Viewpoint wrote:Kikapu wrote:zan wrote:Source:
Stephen, Michael. 1987
Turkey's Response, and the Treaty of Guarantee
Five days after the overthrow of Makarios, and one day after his speech to the UN, the Turkish Government (at that time a Social Democrat Government), acted against the Greek invasion, and landed troops in the North of the island. The Greeks and Greek-Cypriots argue that the Turkish military action and subsequent presence is illegal. The Turks and Turkish-Cypriots say it is legal.
By Article 1 on the 1960 Treaty of Guarantee the Republic of Cyprus had agreed:
(a) to ensure the maintenance of its independence, territorial integrity and security, (b) to ensure the maintenance of respect for its Constitution, and (c) not to participate in any political or economic union with any State. Further, the Republic declared prohibited any activity likely to promote, directly or indirectly, either union with any other State or partition of the Island.
By Article II it was agreed that the Guarantor powers would:
(a) recognise and guarantee the independence, territorial integrity and security of the Republic, (b) recognise and guarantee the state of affairs established by the Basic Articles of its Constitution, and (c) prohibit, so far as concerned them, any activity aimed at promoting, directly or indirectly, either union of Cyprus with any other State or partition of the island.
Finally, by Article IV it was agreed that in the event of a breach of the provisions of the Treaty the Guarantor powers: (a) would consult together with respect to representations or measures necessary to ensure observance of those provisions, and (b) reserved the right, insofar as common or concerted action might not prove possible, to take action with the sole aim of re-establishing the state of affairs created by the Treaty.
As at 20th July 1974 the "Republic of Cyprus" had quite clearly failed to maintain its independenceterritorial integrity, or security, and had failed to maintain respect for its Constitution, as required by Article I of the Treaty. In particular it had failed to maintain respect for the Human Rights of its people recognised by and embodied in the Constitution. Further, Greece was itself in gross and obvious breach of Article II of the Treaty and accordingly, as required by Article IV, the United Kingdom and Turkey consulted together in London on 17th and 18th July. Greece was invited, but declined to attend.,
The House of Commons Select Committee on Cyprus formed the view (HC 331 1975/76 para. 22), that during these consultations Turkey had proposed joint Anglo-Turkish action under the Treaty of Guarantee, and this was confirmed by Prime Minister Ecevit on 14th August 1974 (Daily Telegraph 15th August). However the Labour Government in Britain refused to take any effective action, even though they had troops and aircraft in the Sovereign Bases in Cyprus. They argued that Britain was under no duty to take military action, but Article II provided that Britain would guarantee the independence, territorial integrity and security of the Republic, which it manifestly failed to do. The Select Committee concluded that "Britain had a legal right to intervene, she had a moral obligation to intervene. She did not intervene for reasons which the Government refuses to give."
The responsibility therefore fell upon Turkey, as the only Guarantor willing to act, and on 20th July Turkish forces landed in Cyprus. The legal authority for their action rests not only upon the breaches of the Treaty identified here, but also upon the breaches committed before 1974 by the Republic of Cyprus at the instance of the Greek-Cypriots, and which have already been mentioned.
Violence Continues
Given the above articles, I'm surprised that Turkey or Britain did not intervened in 1963, when they could and should have. Perhaps had they did that, and kicked few butts, order would have been restored, and today may have been much different situation. So the so called guarantor rights that Turkey had back then, was never put into practice.
Oh well, water under the bridge.!!
Now we come to 1974, and once again, Britain does nothing.
Turkey comes to intervene.....Well done boys. We thank them a great deal for finally living up to their responsibility. Kicked some ass, and now the RoC is ready to self govern once again..........
But wait, Turkey is still sending troops to stop the coup, that is all but over. The intervention worked, so why are they still arriving.
This is where intervention became invasion. And from this very point, in 1974, Turkey's role as a guarantor became an aggressor and an occupying force in Cyprus, and broke every rule in Article I.. a) b) and c) as well as Article II... a) b) and c) as well as Article IV from the above, that Zan posted. It has been an invasion & occupation ever since.
Turkey could have easily restored power to the Cypriots back in 74 and went home. Well, guess what. Perhaps they did not want to go home, but just stay in Cyprus until who knows when, or perhaps never had intentions of going back. So before you all clap your hands congratulating Turkey's rights to intervened, you should also reprimand her, for breaking their responsibility as a guarantor by invading and occupying Cyprus.
Oh, by the way, they are still here.!!
When did the coup end again.??
Bottom line...Intervention became Invasion.
Have we resolved anything? we are no closer to a solution today than we were in 1963. So Turkey has the right to stay until or if ever the 2 sides can agree on a solution, easy as that.
I don't believe it was any of the guarantors responsibility, to restore a "settlement". That word probably never existed in the constitution, as well as each guarantors rights. They were to stick to the articles that I mentioned above, and nothing else. They fulfilled the first part by intervening, but failed the second part, which was to restore power to the RoC and leave with our blessing.
They never left.
How can we resolve anything VP, when Turkey violated every Articles, specially Article II... c).
How can anything get done, with everything that has happened in the last 33 years, unless Turkey restores full power to the RoC, as in the 1963 constitution. The fact that the TC's do not want that anymore, has nothing to do with the 3 guarantors.
If we want to change the rules of the game now and go for the BBF system of government, well, then they should all help us get there.
So what have they done for us lately, all 3 guarantors.
