MWF: Cyprus and a response to genocide
Thomas Buergenthal is a leading law scholar and judge of the International Court of Justice. He presented a lecture on the history of international human rights and how the law stands today. Judge Buergenthal explained that there is still a long way to go until the world has a system that can protect human rights, although he is optimistic about the future.
Judge Buergenthal spoke about the UN and how it comprises of member states. But most of these states are not committed to signing a binding bill of human rights. Therefore, the UN declaration of human rights has vague descriptions of members having to respect human rights but this declaration to not binding.
The European Court of Human Rights is the first court to successfully force governments to pay compensation and amend their constitutions. This court is where the most progress has been made on the Cyprus problem where Turkey has been held accountable for their invasion of northern Cyprus. In one of the landmark cases presented, Loizidou v. Turkey, the Court ordered Turkey to pay Loizidou approximately $915,000 in damages and costs for the house she had to flee when Turkey invaded.
I found Judge Buergenthal’s talk more a history of humans rights law rather than a discussion on the key issues on human rights as they stand today. What was more insightful was the question time. Someone from the audience asked if Australia should be held accountable for breaching international human rights for the atrocities of the stolen generation. It was interesting to discover that there is no actual bill of human rights that has jurisdiction over Australia. Judge Buergenthal answered this question by saying that Australia, being a member state of the UN, should have to answer for these crimes at the UN. But why hasn’t this happened already? There was also a question about corporations being tried for infringing human rights for example companies using children from third-world countries to work in their factories. Judge Buergenthal replied that there is only a moral obligation for these companies to “do the right thing” and that governments have a hard time controlling them. This just doesn’t seem good enough for me. It’s almost as if the countries running the world (America, UK), and all their best-buddy companies, can get away with anything. Where’s the justice in that?
This led to my question. I asked Judge Buergenthal in front a lecture of hundred of people, with my heart racing: Regarding the division of Cyprus in 1974 and Turkey invading northern Cyprus, do you believe that America and the UK should be held accountable in an international court of law for their workings in the background and conspiring to divide Cyprus?
To this Judge Buergenthal began speaking about recent court rulings in the international court, about land compensation and bringing the two sides together without answering my question.
The point that I came away with from this talk is that the world is unjust and the countries that are doing the real damage, behind closed doors, never have to answer for it.
So much for international law.
Serkan said,
August 29, 2009 at 2:34 pm
Hello Koraly,
You have raised an interesting point about property – one of the prominent complications that defines the scope of the situation in Cyprus. This complication rubs shoulders with genocide, human rights and a few others.
On this instance we shall concentrate on property, but not before I correct a passage of your writing above.
You have stated -
“This led to my question. I asked Judge Buergenthal in front a lecture of hundred of people, with my heart racing: Regarding the division of Cyprus in 1974 and Turkey invading northern Cyprus, do you believe that America and the UK should be held accountable in an international court of law for their workings in the background and conspiring to divide Cyprus?”
My response -
Turkey did not invade Cyprus. Turkey millitarily intervened on July 20, 1974 as one of the Guarantors of Cyprus (as stated in 1960 constitution).
The aim of Turkey was to re-instate the 1960 Cyprus constitution after the Junta in Greece had invaded Cyprus and overthrown Archbishop Makarios (President of Cyprus 1960-63). The Junta had replaced Makarios with Nicos Samson, a Greek nationalist, which hadn’t been elected by the people of Cyprus…a complete breach of the constitution, hence nullifying the whole constitution.
The intent of Turkey’s intervention was broadcast live on tv to the world on 20 July 1974. Turkish PM Bulent Ecevit stated “We are going to Cyprus to bring peace, not only to the Turkish Cypriots, but also to the Greek Cypriots.”
Now back to the topic of property.
Respective leaders for both sides – Mr Denktas & Mr Papandreau signed a population agreement in 1977 (I may be wrong with date, I can clarify). This meant that all of the Greek population will be relocated to the south, while all the Turkish population will be moved to the north of the island. The two leaders also discussed setting up a property commission that would provide everybody displaced with compensation equivalent to the lands that have been left behind. This would be in the form of land or a monetary payment. The failure of the Greek Cypriots to recognise the Turkish Cypriots as a partner in the Cyprus Republic let to a breakdown in negotiations.
The 2004 Annan Plan referendum (backed by the United Nations) was an excellent opportunity for Greek Cypriots to reclaim their properties in North Cyprus. Over 100,000 Greek Cypriots would have accessed their lands and lived in North Cyprus today.
The plan was rejected by 85% of Greek Cypriots because the Plan also backed a creation of a Turkish state (The Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus), of which they would live under if they settled in the north.
Since 2004 the Turkish Cypriot Government have developed a property commission aimed at providing Greek Cypriots with compensation for the lands they have left behind. Unfortunately only a handful of Greek Cypriots have put their case forward for compensation.
The Turkish Cypriot properties in the south is a topic which was rarely voiced up until the increased court battles raised against Turkey e.g. Lozidou case in the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).
Turkish Cypriots are also opting to fight for their properties by taking to court the Greek Cypriot Government. Prominent areas in the south including Larnaca Airport have been illegally built on lands owned by Turkish Cypriots.
A considerable amount of land in Cyprus including Maras (Varhosa) is deemed to be VAKIF land (Areas belonging to the state which cannot be developed without the consent of EVKAF – the Muslim organisation founded by the Ottoman Empire used to administer lands in Cyprus between 1571 – 1878). Recently a citizen of Turkey has come forward citing his title deeds to land in the south. He is a descendant of an Ottoman Sultan which had many acres of land and it has now been mysteriously developed by Greek Cypriots. The VAKIF question has put a totally new twist on the property issue in Cyprus.
My understanding of why Judge Buergenthal could not give you an answer Koraly is because the situation in Cyprus is so complex that it cannot be solved in the courts – hence the reason why no other cases against the Turkish Government have been successful since Lozidou because the courts have realised the complexity of the issue.
A complete settlement of the property issue in Cyprus can only be made with a comprehensive settlement to the Cyprus issue which also involves addressing the other factors as stated earlier. Unfortunately with a settlement both sides wil concede and there is no winner. It is with this settlement that the basis for cooperation between the two communities will commence.
Dimitri said,
August 30, 2009 at 1:50 am
Dear friend,
To give you an idea of some of the Cyprus problem. I was born in Cyprus and lived through this. Before 1940 there was no such thing as “Turkish-Cypriot” and if you want to check this find the agreement between England and Turkey in 1876(approx). After 1940 when the Cypriots started making noise for enosis with Greece, this annoyed this English government and England started persuading Turkey to show some interest in Cyprus when they never had any interest before. The Turkish government kept refusing England and then English started getting America involved to push Turkey to get involved. After a couple of years they were successful and then England came up with the term “Turkish-Cypriot”. Then, some extremists from Cyprus, the Turkish government and England formed an illegal organisation (TMT), their purpose being to create hate between the Turkish-Cypriots and Greek-Cypriots.
5 years before Cyprus was given their fake independence, some Greek-Cypriots formed EOKA to drive the English out of Cyprus. Any Turkish-Cypriots that followed the Greek-Cypriot mentality of enosis with Greece, was executed by the TMT. TMT then started bringing guns from Turkey and the English closed their eyes to this. The English then put TMT members in positions in the Cyprus police force to create hate between the Greek-Cypriots and Turkish-Cypriots. TMT was putting bombs in Cyprus with the help of the English government. The English government was creating propaganda around the world by blaming Greek-Cypriots for this. There is a lot more I want to say about this, but I can’t write a thesis. It is just to show how the situation in Cyprus began.
Turkey had no right to invade in Cyprus. Read the constitution of Cyprus. It says that the guarantor cannot invade Cyprus unless the Cypriot government asked them and if Cyprus is a threatened by another country. That is why the Turkish Republic of Cyprus is not recognised around the world. Greece, didn’t invade and they didn’t overthrow Makarios – the Americans did. There was already a Greek army in Cyprus at the time, as was there are Turkish army, and these small armies were allowed to be there as part of the Cyprus constitution. The Americans overthrew Makarios by brainwashing a group of Greek-Cypriot extremists (EOKA B) convincing them that Makarios was not interested in enosis with Greece. And if you want information about this, read Henry Kissinger’s book who was the state of secretary at the time for the US.
This is a never ending story. The only comment I want to add is that Cypriots have been manipulated by the English and US to satisfy their own agendas.
Serkan said,
August 30, 2009 at 5:30 am
Hello Dimitri,
It is nice to have another participant in the blog. Just as I have been responding to Korally, I’ll respond to each of your statements below.
You have stated -
“To give you an idea of some of the Cyprus problem. I was born in Cyprus and lived through this. Before 1940 there was no such thing as “Turkish-Cypriot” and if you want to check this find the agreement between England and Turkey in 1876(approx).”
Yes you are right Dimitri, there was no such thing as Turkish Cypriots. The British had imposed a system which recognised the two main communities on the island, you were either a Turkish speaking Muslim or a Greek speaking Christian. There were even individual Turkish & Greek schools and administrations to administer the two peoples.
The term ‘Turkish Cypriot’ or ‘Greek Cypriot’ is a manufactured term that has arisen in recent times to distinguish between the two people on the island, since the term ‘Cypriot’ cannot be defined to a single language, religion, culture/tradition.
You have stated -
“After 1940 when the Cypriots started making noise for enosis with Greece, this annoyed this English government and England started persuading Turkey to show some interest in Cyprus when they never had any interest before.”
Turkey has always had interest in Cyprus for a number of reasons. They include the fact that there is a Turkish population there, historical ties with the land, and the validity of claims to land there by its citizens.
The problem for Turkey was that they were in a state of dis-array trying to come to terms with their own economy, international relations, etc after 20 odd years after the war of independence.
You have stated that -
“Then, some extremists from Cyprus, the Turkish government and England formed an illegal organisation (TMT), their purpose being to create hate between the Turkish-Cypriots and Greek-Cypriots.”
You have your facts the wrong way round Dimitri. EOKA was formed in 1955 and TMT was formed to resist the terrorist activities of EOKA in 1958. You can clarify these facts on wikipedia.
You have stated -
“5 years before Cyprus was given their fake independence, some Greek-Cypriots formed EOKA to drive the English out of Cyprus. Any Turkish-Cypriots that followed the Greek-Cypriot mentality of enosis with Greece, was executed by the TMT.”
Dimitri it wasn’t some Greek Cypriots that formed EOKA. It was an organisation backed by Greeks from Greece also and the only party that semi-opposed EOKA was AKEL. The supporters of the communist AKEL group were murdered by fellow Greeks. I recommend that you watch the documentary named ATILLA 74 by Greek Cypriot Director Michael Cacoyannis that cites this.
No Turkish Cypriot ..regardless of political beleifs supported union with Greece.
You have stated -
“TMT then started bringing guns from Turkey and the English closed their eyes to this. The English then put TMT members in positions in the Cyprus police force to create hate between the Greek-Cypriots and Turkish-Cypriots.”
Yes you are correct. TMT began arming themselves during the 1960s against EOKA as Turkish Cypriots began to go missing from the roads while on their way to work or home. Over 500 Turkish Cypriots went missing between 1960-1974, today they are digging up their bones from wells and mass graves with the assistance of a joint Turkish-Greek-UN team.
The guns brought by TMT were old guns used during WWI in Turkey. These guns required gunpowder and nearly all of them failed to work due to the dampness at sea. The guns that did work were used by TMT fighters to protect their towns/villages from advancing EOKA terrorists. The guns were nothing really compared to what the Greek Cypriots had.
Turkish Cypriots were used as auxilliary police in Cyprus. Yes the death of Turkish Cypriot policemen by EOKA led to hightened tensions between the two communities.
You have stated -
“Turkey had no right to invade in Cyprus. Read the constitution of Cyprus. It says that the guarantor cannot invade Cyprus unless the Cypriot government asked them and if Cyprus is a threatened by another country.”
Dimitri Turkey did not invade Cyprus. Turkey militarily intervened in Cyprus because Greece had already invaded in the form of EOKA. You must remember Colonel Grivas had secretly slipped in to Cyprus from Greece with his army via the ships that traveled between Cyprus and Greece. EOKA was killing soldiers of the Government (British) at the time. Later EOKA was killing British, Turkish and Greeks after the 1960 Cyprus constitution was formed demanding union with Greece. At this point I do not see a functioning Cyprus Republic, especially once Nicos Samson (A Greek nationalist) was placed as President of Cyprus by Greece. Nicos Samson was not elected by Greek or Turkish Cypriots.
Turkey militarily intervened to re-instate Archbishop Makarios (President of Cyprus 1960-1963) which had fled for his life after members of the Cyprus National Guard (Greek Cypriot soldiers) were bribed and sided with Nicos Samson.
So Dimitri please tell me…What Cyprus Government existed at this point?
You have stated -
“There was already a Greek army in Cyprus at the time, as was there are Turkish army, and these small armies were allowed to be there as part of the Cyprus constitution.”
There was about 1000 mainland Greek troops and 650 Turkish mainland troops.
You have stated -
“The Americans overthrew Makarios by brainwashing a group of Greek-Cypriot extremists (EOKA B) convincing them that Makarios was not interested in enosis with Greece.”
Makarios was interested in ENOSIS in the smart way…with no spilling of blood. I can introduce you to many Turkish Cypriots in Melbourne that left Cyprus during the time of Makarios. They managed to obtain their visa to Australia, their passport, spending money and a Greek Cypriot in Australia as a sponsor within 24 hours. Don’t you think this it is very interesting to have all this organised in a single day? This is a whole new topic we can discuss later.
You have stated –
“This is a never ending story. The only comment I want to add is that Cypriots have been manipulated by the English and US to satisfy their own agendas.”
Yes Dimitri you are correct. This is all a never-ending story, and I am not saying that the Turks were complete angels in all of this. My underlying argument is that greece, Makarios and co should have put a lid on EOKA back in the day which would have prevented the innocent people from losing.
As for ENOSIS and TAKSIM, etc, that is all history now. The Greeks got their ENOSIS – they are now in the EU along with Greece. The Turks got their TAKSIM – they are now even closer to Turkey economically, militarily and politicaly.
Serkan.
Koraly Dimitriadis said,
August 29, 2009 at 11:39 pm
My fellow Turkish-Cypriot, you’ve covered quite a bit of ground here. But you have also proven my point: that instead of Greek-Cypriots and Turkish-Cypriots understanding that they were chess pieces in an elaborate plan hatched by the America and the UK instead they bicker about who is to blame. Regardless, I’d like to address your points:
You say “Turkey did not invade Cyprus. Turkey militarily intervened on July 20, 1974 as one of the Guarantors of Cyprus (as stated in 1960 constitution).”
The constitution which was forced onto Cypriots was a sham. Cypriots wanted their independence from British rule but Britain, America, Turkey and Greece did not want that. Cyprus is an important island and strategically located and I quote from the British cabinet minutes 21/7/1954 “The effect on Turkey and other Middle East countries, and indeed the United States, of any abrogation of British sovereignty is likely to be so serious that it is strategically necessary for Cyprus to remain British.” The leader of Cyprus, Makarios, was blackmailed to sign the constitution and this was validated by intelligence writer Nigel West. The fact is that you can spy on the entire world from Cyprus. And the UK and America still have bases in Cyprus, and Turkey, being part of NATO, is also another alley for America. I do not believe Cyprus should belong to any of these countries that were guarantors on the constitution. Cyprus is for Cypriots – we are not Turkish, we are not Greek, we are Cypriot, and we will not find peace until we come to this understanding.
You say “The aim of Turkey was to re-instate the 1960 Cyprus constitution…”
No, it was to carry out the plan that America, UK and Turkey had for Cyprus – for it to be divided. Turkish-Cypriots only made up 1/5 of the population of Cyprus. Why should they have 34% of the island? America, UK, Turkey and Greece did not want Makarios to rule because they knew he would kick America and the UK out of their bases. Yes there was civil unrest, but this unrest was escalated and made worse by propaganda that the UK was creating. They wanted civil unrest and did everything they could to make sure it happened.
You say “The failure of the Greek Cypriots to recognise the Turkish Cypriots as a partner in the Cyprus Republic let to a breakdown in negotiations.”
Let’s not get confused. The Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus is not recognised by any country except Turkey. It is not part of the EU but Cyprus is. Nowhere in the constitution did it say that Turkey was allowed to take 34% of Cyprus permanently. Turkey and Turkish-Cypriots are not the same thing. In fact, many Turkish Cypriots left Cyprus after Turkey took over because they were not happy with the government. The Turkish government still to this day lets Turkish people came from Turkey and live in Cyprus to increase their numbers but these people are not Turkish-Cypriots they are Turks.
You say “The 2004 Annan Plan referendum (backed by the United Nations) was an excellent opportunity for Greek Cypriots to reclaim their properties in North Cyprus.”
No, and we both know that the ANNAN proposal is much more complicated than that. Firstly, why do the UK still get to keep their military bases – they should get out. The proposal also allowed Turkish people that are NOT Turkish-Cypriots to stay. There are other things but most importantly Turkey would have power over Cyprus – why should they? Cyprus is not Turkish, not Greek, it is Cypriot. There are many more issues with ANNAN but it was a plan in the favour of Turkey, America and the UK and it always has been about them, not about Cypriots.
You say “Since 2004 the Turkish Cypriot Government have developed a property commission aimed at providing Greek Cypriots with compensation for the lands they have left behind. Unfortunately only a handful of Greek Cypriots have put their case forward for compensation.”
Really? I’ve never heard of this. Why did it take the Turkish government almost 10 years to compensate Lozidou? The Turkish government are bringing people in from Turkey to live in these houses. And it seems strange to me – you say that Turkey did not invade Cyprus so then why is Turkey paying compensation? Surely then they are admitting that they did the wrong thing?
You say “hence the reason why no other cases against the Turkish Government have been successful since Lozidou because the courts have realised the complexity of the issue”
There has been. Check this out.
My friend, I’m glad we both got all this off our chests. No hard feelings. Still want to meet for coffee.
Serkan said,
August 30, 2009 at 2:37 am
Good Afternoon Koraly,
I shall attempt to respond to each of your statements without making it too messy for others reading this to understand.
You have stated -
“The constitution which was forced onto Cypriots was a sham. Cypriots wanted their independence from British rule but Britain, America, Turkey and Greece did not want that.”
I disagree with you here Koraly. Greek Cypriots weren’t demanding Independence, they were demanding ENOSIS (Union with Greece). The Greek Church in Cyprus had held a referendum for all Greek Cypriots in the 1950s about whether they wanted to unite Cyprus with Greece and they received a 98% Yes vote.
This referendum was one of the turning points of when terrorist activities started. Colonel Grivas (A good military leader for Greece in their battles against Nazi Germany during the invasion of Greece) was instrumental in forming EOKA (A Greek secret group with aims of uniting Cyprus with Greece). EOKA was placed in Cyprus by Greece to ‘speed up’ the process of eliminating British soldiers on the island between 1955 – 1974 and declaring Cyprus a Greek island.
While Archbishop Makarios turned a blind eye to the activities of EOKA (because he too wanted to get rid of the British also but in a more subtle approach), he traveled the world developing international relations and representing Cyprus as a Greek island.
‘Independence was not the aim of the EOKA struggle. Foreign factors have prevented the achievement of the national goal (ENOSIS), but this should not be a cause for sorrow, New bastions have been conquered and from these bastions the Greek Cypriots will march on to complete the final victory.’ (Cyprus President Archbishop Makarios, 16th August 1960 on the day the Cyprus Republic was inaugurated)
Recognising this threat to the stability of the island, the Turkish Cypriots with the assistance of Turkey formed TMT, a resistance group to EOKA. TMT demanded ‘Taksim’ (partition of the island) to safegaurd the rights of Turkish Cypriots. The nightmare about stability in the island became apparent when the Turkish Cypriots were expelled from the Cyprus Republic in 1963.
So in a nutshell Koraly, nobody really wanted independence, it was ENOSIS for the Greeks and TAKSIM for the Turks.
You have stated -
“The fact is that you can spy on the entire world from Cyprus. And the UK and America still have bases in Cyprus, and Turkey, being part of NATO, is also another alley for America. I do not believe Cyprus should belong to any of these countries that were guarantors on the constitution. Cyprus is for Cypriots – we are not Turkish, we are not Greek, we are Cypriot, and we will not find peace until we come to this understanding.”
There has never been a Cypriot identity on the island. You have always been a Greek or Turkish person. The British attempted to change the demographics by renaming the Turkish Cypriots as the Muslim population of Cyprus and the Greeks as the Christian population. This didn’t get far at all because you still had both the Turks and Greeks illegally reciting nationalistic poems about their love for the motherlands in their schools and gatherings. They also flew their Turkish and Greek flags.
I cannot see anything that distinguishes me from a mainland Turkish person. We share the same religion, culture/tradition, and language. These are 3 very important attributes that make up a distinct race…and it is the same for Turks from Turkey and Turks from Cyprus. The dialect differs a little but that is common in every language spoken.
The Turkish Cypriots have accepted the fact (as indicated by the 75% Yes vote in the 2004 Annan Plan) Turks and Greeks have to live together in Cyprus. Yes the Turkish Cypriots are willing to create a new partnership under a Cyprus banner. It was the Greek Cypriots that overwhelmingly rejected this Korally.
You stated that -
You say “The aim of Turkey was to re-instate the 1960 Cyprus constitution…” No, it was to carry out the plan that America, UK and Turkey had for Cyprus – for it to be divided.
Korally on 20 July 1974 the Turkish army landed in Girne (Kyrenia) and setup base in an area equivalent to a few kms wide in radius. The Turkish Government demanded to Greece, America and the UK to re-instate Archbishop Makarios as the President and to remove Nicos Sampson. The Turkish Government also demanded the safe right of passage to assistance to the Turkish Cypriot population which had been in enclaves since 1963.
When these demands were not met and the genocide of 209 Turkish Cypriots had taken place by EOKA in the villages of Taskent (Tokni), Murataga (Maratha), Sandallar (Sandallaris) and Atlilar (Alloa), the Turkish army moved in what was the 2nd movement on August 18 1974. This was one of the justifications for the division.
You stated that -
Turkish-Cypriots only made up 1/5 of the population of Cyprus. Why should they have 34% of the island?
Cyprus has officially been an Ottoman Turkish island between 1571 – 1878. That is over 300 years (More than Australia has been part of the British Monarchy). Cyprus was illegally annexed by the British Empire after the Ottoman Empire sided with Germany during WWI. Acknowledging the importance of Cyprus to Turkey and the Turks of Cyprus, the world decided that they should play a key role with Greek Cypriots in the future of the island. This is why 18% of the former Cyprus Republic was made up of Turkish Cypriots including a Vice President. This is similiar to the Constitutional structure in Lebanon today with Muslims, Catholics and the Orthodox, and what exists in Iraq with Sunni and Shiite Muslims and the Kurds.
After the partition of Cyprus in 1974 the Turkish Cypriots lay claim to approximately 37% of Cyprus. About 8% of this land is uninhabited today and in the case of a solution it will be given to the Greek Cypriot Government for settlements. This will bring the Turkish Cypriots back in line with approximately the amount of land they had pre 1974 bringing everything back in to equalibrium.
You have stated that -
You say “The failure of the Greek Cypriots to recognise the Turkish Cypriots as a partner in the Cyprus Republic let to a breakdown in negotiations.” Let’s not get confused. The Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus is not recognised by any country except Turkey. It is not part of the EU but Cyprus is.
Yes you are right, it isn’t recognised because recognition has never been the official policy of Turkey or the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. It has been promoted as a state which makes up Cyprus.
Cyprus is illegally in the EU, hence the reason why the UN organised a referendum so the Turkish Cypriots can be accepted in to the EU also. The Cyprus constitution stated that 18% of the Cyprus Government must be made up of Turkish Cypriots. That does not exist today therefore the Constitution is null and the entry of Cyprus in to the EU is illegal. This mis-representation will have major ramifications to the Greek Cypriot government that is claiming to be the Republic of Cyprus since 1963 because they are accepting world aid/assistance of which lawfully should benefit Turkish Cypriots.
You have stated that –
Nowhere in the constitution did it say that Turkey was allowed to take 34% of Cyprus permanently. Turkey and Turkish-Cypriots are not the same thing. In fact, many Turkish Cypriots left Cyprus after Turkey took over because they were not happy with the government. The Turkish government still to this day lets Turkish people came from Turkey and live in Cyprus to increase their numbers but these people are not Turkish-Cypriots they are Turks.
Greek people have a misconception of the Turkish Republic of Northen Cyprus (TRNC). It is not owned by Turkey, it has a parliament made up of Turkish Cypriots elected by the citizens of the TRNC. Turkey provides military security because we only have a police force, not an army.
Yes alot of Turkish Cypriots left the TRNC between 1983 and the early 1990s because we are embargoed and we do not receive financial aid like South Cyprus. Turkey is the only country that supports the TRNC financially. Nowdays the EU also provides a small amount of financial assistance but investments from Turkish Cypriots abroad is financing employment in many sectors. The standard of living in the TRNC is actually better than in areas of Turkey today.
The TRNC and Turkey have a working visa scheme in place allowing Turks from Turkey to come and work in the TRNC. Yes the TRNC also accepted Turkish migrants to live there, just as the Greek Cypriot government has accepted thousands of Pontus & Mainland Greeks to live in the south. These people are Greek..not Greek Cypriots.
You have stated that -
You say “The 2004 Annan Plan referendum (backed by the United Nations) was an excellent opportunity for Greek Cypriots to reclaim their properties in North Cyprus.”
No, and we both know that the ANNAN proposal is much more complicated than that. Firstly, why do the UK still get to keep their military bases – they should get out. The proposal also allowed Turkish people that are NOT Turkish-Cypriots to stay. There are other things but most importantly Turkey would have power over Cyprus – why should they? Cyprus is not Turkish, not Greek, it is Cypriot. There are many more issues with ANNAN but it was a plan in the favour of Turkey, America and the UK and it always has been about them, not about Cypriots.
I don’t mind the British keeping two scaled down bases in Cyprus. I think it is good for stability in the area.
50,000 Turks from Turkey would have been allowed to stay under the Annan Plan…what is wrong with this? This is merely a fraction of the amount of Turkish Cypriots forced to leave the island due to the EOKA terror activities between 1963 – 1974. What about the Pontus Greeks and Mainland Greeks…should they be sent back as well?
I don’t understand what you mean by Turkey having power over Cyprus? Turkey will merely have its Guarantor role, just as Greece, and the UK will…and has been.
You stated that -
You say “hence the reason why no other cases against the Turkish Government have been successful since Lozidou because the courts have realised the complexity of the issue”
The Orams case which you have put forward as an example is complex. The first time the courts ruled in favour of the Orams and now the second case in the higher court has hit a standstill. Either way the court hearings are in my opinion a waist of time because EU law does not apply in the TRNC and is not legally binding (as the findings of the first ruling found).
I must reiterate that the only way the property issue can be solved in Cyprus is with a comprehensive solution to the whole Cyprus question that is backed by the UN.
Korally yes…a coffee sounds good…will it be a Turkish coffee? A Greek coffee? Or a Cypriot coffee ?
Koraly Dimitriadis said,
August 30, 2009 at 4:25 am
Oh my Goodness, we are getting into a heated argument here. I’ll try to be brief because I have a tonne of other writing to do today.
I’d like you to refer to the comments made by Dimitri so I won’t cover ground that he covered.
You say “Greek Cypriots weren’t demanding independence, they were demanding ENOSIS (Union with Greece). The Greek Church in Cyprus had held a referendum for all Greek Cypriots in the 1950s about whether they wanted to unite Cyprus with Greece and they received a 98% Yes vote.”
Firstly, in 1915, Britain offered to give Cyprus to Greece if they helped them in WWI. Greece helped and they didn’t uphold the agreement. Yes Cypriots wanted enosis but Makarios soon realised that the first step to enosis was independence from Britain. It started off being about enosis but it turned into a struggle for Cypriots to be their own people. If Britain just gave us our independence without these guarantors and let the Cypriot people decide their fate, none of this would have happened.
You say “Recognising this threat to the stability of the island, the Turkish Cypriots with the assistance of Turkey formed TMT, a resistance group to EOKA. TMT demanded ‘Taksim’ (partition of the island) to safeguard the rights of Turkish Cypriots. The nightmare about stability in the island became apparent when the Turkish Cypriots were expelled from the Cyprus Republic in 1963.”
TMT was created before EOKA to create propaganda and have the two communities fighting (refer to Dimitri’s post on more detail)
You say “There has never been a Cypriot identity on the island”
I totally disagree with this. Turkish-Cypriots and Greek-Cypriots used to live side by side in peace. There was a Cypriot identity and there still is one (whether Cypriots acknowledge it or not). A very good friend of mind is Turkish-Cypriot and he hates it when Cypriots says they are either Turkish or Greek Cypriot. This is the whole problem. Yes I speak Greek and identify with Greece but I identify with Greece just as much as an Aussie identifies with England. Aussies are not Poms and we are not Greek or Turkish. I feel really strongly about this. Cypriots need to understand that we are victims of a plot by England and America to segregate us.(Refer to Dimitri’s post) And that is why we do not accept ANNAN because we are not Turkish we are Cypriot.
Regarding the invasion of Turkey, once Turkey had made the decision to invade they were hell-bent on partition and nothing stood in their way. The line in which the country was divided today, that plan existed well before the Turkish invasion and Turkey and America. During the invasion Turkey was in talks with America and England in private. And I quote “Kissinger refused to criticise the Turks for ignoring the ceasefire. Privately, he told his close officials he would not oppose their territorial interests.” Morris, Uncertain Greatness. At this point the Turkish controlled only a 20 mile corridor between Kyrenia and the landing zone on the north post. Shortly after Samson resigned. Yet still the Turkish army kept going. And I quote “With Ecevit’s backing, he [Denktash] called for a 30% slice of Cyprus to be made into a Turkish-Cypriot zone with its own military force, so that it could be protected and economically viable.” New York Times 10.8.1974
You say “Cyprus has officially been an Ottoman Turkish island between 1571 – 1878.”
So? So was Greece at one time. Before Ottoman rule the Venetians had Cyprus. Does that mean they can invade it now? The fact is that there were not that many Turkish-Cypriots living in Cyprus at the time and, like Dimitri says in his post, there was no such thing as Turkish-Cypriot there was just Cypriot. If you do some research into the last years of the Ottoman rule you will see that many Greek-Cypriots, to avoid persecution and paying high taxes, they had to declare themselves as Muslims. Then when England took over, and these people wanted to correct their papers to reflect their true identity, the English government would not allow it. Hence, many of the Turkish-Cypriots that live in Cyprus originated from Greek-Cypriot routes. 18% of the population being Turkish-Cypriot does not mean you can take 34% of the country.
You say “Cyprus is illegally in the EU, hence the reason why the UN organised a referendum so the Turkish Cypriots can be accepted in to the EU also.”
Who says it is illegally in the EU? The TRNC? Has anyone else said that? No, what is illegal is that the TRNC exists and is illegally occupying land.
You say “The Cyprus constitution stated that 18% of the Cyprus Government must be made up of Turkish Cypriots”
They are illegally occupying land.
You say “Greek people have a misconception of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC).”
It is run by Turkey financially and its army. That is huge. The TRNC offered house to Turkish people to come and live in Cyprus to increase their numbers. The Greek-Cypriot government does not do this. It does not have money from Greece and an army from Greece. It is not Greek.
“I don’t mind the British keeping two scaled down bases in Cyprus. I think it is good for stability in the area.”
Cyprus is for Cypriots. Once again I will say this. It is not for Turkey, not Greece, not England not America. This is what we have wanted from the start. Everyone else should piss off.
I’m exhausted.