Cyprus-Forum.com

[Get Real!]

2. There were approximately 200,000 Greek and Turkish Cypriots who were displaced in the war between Cyprus and Turkey.

...and 65,000 Turkish Cypriots actually but anyway from all my research the ONLY area that is grey is the alleged "Akritas Plan". Everything else you can get a good balance of the events by reading the available multiple sources.

[reportfromcyprus]

and waht would you put in this book of yours what side will you take in the cyprus conflict

Neither side because I'm not writing as a patriot or a nationalist but as a reporter. Therefore I'm obligated to stick to the facts and get comments from people involved in the story.

And to see through blatant propaganda.

[cypezokyli]

New: unbiased, questioning and balanced. Name me one book that you can trust that isn't plugging one side or the other. I'd like to read it.

Approach: journalistic; find the facts, support them through sources and present what happened from both sides of the story so you can make up your own mind.

i dont want to discourage you in any way report.... its just the more books i read about cyprus, the most critical i become.

so heres some random comments :

i dont believe that there are unbiased books. all books are biased , some more some less, but all present the opinion of the writer. and knowing parts of your opinion (which i usually agree btw ) , i believe it is already out there one way or another.

"questioning" .... questioning what ?

"balanced" .... how are you planning to present the tc or turkish opinion (or to put it more correctly...opinions ) ? ask politicians , or go through their press ? (can you speak turkish btw ? )


the period you have chosen... its HUGE. it is really too long. if you plan to cover the whole time, inevitably, some parts you will only be able to touch the surface. most of the books that try to explain everything in the end explain nothing. there are so many factors to consider that it is usually too difficult to cover them all.

my advice is ,either concentrate on a smaller period, or concentrate or only a couple of factors (negotiations, domestic politics, elections, the effects of the press, of education , of the economy.... the effect of the end of the cold war..the EU factor.... domestic politics in turkey...the AP....to mention only but a few) ...concentrate on sth, and do it good. and give the ignorant us, something new


besides, as i have said above, i am really not excited about journalistic approaches (i do prefer academics) . going back to the time you have chosen : the period 63-74 is flooded with journalistic books. there are no more facts to be discovered, besides personal stories - like sevgul uludags book.... if you can find such stories it is ofcource exciting....

the only thing that it is therefore interesting on that period, is the analysis /interpetation of those facts - as there is hardly anything new to be said, considering the facts. ... and i am sorry to say that, but i dont believe that journalists have the ability to "analyse".


i would never suggest "a book" concerning the cyppro. most cypriots only have read "a book", and then believe that they ve read the bible. i could only suggest "books". a number of them, covering different periods, concentrating on different variables, and using different scientific approaches. i would never suggest "a book", even if i was the one writing it


as i said, i dont want to discourage you, or reduce your enthousiasm. if you really believe that what you have to say, has not already been said, you dont have to listen to me

[reportfromcyprus]

2. There were approximately 200,000 Greek and Turkish Cypriots who were displaced in the war between Cyprus and Turkey.

...and 65,000 Turkish Cypriots actually but anyway from all my research the ONLY area that is grey is the alleged "Akritas Plan". Everything else you can get a good balance of the events by reading the available multiple sources.

There's a lot to be said for that, provided that people are given that chance and take the initiative to read multiple sources.

Thing is, there's too much one-sidedness in the media. I remember when I was editing at a local tv station, we had a story about turkey invading cyprus' airspace. There was a young girl who was interning, Greek Cypriot. She gave me a story that read something like:

"The turkish invaders showed their true characters again by threatening cyprus' people with their expansionist policy and flying their war machines over our beloved island."

Nowhere in her introduction was the fact that there were turkish airplanes flying over cyprus' sovereign airspace - so I made her rewrite it leaving her personal opinions out and putting the facts in.

If I feed you your opinions, you should be insulted, haven't you got your own mind to make up?

[pitsilos]

but to be honest i do not want to discourage you and look like i am suffering from the cutting of tall poppies syndrome.

good luck

Thanks, it's just at the 'i'm thinking about it' stage, cos I'm fed up with being fed propaganda.

facts
1...turkey didn't live up to what she signed...guarantee the borders of cyprus, uphold the constitution...and this is what a quarantor country was meant to be

2...there is no propaganda with 250,000 ethnic cleansed people and colonization.

these are facts. anything else was intercommunal fighting with quarantor countries supposing quaranteing.

and what we see today again turkey not honouring what she signed with the eu.

With all due respect, what you just posted were not facts, they were interpretations.

Examples of facts are:

1. Turkey is a signatory country in the Cyprus Treaty of Guarantee.

2. There were approximately 200,000 Greek and Turkish Cypriots who were displaced in the war between Cyprus and Turkey.

don't worry i never take offence. but i think you misread my post

but the question to you is what does Turkey is a signatory country in the Cyprus Treaty of Guarantee mean to you? does it mean in anyway ethnic cleansing, colonozation?

as for your second point i included all people that had to move...but if you take it a bit further, which i didn't want to, the GCs were forced to leave with the shirt on their backsand leave in tents while the TCs had ample time to move, a year i believe, with all their belongings and a new house to move in immediately.

[reportfromcyprus]

2. There were approximately 200,000 Greek and Turkish Cypriots who were displaced in the war between Cyprus and Turkey.

...and 65,000 Turkish Cypriots actually but anyway from all my research the ONLY area that is grey is the alleged "Akritas Plan". Everything else you can get a good balance of the events by reading the available multiple sources.

Of course, exact facts and figures are important, it's not something I've researched carefully at this point. What I'm trying to do is illustrate the difference between a fact and an opinion.

The Akritas Plan is a grey area, there are a lot of references to it, but not one that I've been able to corroborate.

[reportfromcyprus]

New: unbiased, questioning and balanced. Name me one book that you can trust that isn't plugging one side or the other. I'd like to read it.

Approach: journalistic; find the facts, support them through sources and present what happened from both sides of the story so you can make up your own mind.

i dont want to discourage you in any way report.... its just the more books i read about cyprus, the most critical i become.

so heres some random comments :

i dont believe that there are unbiased books. all books are biased , some more some less, but all present the opinion of the writer. and knowing parts of your opinion (which i usually agree btw ) , i believe it is already out there one way or another.

"questioning" .... questioning what ?

"balanced" .... how are you planning to present the tc or turkish opinion (or to put it more correctly...opinions ) ? ask politicians , or go through their press ? (can you speak turkish btw ? )


the period you have chosen... its HUGE. it is really too long. if you plan to cover the whole time, inevitably, some parts you will only be able to touch the surface. most of the books that try to explain everything in the end explain nothing. there are so many factors to consider that it is usually too difficult to cover them all.

my advice is ,either concentrate on a smaller period, or concentrate or only a couple of factors (negotiations, domestic politics, elections, the effects of the press, of education , of the economy.... the effect of the end of the cold war..the EU factor.... domestic politics in turkey...the AP....to mention only but a few) ...concentrate on sth, and do it good. and give the ignorant us, something new


besides, as i have said above, i am really not excited about journalistic approaches (i do prefer academics) . going back to the time you have chosen : the period 63-74 is flooded with journalistic books. there are no more facts to be discovered, besides personal stories - like sevgul uludags book.... if you can find such stories it is ofcource exciting....

the only thing that it is therefore interesting on that period, is the analysis /interpetation of those facts - as there is hardly anything new to be said, considering the facts. ... and i am sorry to say that, but i dont believe that journalists have the ability to "analyse".


i would never suggest "a book" concerning the cyppro. most cypriots only have read "a book", and then believe that they ve read the bible. i could only suggest "books". a number of them, covering different periods, concentrating on different variables, and using different scientific approaches. i would never suggest "a book", even if i was the one writing it


as i said, i dont want to discourage you, or reduce your enthousiasm. if you really believe that what you have to say, has not already been said, you dont have to listen to me

Great advice cypezokyli - and you're right, there are very few journalists that are good analysts, by nature they need other people to make the macro connections. But there's nothing to stop a journalist from getting good and valuable comments from academics.

Presenting the turkish opinion is a difficult thing, I always prefer to use people's quotes since that's a source that's attributable. The Turkish press I am a bit wary of, since a lot of it is simply repeating the government's position on things.

Usually the best approach is to just talk to the relevant people and see what they have to say.

[Jerry]

I think one way you could write a balanced book would be to interview an equal number of Cypriots from both communities who had experiences that relate to the Cy Prob. If you devoted the same amount of space to each "story" and told them alternately and in order of events that took place on the island I think you would end up with a balanced book that reflects the human tragedy of Cyprus.

One of the best books I have read about Cyprus is "Hostage to History" by Christopher Hitchens. It does lean towards the GC point of view but it also examines the interference of "the international community"

[reportfromcyprus]

but to be honest i do not want to discourage you and look like i am suffering from the cutting of tall poppies syndrome.

good luck

Thanks, it's just at the 'i'm thinking about it' stage, cos I'm fed up with being fed propaganda.

facts
1...turkey didn't live up to what she signed...guarantee the borders of cyprus, uphold the constitution...and this is what a quarantor country was meant to be

2...there is no propaganda with 250,000 ethnic cleansed people and colonization.

these are facts. anything else was intercommunal fighting with quarantor countries supposing quaranteing.

and what we see today again turkey not honouring what she signed with the eu.

With all due respect, what you just posted were not facts, they were interpretations.

Examples of facts are:

1. Turkey is a signatory country in the Cyprus Treaty of Guarantee.

2. There were approximately 200,000 Greek and Turkish Cypriots who were displaced in the war between Cyprus and Turkey.

don't worry i never take offence. but i think you misread my post

but the question to you is what does Turkey is a signatory country in the Cyprus Treaty of Guarantee mean to you? does it mean in anyway ethnic cleansing, colonozation?

as for your second point i included all people that had to move...but if you take it a bit further, which i didn't want to, the GCs were forced to leave with the shirt on their backsand leave in tents while the TCs had ample time to move, a year i believe, with all their belongings and a new house to move in immediately.

Great question, what it means to me, personally, was that Cyprus was put in a position where its territory would still be controlled by the region's largest military powers. It means that yes, the big powers did give Cyprus its independence, symbolically, but effectively, its government was still dependent on Greece, Turkey and Britain.

I was born in 1966, so the 1960 consitution and treaty of guarantee had already been fought over and signed, so strictly speaking, on a personal level I only experienced the aftereffects - ie, partition, war and a divided island.

[reportfromcyprus]

I think one way you could write a balanced book would be to interview an equal number of Cypriots from both communities who had experiences that relate to the Cy Prob. If you devoted the same amount of space to each "story" and told them alternately and in order of events that took place on the island I think you would end up with a balanced book that reflects the human tragedy of Cyprus.

One of the best books I have read about Cyprus is "Hostage to History" by Christopher Hitchens. It does lean towards the GC point of view but it also examines the interference of "the international community"

Yes, that's a good book, as you say, it leans towards one point of view, which is what I want to avoid.

I agree, Jerry, that interviewing people in the Greek and Turkish Cypriot communities would be a balanced approach and very human at the same time.