) The proposed amendments are reasonable, just, and safeguard the reasonable rights of the minority.

e) Today it has been generally demonstrated that the international climate is against every type of oppression and, more specifically, against the oppression of minorities. The Turks have already succeeded in persuading international opinion that union of Cyprus with Greece amounts to an attempt to enslave them. Further, it is estimated that we have better chances of succeeding in our efforts to influence international public opinion in our favour if we present our demand, as we did during the struggle, as a demand to exercise the right of self-determination, rather than as a demand for union with Greece (Enosis). In order, however, to secure the exercise of complete and free self-determination, we must get free of all those provisions of the constitution and of the agreements (Treaty of Guarantee, Treaty of Alliance) which prevent the free and unfettered expression and implementation of the wishes of our people and which create dangers of external intervention. It is for this reason that the first target of attack has been the Treaty of Guarantee, which was the first that was stated to be no longer recognised by the Greek Cypriots.

When this is achieved no legal or moral power can prevent us from deciding our future alone and freely and exercising the right of self-determination by a plebiscite.

From the above, the conclusion can be drawn that for the success of our plan a chain of actions is needed, each of which is necessary, otherwise, future actions will remain legally unjustified and politically unachieved, while at the same time we will expose our people and the country to serious consequences. The actions to be taken can be summed up as follows:

a) Amendment of the negative elements of the agreements and parallel abandonment of the Treaties of Guarantee and Alliance. This step is necessary because the need for amendments of the negative aspects of the treaties is generally accepted internationally and is considered justified (we can even justify unilateral action), while at the same time intervention from outside to prevent us amending them is unjustified and inapplicable;

b) As a result of our above actions, the Treaty of Guarantee (right of unilateral intervention) becomes legally and substantively inapplicable;

c) The people, once Cyprus is not bound by the restrictions of the Treaties of Guarantee and Alliance regarding the exercise of the right of self-determination, will be able to give expression to and implement their desire.

d) Legal confrontation by the forces of State of every internal or external intervention.

It is therefore obvious that if we hope to have any chance of success internationally in our above actions, we cannot and must not reveal or declare the various stages of the struggle before the previous one is completed. For instance, if it is accepted that the above four stages are necessary, then it is unthinkable to speak of amendments in stage (a) if stage (d) is revealed. How can it be possible to aim at the amendment of the negative aspects of the constitution by arguing that this is necessary for the functioning of the State if stage (d) is revealed?

The above relate to targets, aims and tactics in the international field. And now on the internal front:

B. Internal Front.

1. The only danger which could be described as insurmountable is the possibility of external intervention, by force, not so much because of the material damage, nor because of the danger itself (which, in the last analysis, it is possible for us to deal with partly or totally by force), but mainly because of the possible political consequences. Intervention is threatened or implemented before stage (c), then such intervention would be legally debatable, if not justified. This fact has a lot of weight both internationally and in the United Nations.

From the history of many recent instances we have learnt that in not a single case of intervention, whether legally justified or not, has either the United Nations or any other power succeeded in evicting the invader without serious concessions detrimental to the victim. Even in the case of the Israeli attack against Suez, which was condemned by almost all nations, and on which Soviet intervention was threatened, Israel withdrew, but received as a concession the port of Eilat on the Red Sea. Naturally, more serious dangers exist for Cyprus.

If, on the other hand, we consider and justify our action under (a) above well, on the one hand, intervention is not justified and, on the other, it cannot be carried out before consultations between the guarantors Greece, Turkey and the UK. It is at this stage of consultations (before intervention) that we need international support. We shall have it if the proposed amendments by us appear reasonable and justifiable.

Hence, the first objective is to avoid intervention by the choice of the amendments we would request in the first stage.

Tactics: We shall attempt to justify unilateral action for constitutional amendments once the efforts for a common agreement are excluded. As this stage the provisions in (ii) and (in) are applicable in parallel.

2. It is obvious that in order to justify intervention, a more serious reason must exist and a more immediate danger than a simple constitutional amendment.

Such a reason could be an immediate declaration of Enosis before stages (a) - (c) or serious inter-communal violence which would be presented as massacres of the Turks.

Reason (a) has already been dealt with in the first part and, consequently, it remains only to consider the danger of inter-communal violence. Since we do not intend, without provocation, to attack or kill Turks, the possibility remains that the Turkish Cypriots, as soon as we proceed to the unilateral amendment of any article of the constitution,

will react instinctively, creating incidents and clashes or stage, under orders, killings, atrocities or bomb attacks on Turks, in order to create the impression that the Greeks have indeed attacked the Turks, in which case intervention would be justified, for their protection.

Tactics. Our actions for constitutional amendments will be in the open and we will always appear ready for peaceful negotiations. Our actions will not be of a provocative or violent nature.

Should clashes occur, they will be dealt with in the initial stages legally by the legally established security forces, in accordance with a plan. All actions will be clothed in legal form.

3. Before the right of unilateral amendments of the constitution is established, decisions and actions which require positive violent acts, such as, for example, the use of force to unify the separate municipalities, must be avoided. Such a decision compels the Government to intervene by force to bring about the unification of municipal properties, which will probably compel the Turks to react violently. On the contrary, it is easier for us, using legal methods, to amend, for instance, the provision of the 70 to 30 ratio in the public service, when it is the Turks who will have to take positive violent action, while for us this procedure will not amount to action, but to refusal to act (to implement).

The same applies to the issue of the separate majorities with regard to taxation legislation.

These measures have already been considered and a series of similar measures have been chosen for implementation. Once our right of unilateral amendments to the constitution is established de facto by such actions, then we shall be able to advance using our judgment and our strength more decidedly.

4. It is, however, naive to believe that it is possible to proceed to substantive acts of amendment of the constitution, as a first step of our general plan, as has been described above, without the Turks at tempting to create or to stage violent clashes. For this reason, the existence of our organisation is an imperative necessity because:

a) In the event of instinctive violent Turkish reactions, if our counter-attacks are not immediate, we run the risk effacing panic in the Greeks in the towns and thus losing substantial vital areas, while, on the other hand, an immediate show of our strength may bring the Turks to their senses and confine their actions to sporadic insignificant acts, and

b) In the event of a planned or staged Turkish attack, it is imperative to overcome it by force in the shortest possible time, because if we succeed in gaining command of the situation (in one or two days), no outside, intervention would be either justified or possible.

c) In either of the above cases, effective use of force in dealing with the Turks will facilitate to a great extent our subsequent actions for further amendments. It would then be possible for unilateral amendments to be made, without any Turkish reaction, because they will now that their reaction will be weak or seriously harmful for their community, and

d) In the event of the clashes becoming more general or general we must be ready to proceed with the actions described in (a) to (b), including the immediate declaration of Enosis, because then there would be no reason to wait nor room for diplomatic action.

5. At no stage should we neglect the need to enlighten, and to face the propaganda and the reactions of those who cannot or should not know our plans. It has been shown that our struggle must pass through four stages and that we must not reveal publicly and at improper times our plans and intentions. Complete secrecy is more than a national duty.

.....etc etc etc.....(the links at the bottom read it all)

THE LOSS OF ANY DOCUMENT ON THE ABOVE AMOUNTS TO TREASON AGAINST THE NATION.

No act can damage our struggle as vitally and decisively as the revealing of the present document or its publication by our opponents. With the exception of word-of-mouth briefing, all our other actions, i.e., publications in the Press, resolutions, etc., must be very restrained and no mention of the above should be made. Similarly, in public speeches and gatherings, only responsible persons may make, under the personal responsibility of the Leader or Deputy Leaders, references in general terms to the plan. They must also have the authorisation of either the Leader or the Deputy Leader who must approve the text.

ON NO ACCOUNT ARE REFERENCES IN THE PRESS OR ANY OTHER PUBLICATION PERMITTED.

Tactics. Complete briefing of our people and of the public by word of mouth. Publicly we shall endeavour to appear as moderates. Projection of or reference to our plans in the Press or in writing is strictly prohibited. Officials and other responsible persons will continue to brief and to raise the morale and the desire for the struggle of our people, but such briefing excludes making our plans public knowledge by the Press or otherwise.

NOTES: This document will be destroyed by fire on the personal responsibility of the Leader and the Deputy Leader in the presence of all the members of the General Staff within 10 days from its receipt. Copies or part copies are prohibited: members of the staff of the Office of the Deputy Leader may have copies on the personal responsibility of the Leader, but may not remove them from the Office of the Deputy Leader.

The Leader AKRITAS"
http://www.cyprus-conflict.net/akritas_plan.htm


Cheers.

 

[s3kiz]

"Everything you need to know about the Akritas plan"

By Loucas Charalambous - Cyprus Mail, April 17, 2005
(Greek Cypriot Journalist and Newspaper)

"The MOST important document there is about the Cyprus problem is the ‘Akritas’ plan. It is incontrovertible testimony as to how the Cyprus problem was created in the form it has had for the last 42 years. Nobody should be allowed to talk about the Cyprus problem if he has not read the ‘Akritas’ plan.

Of course, most Greek Cypriots are completely in the dark about the history of their country’s troubles, something which constantly pushes them into making new mistakes. I would bet my life that among the hundreds of clueless and uneducated characters who appear in the media every day as journalists – supposedly to inform the public – you will not find 10 who would have read this document, which is the key to understanding the Cyprus problem. This bitter truth alone explains why we Greek Cypriots are rooted to a primitive level of politics.

In reality, the Cyprus problem was brought into being by this idiotic and nationally catastrophic plan. A plan, which, in Demetris Christofias’ phraseology, would have been describe as treasonous. It is a glowing monument of political stupidity and irresponsibility. The very same man who had signed the Treaty of Establishment for this state and his ministers, as soon as this state came into being, began plotting its dissolution. And for this purpose they set up an illegal organisation. Only in the minds of a Makarios, a Papadopoulos, a Yiorkadjis, a Kyprianou and a Lyssarides could such paranoid politics have found fertile ground.

The gist of this insane plan is included in the following few lines:

Stage 1: Create of the impression among international public opinion, that the Cyprus issue had not been solved correctly and condemn of the Treaty of Guarantee, “the first target of our attack”."

-Referring to the Greek attempt to change the Constitution of 16 August 1960 and change the co-founded (original) Republic of Cyprus, stripping the rights of Turkish Cypriots, paving the way for ethnic cleansing of them, and annexation of the island to Greece.

"Stage 2: Seek amendment of negative elements of the agreements by all means. “We can even justify unilateral action.”"

-Creation of frictions and creating causes for the Greek side to make it self look right for the changes it wanted to do to the agreements: Constitution, international treaties etc, that gave the Greeks and Turks equal footing and co-founding of (original) Republic of Cyprus, these are termed "negative elements" to be changed by "unilateral action" = ethnic cleansing of Turks by Greeks.

"Stage 3: “Following the above action, the Treaty of Guarantee (right of interventions) is rendered legally and substantively unenforceable”.

-Completely breach the 16 August 1960 Constitution of the (original) Republic of Cyprus, and its relative international treaties.

Stage 4: “With Cyprus freed (from the treaties of Alliance and Guarantee) the people would be enabled to express and implement their desire.”

- Read "Freed from the 16 August 1960 treaties and international treaties, giving Turkish side co-foundation/political/human rights."

Stage 5: “Lawful confrontation by the forces of the state (police and friendly military troops) of any intervention from within or from outside because then we would be completely independent.”

-Turning the once peacefull island into a "Greek-Fortress".

This plan was not put together by people who had escaped from a mental hospital, as some may think. Its writers made it obvious that they knew very well they were playing with fire. The only parts of the document which are written in block capitals are those informing the recipients that leaking of it was tantamount to “high treason” and urging members of the organisation of their obligation to “destroy by fire”, once it had been read. They were obviously concerned that the Turks might have got wind of it.

This was the great plan, with which Mr Papadopoulos – the deputy chief of Akritas – and his fellow-fighters destroyed the (original) Cyprus Republic....The achievement of Papadopoulos’ and his organisation’s national activities was truly impressive."



Cheers.

 

[eliaslar]

I would like to ask Turkey always see ethnic cleansings of other countries on Turks?
I would also like to ask our Turkish friends. Has Turkey commited an ethnic cleansing on other minorities leaving in Turkey?

Of course it's Turkey's right to defend the Turkish and Muslim (as they are seen as Turkish by Turkey) speaking minorities, who apparently are remnants of the Ottoman empire which ruled the Balkans for many years. But does it have the right to call everything an ethnic cleansing?

Maybe our Turkish friends can give us an answer if there were any Turkish attrocities on Greek side in Cyprus, during their campaign or before it.

Also Turkey has a certain and maybe one sided way to see things, for more information i would like to link everyone who is interested in the threads
Russia vs Azerbaijan
http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7365&page=4
and Balance of Power
http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7459

 

[s3kiz]

Thank you for the above post eliaslar.

Providing the links to Russia vs Azerbaijan and Balance of Power threads was a good idea, much appreciated.

They show the existance and ethnic cleaning Turks are going through in Greece even in 2008. Its interesting how you claim the non existance of Turkish minority in Greece even in this above post you made and giving links to those two threads which basicly show this fact too, with many facts there, even with links to the European Court of Human Rights ruling of 31 March 2008 as evidence.

But I'll put aside your blatant "interpretational skills" and ask you to, please not try to sabotage this thread with "mud trowing" tactics and off topic (factual and fictional) claims like "didnt Turks do this?", "didnt Turks do that?" kind of an approach.

Many can/do bring past/present facts of "Greeks did this", "Greeks doing that" too in negative context, with evidence and proof, but this thread is not a "pissing contest" so to say, lets stay on topic.

So, the level and scope of this thread, and DefenceTalk in general is not about that, and please dont turn it into that.

Dont make true what Loucas Charalambous of Cyprus Mail newspaper, said on his April 17 2005 dated news article, I posted above:

"....we Greek (Cypriots) are rooted to a primitive level of politics."

Lets continue on here with discussing solely matters of the "Cyprus Conflict: past, present and future".

In context of its origins of conflict, the events of this conflict and future projections of this conflict, in light of human, economic, military strategies and issues.

Because:

1)You cant solve problems when its bundled up, when there is "mud-throwing" to this effect, it will not be fruitfull to solve problems, such approach will only imbed existing ones and create newer problems;

2)I dont want this thread CLOSED due to flaming caused by such sabotage that is bound to create a flaming contest.

This is a discussion thread solely on the Cyprus Conflict, for people to read, learn, discuss mutually all varying opinions and facts related to this conflict in mutual respect and historic factuality for all the future years of DefenceTalk.

Thats what this place is, lets respect it.

And work for peace even if we disagree.

Cheers.

 

[wyoming cowboy]

wyoming cowboy

S3kiz posted that, not me. Quoted Newspaper report:
- Washington Post, 23 July, 1974. You challenged me to find articles from newspapers from that era here you go.

The date of the article is july 23 1974, three days after the invasion of cyprus by Turkey...A war was begun by Turkey and this would follow with thousands of civilians being killed from both sides...The coup started on the 15th of july 1974..until the 19th of july 1974...

 

[eliaslar]

I must thank you dear s3kiz because in the threads i linked they are showing both sides of view, not only Turkey's side.

Also i must inform you that the reason i made the questions, was to learn your point of view about these subjects, but as i see you may not want to answer and on the contrary your phrasal attack is obvious.

Your side mentioned the words "ethnic cleansing", which is a very "heavy" phrase with actual meanings and clear messages. It has the same meaning with genocide i think.

 

[eliaslar]

About Cyprus problem now

It is important to realize that Turkey has always planned the invasion of Cyprus and events prior to 1974 just served as a pretext.

Taxim, (partition in Turkish) of the island was always in Turkey's plans. In 1956 the Turkish Cypriot leader F. Kutchuck submitted on a map Taxim proposals dividing Cyprus to North and South (Hitchens "Cyprus: Hostage to History").

In 1974 the Turkish troops divided the island to north and south deviating from the 1956 plan only in minor details. It is therefore clear that the 1974 invasion was a part of a plan and not the result of any actions of the Greek-Cypriots in the sixties.

The Turkish Cypriot leader Denktash agreed when he stated: "Even if the Turkish-Cypriots did not exist, Turkey would not have left Cyprus to Greece" ( Turkish newspaper "Milliyet" 7/23/1985).

Very interesting what Mr Denktash said.

Here is a whole list of Turkish violations in Cyprus
http://www.kypros.org/Cyprus_Problem/human_rights.html

 

[s3kiz]

Atilla [TR] wrote:


"You challenged me to find articles from newspapers from that era here you go.”

“In a Greek raid on a small Turkish village near Limassol, 36 people out of a population of 200 were killed. The Greeks said that they had been given orders to kill the inhabitants of the Turkish villages before the Turkish forces arrived.”
Quoted Newspaper report from Washington Post, 23 July, 1974."

The date of the article is july 23 1974, three days after the invasion of cyprus by Turkey...A war was begun by Turkey and this would follow with thousands of civilians being killed from both sides...The coup started on the 15th of july 1974..until the 19th of july 1974...

wyoming cowboy as an ethnic Greek living in USA, why are you trying to twist what Atilla [TR] is saying, he was referring to the Greeks actions of ethnically cleansing the Turks on the island of Cyprus since the 1960s.

Yes the excerpt of the news article of Washington Post provided by him is dated 23 July 1974 and the date of Greek military sent from coup in Greece on 15 July 1974, and the internationaly legal Turkish intervention is on 20 July 1974 (as Turkiye was a guarantor state of 16 August 1960 Consitution of [original] Republic of Cyprus, pls follow the thread from the start full of evidence) to stop this ethnic cleansing and the attempted genocide of Turks operated by Greeks.

Because the date of that Washintong Post article surpasses these events does not hide the events that occured between 1960 and 1974, and you cant hide this with such a simple attempt at doing so.

I mean;

-the Byzantine/Greek Intrigue, an “art-form” of “manipulating, deviously twisting the perception of things” to suits ones interests as it has been going on for some millenium in history, and taking its place in modern day politics and international affairs (as detailed in many thesaurus),

and,

-the situation of "....we Greek (Cypriots) are rooted to a primitive level of politics." As detailed in a Greek newspaper in an article outlining the Greek Akritas plan of 1960s setting out to first strip the co-founder/political equality rights of Turkish side as owners of the (original) Republic of Cyprus and then ethnically cleansing and attempting genocide on them, written by Loucas Charalambous of Cyprus Mail on his April 17 2005

Does not give you the right to hide behind the date of the Washington Post news article Atilla [TR] was referring to. This is a malicious attempt to hide the realities of the Cyprus conflict and hide the ethnic cleansing of Turks, and the attempted denocide on them by Greeks.

There are innumerous international news articles and eyewitnesses of the events since 1960 that prove this ambition. Just because I have made it a principle to keep this thread on intellectual and factual basis, does not mean there arent any evidence of the ethnic cleansing of the islands Turkish population.

This is a conflict that originated in Greek attempts to first politically cleanse the Turkish side of their rights as given in the 16 August 1960 Constitution of (original) Republic of Cyprus of which they were co-founders of, and later the ethnic cleansing and attempted genocide on them by the Greek side.

As a result of this conflict everyone suffered, whether they are Turk or Greek, amoung other nationalities. But to solve a conflict you need to go to its origins and events that escalated it, instead on swimming on the periphery and bringing up surficial arguments like you have.

Please, be more decerning if its peace that you want.
(This goes for all participating on this thread.)

Cheers.

 

[s3kiz]

Part 1/3

Attempted Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing in Cyprus
By Michael Stephen, former British Parliamentarian (1992-97)

The assertion by Mr. Christides (May 10, 1999) that there was no ethnic cleansing or attempted genocide of Turkish Cypriots by Greek Cypriots is ridiculous. Until influential Greek Cypriots come to terms with the appalling behavior of their community toward the smaller Turkish Cypriot community and stop trying to persuade themselves and the world that each side was as much to blame as the other, there will be no reconciliation in Cyprus.
What did George Ball and Sir Alec Douglas say about the intentions of Archbishop Makarios vis a vis the Turkish Cypriots?

In his memoirs, American Undersecretary of State George Ball said: "Makarios's central interest was to block off Turkish intervention so that he and his Greek Cypriots could go on happily massacring Turkish Cypriots. Obviously we would never permit that. "

The fact is, however, that neither the United Nations, nor anyone, other than Turkey ever took effective action to prevent it.

On Feb. 17, 1964 the Washington Post reported that "Greek Cypriot fanatics appear bent on a policy of genocide."

Former British Prime Minister Sir Alec Douglas-Home said, "I was convinced that if Archbishop Makarios could not bring himself to treat the Turkish Cypriots as human beings he was inviting the invasion and partition of the island."

On July 28, 1960 Makarios, the Greek Cypriot president, said: "The independence agreements do not form the goal they are the present and not the future. The Greek Cypriot people will continue their national cause and shape their future in accordance with THEIR will."

In a speech on Sept. 4, 1962 at Panayia Makarios said, "Until this Turkish community forming part of the Turkish race that has been the terrible enemy of Hellenism is expelled, the duty of the heroes of EOKA can never be considered terminated.

The Constitutional Coup
In November 1963 the Greek Cypriots demanded the abolition of no less than eight of the basic articles that had been included in the 1960 agreement for the protection of the Turkish Cypriots. The Turkish Cypriots, naturally, refused to agree.

The aim of the Greek Cypriots was to reduce the Turkish Cypriot people to the status of a mere minority, wholly subject to the control of the Greek Cypriots, pending ultimate destruction or expulsion of the Turkish Cypriots from the island.

"When the Turkish Cypriots objected to the amendment of the Constitution, Makarios put his plan into effect, and the Greek Cypriot attack began in December 1963," wrote Lt. Gen. George Karayiannis of The Greek Cypriot militia ("Ethnikos Kiryx" 15.6.65). The general was referring to the notorious "Akritas" plan, which was the blueprint for the annihilation of the Turkish Cypriots and the annexation of the island to Greece.

Events leading to the sending of the UN Peace-Keeping Force to the island
On Christmas Eve 1963 the Greek Cypriot militia attacked Turkish Cypriot communities across the island. Large numbers of men, women, and children were killed and 270 mosques, shrines and other places of worship were desecrated.

On Dec. 28, 1963, the Daily Express carried the following report from Cyprus: "We went tonight into the sealed-off Turkish Cypriot quarter of Nicosia in which 200 to 300 people had been slaughtered in the last five days. We were the first Western reporters there, and we have seen sights too frightful to be described in print. Horror was so extreme that the people seemed stunned beyond tears."

On Dec. 31, 1963, The Guardian reported: "It is nonsense to claim, as the Greek Cypriots do, that all casualties were caused by fighting between armed men of both sides. On Christmas Eve many Turkish Cypriot people were brutally attacked and murdered in their suburban homes, including the wife and children of a doctor-allegedly by a group of 40 men, many in army boots and greatcoats." Although the Turkish Cypriots fought back as best they could and killed some militia, there were no massacres of Greek Cypriot civilians.

On Jan. 1, 1964, the Daily Herald reported: "When I came across the Turkish Cypriot homes they were an appalling sight. Apart from the walls they just did not exist. I doubt if a napalm attack could have created more devastation. Under roofs springs, children's cots, and gray ashes of what had once been tables, chairs and wardrobes. In the neighboring village of Ayios Vassilios I counted 16 wrecked and burned out homes. They were all Turkish Cypriot's. In neither village did I find a scrap of damage to any Greek Cypriot house."

On Jan. 2, 1964, the Daily Telegraph wrote: "The Greek Cypriot community should not assume that the British military presence can or should secure them against Turkish intervention if they persecute the Turkish Cypriots. We must not be a shelter for double-crossers."

On Jan. 12, 1964, the British High Commission in Nicosia wrote in a telegram to London: "The Greek [Cypriot] police are led by extremist who provoked the fighting and deliberately engaged in atrocities. They have recruited into their ranks as 'special constables' gun-happy young thugs. They threaten to try and punish any Turkish Cypriot police who wishes to return to the Cyprus Government... Makarios assured Sir Arthur Clark that there will be no attack. His assurance is as worthless as previous assurances have proved."

On Jan. 14, 1964, the Daily Telegraph reported that the "Turkish Cypriot inhabitants of Ayios Vassilios had been massacred on Dec. 26, 1963" and reported their exhumation from a mass grave in the presence of the Red Cross.

A further massacre of Turkish Cypriots, at Limassol, was reported by The Observer on Feb. 16, 1964; and there were many more.

On Feb. 6, 1964, a British patrol found armed Greek Cypriot police attacking the Turkish Cypriots of Ayios Sozomenos. They were unable to stop the attack.

On Feb. 13, 1964, the Greeks and Greek Cypriots attacked the Turkish Cypriot quarter of Limassol with tanks, killing 16 and injuring 35.

On Feb. 15, 1964, the Daily Telegraph reported: "It is a real military operation which the Greek Cypriots launched against the 6,000 inhabitants of the Turkish Cypriot quarter yesterday morning. A spokesman for the Greek Cypriot government has recognized this officially. It is hard to conceive how Greek and Turkish Cypriots may seriously contemplate working together after all that has happened."

End Part 1/3

 

[s3kiz]

Part 2/3

Further attempts for ENOSIS
On Sept. 10, 1964, the U.N. Secretary-General reported that:
"UNFICYP carried out a detailed survey of all damage to properties throughout the island during the disturbances... It shows that in 109 villages, most of them Turkish-Cypriot or mixed villages, 527 houses have been destroyed while 2,000 others have suffered damage from looting.
In Ktima 38 houses and shops have been destroyed totally and 122 partially. In the Orphomita suburb of Nicosia, 50 houses have been totally destroyed while a further 240 have been partially destroyed there and in adjacent suburbs."

The U.K. House of Commons Select Committee on Foreign Affairs reviewed the Cyprus question in 1987 and reported unanimously on July 2 of that year that: "although the Cyprus Government now claims to have been merely seeking to 'operate the 1960 Constitution modified to the extent dictated by the necessities of the situation,' this claim ignores the fact that both before and after the events of, December 1963 the Makarios Government continued to advocate the cause of ENOSIS and actively pursued the amendment of the Constitution and the related treaties to facilitate this ultimate objective."

The committee continued: "Moreover, in June 1967 the Greek Cypriot legislature unanimously passed a resolution in favor of enosis, in blatant contravention of the 1960 Treaties and Constitution." (Art. I of the Treaty of Guarantee prohibited any action likely to directly or indirectly promote union with any other state or partition of the island, and Art. 185(2) of the Constitution is to similar effect.)

Professor Ernst Forsthoff, the neutral president of the Supreme Constitutional Court of Cyprus, told Die Welt on Dec. 27, 1963: "Makarios bears on his shoulders the sole responsibility for the recent tragic events. His aim is to deprive the Turkish community of their rights". In an interview with the UPI press agency on Dec. 30, 1963 he said, "All this happened because Makarios wanted to take away all constitutional rights from the Turkish Cypriots."

The Failure of the UN and the others
The United Nations not only failed to condemn the forcible usurpation of the legal order in Cyprus, but actually rewarded it by treating the by then wholly Greek Cypriot administration as if it were the government of Cyprus (Security Council Res. 186 of 1964). This acceptance has continued to the present day, and reflects no credit upon the United Nations, nor upon Britain, nor the other countries who have acquiesced.

On Aug. 12, 1964, the UK representative to the United Nations wrote to his government in London as follows:
"What is our policy and true feelings about the future of Cyprus and about Makarios? Judging from the English newspapers and many others, the feeling is very strong indeed against Makarios and his so-called government, and nothing would please the British people more than to see him toppled and the Cyprus problem solved by the direct dealings between the Turks and the Greeks. We are of course supporting the latter course, but I have never seen any expression of the official disapproval in public against Makarios and his evil doings. Is there an official view about this, and what do we think we should do in the long run? Sometimes it seems that the obsession of some people with "the Commonwealth" blinds us to everything else and it would be high treason to take more active line against Makarios and his henchmen. At other times the dominant feature seems to be concern lest active opposition against Makarios should lead to direct conflict with the Cypriots and end up with our losing our bases."

Exclusion of the Turkish Cypriots from representation at the international fora
Thereafter Turkish Cypriot MPs, judges, and other officials were intimidated or prevented by force from carrying out their duties.

According to the Select Committee, "The effect of the crisis of December 1963 was to deliver control of the formal organs of government into the hands of the Greek Cypriots alone. Claiming to be acting in accordance with the doctrine of necessity, the Greek Cypriot members of the House of Representatives enacted a series of laws which provided for the operation of the organs of government without Turkish Cypriot participation."

The report of the Select Committee continued: "Equality damaging from the Turkish Cypriot point of view was what they considered to be their effective exclusion from representation at and participation in the international fora where their case could have been deployed... An official Turkish Cypriot presence in the international political scene virtually disappeared overnight." It is not therefore surprising that the world has been persuaded to the Greek Cypriot point of view.

End Part 2/3

 

[s3kiz]

Part 3/3

Atrocities of the Greek Cypriots
More than 300 Turkish Cypriots are still missing without trace from these massacres of 1963/64. These dreadful events were not the responsibility of "the Greek Colonels" of 1974 or an unrepresentative handful of Greek Cypriot extremists.

The persecution of the Turkish Cypriots was an act of policy on the part of the Greek Cypriot political and religious leadership, which has to this day made no serious attempt to bring the murderers to justice.

The UK Commons Select Committee found that "there is little doubt that much of the violence which the Turkish Cypriots claim led to the total or partial destruction of 103 Turkish villages and the displacement of about a quarter of the total Turkish Cypriot population was either directly inspired by, or connived at, by the Greek Cypriot leadership."

The UN secretary-general reported to the Security Council:
"When the disturbances broke out in December 1963 and continued during the first part of 1964, thousands of Turkish Cypriots fled their homes, taking with them only what they could drive or carry, and sought refuge in safer villages and areas."

On Jan. 14, 1964, "ll Giorno" of Italy reported: "Right now we are witnessing the exodus of Turkish Cypriots from the villages. Thousands of people abandoning homes, land, herds. Greek Cypriot terrorism is relentless. This time the rhetoric of the Hellenes and the statues of Plato do not cover up their barbaric and ferocious behavior."

The Greek Cypriots sometimes allege that it was they who were attacked by the Turkish Cypriots, who were determined to wreck the 1960 agreements. However, the Turkish Cypriots were not only outnumbered by nearly four to one; they were also surrounded in their villages by armed Greek Cypriots; they had no way of protecting their women and children, and Turkey was 40 miles away across the sea. The very idea that in those circumstances the Turkish Cypriots were the aggressors is absurd.

The role of the mainland Greek troops in overthrowing of Makarios
There were further attacks on the Turkish Cypriots in 1967. In 1971, General Grivas returned to Cyprus to form EOKA-B, which was again committed to making Cyprus a wholly Greek island and annexing it to Greece.

In a speech to the Greek Cypriot armed forces at the time (quoted in "New Cyprus," May 1987) Grivas said: "The Greek forces from Greece have come to Cyprus in order to impose the will of the Greeks of Cyprus upon the Turks. We want ENOSIS but the Turks are against it. We shall impose our will. We are strong, and we shall do so."

By July 15, 1974, a powerful force of mainland Greek troops had assembled in Cyprus and with their backing, the Greek Cypriot National Guard overthrew Makarios and installed one Nicos Sampson as "president." On July 22, the Washington Star News reported: "Bodies littered the streets and there were mass burials... People told by Makarios to lay down their guns were shot by the National Guard."

Missing persons, what is the truth?
On April 17, 1991, Ambassador Nelson Ledsky testified before the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee that :
"most of the 'missing persons' disappeared in the first days of July 1974, before the Turkish intervention on the 20th. Many killed on the Greek side were killed by Greek Cypriots in fighting between supporters of Makarios and Sampson."

On Nov. 6, 1974, Ta Nea reported that dates from the graves of Greek Cypriots killed in the five days between July 15-20 were erased in order to blame these deaths on the subsequent Turkish military action.

On March 3, 1996, the Greek Cypriot Cyprus Mail wrote: "(Greek) Cypriot governments have found it convenient to conceal the scale of atrocities during the July 15 coup in an attempt to downplay its contribution to the tragedy of the summer of 1974 and instead blame the Turkish invasion for all casualties.

There can be no justification for any government that failed to investigate this sensitive humanitarian issue. The shocking admission by the Clerides government that there are people buried in Nicosia cemetery who are still included in the list of the 'missing' is the last episode of a human drama which has been turned into a propaganda tool."

On Oct. 19 1996, Mr. Georgios Lanitis wrote: "I was serving with the Foreign Information Service of the Republic of Cyprus in London... I deeply apologize to all those I told that there are 1,619 missing persons. I misled them. I was made a liar, deliberately, by the government of Cyprus . .... today it seems that the credibility of Cyprus is nil."

Had Turkey not intervened, what would have happened?
Turkish Cypriots appealed to the guarantor powers for help, but only Turkey was willing to make any effective response. On July 20, 1974 Turkey intervened under Article IV of the Treaty of Guarantee.

The Greek newspaper Eleftherotipia published an interview with Nicos Sampson on Feb. 26, 1981 in which he said, "Had Turkey not intervened I would not only have proclaimed ENOSIS, I would have annihilated the Turks in Cyprus."

More attacks against the Turkish community
The Times and The Guardian reported on Aug. 21, 1974 that in the village of Tokhni on Aug. 14, 1974 all the Turkish Cypriot men between the ages of 13 and 74, except for eighteen who managed to escape, were taken away and shot.

There were also reports that in Zyyi on the same day all the Turkish-Cypriot men aged between 19 an 38 were taken away and were never seen again and that Greek-Cypriots opened fire on the Turkish-Cypriot neighborhood of Paphos killing men, women, and children indiscriminately.

On July 23, 1974, the Washington Post reported that "in a Greek raid on a small Turkish village near Limassol 36 people out of a population of 200 were killed. The Greeks said that they had been given orders to kill the inhabitants of the Turkish villages before the Turkish forces arrived."

The Times and The Guardian also reported on the killings. "The Greeks began to shell the Turkish quarter on Saturday, refugees said. Kazan Dervis, a Turkish Cypriot girl aged 15, said she had been staying with her uncle."

"The [Greek Cypriot] National Guard came into the Turkish sector and shooting began. She saw her uncle and other relatives taken away as prisoners, and later heard her uncle had been shot." (Times 23.7.74)

On July 28, 1974 the New York Times reported that 14 Turkish-Cypriot men had been shot in Alaminos. On July 24, 1974 France Soir reported that "the Greeks burned Turkish mosques and set fire to Turkish homes in the villages around Famagusta. Defenseless Turkish villagers who have weapons live in an atmosphere of terror and they evacuate their homes and go and live in tents in the forest. The Greeks' actions are a shame to humanity."

On July 22, Turkish Prime Minister Ecevit called upon the United Nations to "stop the genocide of Turkish Cypriots" and declared, "Turkey has accepted a cease-fire, but will not allow Turkish Cypriots to be massacred."

The German newspaper Die Zeit wrote on Aug. 30, "The massacre of Turkish Cypriots in Paphos and Famagusta is the proof of how justified the Turks were to undertake their intervention."

"Turkish Cypriots, who had suffered from physical attacks since 1963, called on the guarantor powers to prevent a Greek conquest of the island. When Britain did nothing Turkey invaded Cyprus and occupied its northern part. Turkish Cypriots have constitutional right on their side and understandably fear a renewal of persecution if the Turkish army withdraws", the Daily Telegraph wrote on Aug. 15, 1996.

At last, peace for the Turkish Cypriots
"Turkey intervened to protect the lives and property of the Turkish-Cypriots, and to its credit it has done just that. In the 12 years since, there have been no killings and no massacres" Lord Willis (Labor) told the House of Lords on Dec. 17, 1986.

On March 12, 1977, Makarios declared, "It is in the name of ENOSIS that Cyprus has been destroyed."

The United Nations, the Commonwealth, and the rest of the world have put political expediency before principle and failed to condemn this appalling behavior.

Greek Cypriots are guilty of attempted genocide but no action has ever been taken against them. Instead they have been rewarded by recognition as the government of all Cyprus.

The Turkish Cypriots by contrast were frozen out of the United Nations, the Commonwealth and almost every other international organization.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/578321/posts

End Part 3/3

Cheers.

 

[eliaslar]

Maybe the origin of this problem is that Cyprus at first place got it's freedom from Great Britain.

Maybe it would have been inevitable for peace to be kept, as they both Greeks and Turkish population wanted to unite the island with their motherlands.

1956 the Turks with F. Kutchuck
1963 the Greeks with Akritas

Don't you think that peace was very fragile? Also attrocities happened from both sides, before the invasion and after the invasion, both sides can prove it with lots of articles.

 

[eliaslar]

The conclusion someone can make, by your comment, about international organisations, who have condemned Turkey lots of times (but such condemns may not count for Turkey) is very interesting. It gives me a feeling of disrespect of Turkish side by those organisations.

"The United Nations, the Commonwealth, and the rest of the world have put political expediency before principle and failed to condemn this appalling behavior.

Greek Cypriots are guilty of attempted genocide but no action has ever been taken against them. Instead they have been rewarded by recognition as the government of all Cyprus.

The Turkish Cypriots by contrast were frozen out of the United Nations, the Commonwealth and almost every other international organization."

I will go a bit off topic but on the other hand you use such organisations condemnations on Greece to claim the rights of the muslim minority.

It would be very usefull from your side to give us a list with the organisations we should follow in each case...you confused me a bit on what is right and what is wrong...

 

[wyoming cowboy]

wyoming cowboy

Part 3/3

Atrocities of the Greek Cypriots
More than 300 Turkish Cypriots are still missing without trace from these massacres of 1963/64. These dreadful events were not the responsibility of "the Greek Colonels" of 1974 or an unrepresentative handful of Greek Cypriot extremists.

The persecution of the Turkish Cypriots was an act of policy on the part of the Greek Cypriot political and religious leadership, which has to this day made no serious attempt to bring the murderers to justice.

The UK Commons Select Committee found that "there is little doubt that much of the violence which the Turkish Cypriots claim led to the total or partial destruction of 103 Turkish villages and the displacement of about a quarter of the total Turkish Cypriot population was either directly inspired by, or connived at, by the Greek Cypriot leadership."

The UN secretary-general reported to the Security Council:
"When the disturbances broke out in December 1963 and continued during the first part of 1964, thousands of Turkish Cypriots fled their homes, taking with them only what they could drive or carry, and sought refuge in safer villages and areas."

On Jan. 14, 1964, "ll Giorno" of Italy reported: "Right now we are witnessing the exodus of Turkish Cypriots from the villages. Thousands of people abandoning homes, land, herds. Greek Cypriot terrorism is relentless. This time the rhetoric of the Hellenes and the statues of Plato do not cover up their barbaric and ferocious behavior."

The Greek Cypriots sometimes allege that it was they who were attacked by the Turkish Cypriots, who were determined to wreck the 1960 agreements. However, the Turkish Cypriots were not only outnumbered by nearly four to one; they were also surrounded in their villages by armed Greek Cypriots; they had no way of protecting their women and children, and Turkey was 40 miles away across the sea. The very idea that in those circumstances the Turkish Cypriots were the aggressors is absurd.

The role of the mainland Greek troops in overthrowing of Makarios
There were further attacks on the Turkish Cypriots in 1967. In 1971, General Grivas returned to Cyprus to form EOKA-B, which was again committed to making Cyprus a wholly Greek island and annexing it to Greece.

In a speech to the Greek Cypriot armed forces at the time (quoted in "New Cyprus," May 1987) Grivas said: "The Greek forces from Greece have come to Cyprus in order to impose the will of the Greeks of Cyprus upon the Turks. We want ENOSIS but the Turks are against it. We shall impose our will. We are strong, and we shall do so."

By July 15, 1974, a powerful force of mainland Greek troops had assembled in Cyprus and with their backing, the Greek Cypriot National Guard overthrew Makarios and installed one Nicos Sampson as "president." On July 22, the Washington Star News reported: "Bodies littered the streets and there were mass burials... People told by Makarios to lay down their guns were shot by the National Guard."

Missing persons, what is the truth?
On April 17, 1991, Ambassador Nelson Ledsky testified before the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee that :
"most of the 'missing persons' disappeared in the first days of July 1974, before the Turkish intervention on the 20th. Many killed on the Greek side were killed by Greek Cypriots in fighting between supporters of Makarios and Sampson."

On Nov. 6, 1974, Ta Nea reported that dates from the graves of Greek Cypriots killed in the five days between July 15-20 were erased in order to blame these deaths on the subsequent Turkish military action.

On March 3, 1996, the Greek Cypriot Cyprus Mail wrote: "(Greek) Cypriot governments have found it convenient to conceal the scale of atrocities during the July 15 coup in an attempt to downplay its contribution to the tragedy of the summer of 1974 and instead blame the Turkish invasion for all casualties.

There can be no justification for any government that failed to investigate this sensitive humanitarian issue. The shocking admission by the Clerides government that there are people buried in Nicosia cemetery who are still included in the list of the 'missing' is the last episode of a human drama which has been turned into a propaganda tool."

On Oct. 19 1996, Mr. Georgios Lanitis wrote: "I was serving with the Foreign Information Service of the Republic of Cyprus in London... I deeply apologize to all those I told that there are 1,619 missing persons. I misled them. I was made a liar, deliberately, by the government of Cyprus . .... today it seems that the credibility of Cyprus is nil."

Had Turkey not intervened, what would have happened?
Turkish Cypriots appealed to the guarantor powers for help, but only Turkey was willing to make any effective response. On July 20, 1974 Turkey intervened under Article IV of the Treaty of Guarantee.

The Greek newspaper Eleftherotipia published an interview with Nicos Sampson on Feb. 26, 1981 in which he said, "Had Turkey not intervened I would not only have proclaimed ENOSIS, I would have annihilated the Turks in Cyprus."

More attacks against the Turkish community
The Times and The Guardian reported on Aug. 21, 1974 that in the village of Tokhni on Aug. 14, 1974 all the Turkish Cypriot men between the ages of 13 and 74, except for eighteen who managed to escape, were taken away and shot.

There were also reports that in Zyyi on the same day all the Turkish-Cypriot men aged between 19 an 38 were taken away and were never seen again and that Greek-Cypriots opened fire on the Turkish-Cypriot neighborhood of Paphos killing men, women, and children indiscriminately.

On July 23, 1974, the Washington Post reported that "in a Greek raid on a small Turkish village near Limassol 36 people out of a population of 200 were killed. The Greeks said that they had been given orders to kill the inhabitants of the Turkish villages before the Turkish forces arrived."

The Times and The Guardian also reported on the killings. "The Greeks began to shell the Turkish quarter on Saturday, refugees said. Kazan Dervis, a Turkish Cypriot girl aged 15, said she had been staying with her uncle."

"The [Greek Cypriot] National Guard came into the Turkish sector and shooting began. She saw her uncle and other relatives taken away as prisoners, and later heard her uncle had been shot." (Times 23.7.74)

On July 28, 1974 the New York Times reported that 14 Turkish-Cypriot men had been shot in Alaminos. On July 24, 1974 France Soir reported that "the Greeks burned Turkish mosques and set fire to Turkish homes in the villages around Famagusta. Defenseless Turkish villagers who have weapons live in an atmosphere of terror and they evacuate their homes and go and live in tents in the forest. The Greeks' actions are a shame to humanity."

On July 22, Turkish Prime Minister Ecevit called upon the United Nations to "stop the genocide of Turkish Cypriots" and declared, "Turkey has accepted a cease-fire, but will not allow Turkish Cypriots to be massacred."

The German newspaper Die Zeit wrote on Aug. 30, "The massacre of Turkish Cypriots in Paphos and Famagusta is the proof of how justified the Turks were to undertake their intervention."

"Turkish Cypriots, who had suffered from physical attacks since 1963, called on the guarantor powers to prevent a Greek conquest of the island. When Britain did nothing Turkey invaded Cyprus and occupied its northern part. Turkish Cypriots have constitutional right on their side and understandably fear a renewal of persecution if the Turkish army withdraws", the Daily Telegraph wrote on Aug. 15, 1996.

At last, peace for the Turkish Cypriots
"Turkey intervened to protect the lives and property of the Turkish-Cypriots, and to its credit it has done just that. In the 12 years since, there have been no killings and no massacres" Lord Willis (Labor) told the House of Lords on Dec. 17, 1986.

On March 12, 1977, Makarios declared, "It is in the name of ENOSIS that Cyprus has been destroyed."

The United Nations, the Commonwealth, and the rest of the world have put political expediency before principle and failed to condemn this appalling behavior.

Greek Cypriots are guilty of attempted genocide but no action has ever been taken against them. Instead they have been rewarded by recognition as the government of all Cyprus.

The Turkish Cypriots by contrast were frozen out of the United Nations, the Commonwealth and almost every other international organization.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/578321/posts

End Part 3/3

Cheers.

Again most of these articles you point out are after the invasion of Turkey on Cyprus..on July 20 1974, a war was begun by Turkey people from both sides took up arms to defend themselves The atrocities that Turkey committed during the invasion were horrendous 6,800 civilians killed 1500 missing in action and believed to be still alive...You say that Greece sent in a strong contingent of soldiers, that is not true again i reiterate the minority attempted between the years of 64-67 to userp the agreement that they had signed..20 percent are Turk cyp..they took up arms against the majority 80 percent ...The TMT the turk cyp terrorist organization was formed to kill Greek cyp EOKA on the other hand was formed to fight the British Empire..who began the killings obviously the Turk cyp TMT terrorist organization...The only ethnic conflicts were between 64-67...Again the Turk cyp were fanatical about TAKSIM partition even after they signed the 60 agreements...Again the violence between 64-67 occured when the Turk cyp took up arms against the Greek cyp...Again between 67-74 there was no ethnic violence Again...The coup by the Greek generals against Makarios did not have the support of the Greek cyp population, EOKA B was formed in 1971 in order to overthrow Makarios, Again EOKA B was not formed to kill Turk cyps..Again every UN resolution concerning Cyprus supports the sovereignty of the Republic of Cyprus and after 1974 calls for all Turkish troops to leave the island...Again the Turkish invasion of Cyprus is not legal under international law and UN resolutions and for all refugees Greek and Turk to return to their homes...Again follow the facts of the situation, The UN offered protection to certain villages that harbored TMT terrorist, not all Turk villages were offered protection because they were not threatened...Up until the invasion of 74 Turk cyps were returning from their self imposed enclave and living and working together with Greek cyp without any troubles..