WE HAVE BEEN STABBED IN THE BACK
By R. R. Denktaş - Translated by Ayhan Sutcuoglu
By stabbing in the back, committing murders and steeling the title of the legitimate Cyprus Republic title, and telling lies to his own people and to the world, I believe the TRNC and Turkish governments must make a final call to the Greek Cypriot leadership who has been continuing to this game for far too long and this call must be short and sharp.
“You must admit for all the sin you have committed and stop taking the world for fool and stop brain washing your youth.”
A simple demand! but what for?
Because there are elements (GROUP OF PEOPLE) amongst the Greek Cypriots that had been deceived for over 40 years, began seeing the truth and raising their voices at last
One of these people is Lukas Haralambous who writes in Cyprus Mail. Please take a look at what he said in his editorial he wrote under the heading of “THE 22 DECEMBER BLACK ANNIVERSARY”
“The 22 December is the most important date in the history of Cyprus Republic. If the incident of that date did not happen, the history of Cyprus would have been lot different than what it is to day”.
Cyprus would not have been divided into two States and would not bear the Turkish army, thousands of settlers and tens of thousands of refugees. If the Republic was administered by serious leadership, the 22 December 1963 would be a day of worshiping and remembered as the “shame of the state”.
To day in our schools the students should be taught the repercussions of the 22 December 1963 events and messages should be given to them to learn to live together with their counterpart Turkish Cypriots.
I don’t think there would be need for me to repeat myself; unfortunately none of the above has been realized. Expecting something as such probably would be utopia.
The date of 22 December 1963 that nobody wants to remember, including our President, is the date they wanted to erase from the calendars. That date is the date which caused the communal fights and dislocation tens of thousands of the people and brought about the devastation and the division of this little island.
Thousands of people, Turkish and Greek alike, lost their lives through the wizardry of those novice administrators who have staged those bloody games.
The star role of this 1963 game was the Akritas organization which was established with the help of Makarios and implemented by his interior Minister Policarpos Yorgadjis and his private officer Papadopoulos who is the President of our Republic to day. (What ever remained after the Turkish invasion)?
No one would be able rationally to explain the action of Makarios that caused an armed struggle between the two people of the island.
Our political leaders for years tried to convince the Greek Cypriots that the communal fights were caused by the Turkish Cypriots and officially the 22 December 1963 declared as “the day of uprising of the Turkish Cypriots”.
As a result of the testimonies of the eyewitnesses amongst the Greek Cypriot, 40 years after we learned how many of our leaders have been guilty of the atrocities and crimes they have committed.
According to all the evident produced;
• Ayios Kasianos was set alight by Akritas (the perpetrators have already accepted their involvements).
• As a result of direct orders of Yorgadjis a bomb was planted by T. Chrisafis on the Statue of EOKA hero Marcos Drakos.
These actions were taken to blame the Turkish Cypriots and justify their attacks. This fact was admitted by T. Chrisafis in a statement gave same time later.
Despite those 42 years that passed, state TV, Phileleftheros newspaper and radio station belonged to Zeus group incredibly yet talking about the Turkish uprising. To day our leaders do not have the courage to speak out or accept the real truth.
For realization of reconciliation it requires a leader who could get to the both sides of the Green line and held commemoration ceremonies for both Turkish and Greek Cypriots sufferings.
Yes! The administrator of the partnership state that has been destroyed in the name of ENOSIS is the person who has been lying for over 43 years and in his visits to Islamic countries and claimed that no Turkish people were killed between 1963 and 1974.
Papadopoulos and his supporters who are responsible for the existing de-facto situation if genuinely are after reconciliation, has to beg to the Turkish side for a new partnership solution with two politically equal states.
WE HAVE BEEN STABBED IN THE BACK
32 posts
• Page 1 of 4 • 1, 2, 3, 4
WE HAVE BEEN STABBED IN THE BACK
by zan » Thu May 24, 2007 4:10 pm
-
zan - Leading Contributor
- Posts: 16213
- Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 8:55 pm
by T_C » Thu May 24, 2007 5:09 pm
I also found this letter from Denktash to Koffi Annan on the internet. It was his last letter to Annan as the president of TRNC.
Coming from Denktash it's without a doubt biased but he does raise some valid points....
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.E. Mr. Kofi ANNAN
Secretary-General
of the United Nations
New York.
To start with, let me point out once again that there is no legal foundation, no legitimacy in the Greek Cypriot claim that an administration composed of one hundred percent Greek Cypriots is the legitimate government of the Republic of Cyprus. This Republic was a bi-national partnership Republic established under the international Cyprus Treaties of 1959/60 on 16 August 1960, with equal political powers vested in both co-founder partners, who elected their representatives separately, one not having the right to speak for or represent the other. As is well-known there has been no such joint government in the island since 1963, as a result of the coup against the partnership state by Archbishop Makarios and his team of "leaders", in line with the notorious Akritas Plan which has been published as a UN document under Document No. A/33/115; S/12722 dated 30 May 1978.
The treatment afforded to the Greek Cypriot side by the world at large as "the legitimate government of Cyprus" - in spite of its record of bloodshed, terrorism, defiance of the rule of law, the declaration that the Constitution is dead and buried, and the importation of Greek arms and troops to the tune of 20,000 in contravention of Security Council Resolutions - has been the main obstacle to a negotiated settlement. The Greek Cypriot leadership which had failed to achieve its aim of converting the island into a Greek Cypriot Republic (and Turkish Cypriots into a protected minority) prior to uniting the island with Greece, was deprived of any scintilla of motivation for a negotiated settlement when its unilateral application for EU membership was accepted by the EU as a proper application on behalf of the whole island. A partnership settlement would be contrary to the "national will and testament" of Archbishop Makarios to the effect that by what he had done (i.e. constituting a 100% Greek Cypriot administration as the government of the Republic of Cyprus) he had brought Cyprus to the nearest point to Enosis (union with Greece) and no one should make concessions on this, except for Enosis!
This is the only main, incontrovertible reason for the non-settlement of the Cyprus problem over the years. The acceptance of this one-legged "partnership state" as a candidate and now a full member of the EU has finally blocked the way to any settlement short of the unconditional submission of the Turkish Cypriot side to the political will of the Greek Cypriot administration.
With this short introduction I would like to further analyse the Statement of Mr. Tassos Papadopoulos at the General Assembly:
It hurts the Turkish Cypriot people to listen to Mr. Papadopoulos talk about his "concerted efforts to eliminate terrorism and its underlying causes" when he has publicly lied to the Khaleej Times of 4 September 2004, by declaring that there was not one single Turkish Cypriot killed during the 1963-1974 period. The era of terror and terrorism cannot be obliterated from the minds of Turkish Cypriots, especially when mass graves of civilians, including 16-day old babies, children from one year old to 14-15 years old, aged people of 70-90 years old have been massacred just because they were Turkish Cypriots, who opposed Enosis and defended their vested rights as co-founder partners of the defunct Republic of 1960. The unforgivable sin of Turkish Cypriots was not accepting the Greek Cypriot administration as "the legitimate government of Cyprus" and not bowing to the offer to become a minority in a Greek Cyprus as recorded by Mr. Glafcos Clerides in his memoirs MY DEPOSITION Vol. 3, page 237.
Greek Cypriot Aim
"The aim of the Greek Cypriot Constitutional policy in the talks was a moderate modification of the Plaza plan, which provided limited participation of the Turks in the organs of the independent state of Cyprus, always on a minority basis. This policy also did not succeed, because the Turkish side, though more flexible, remained unretreating on the issue of accepting a minority status for the Turkish Cypriots."
(From the memoirs of Mr.Glafcos Clerides,
former Greek Cypriot Leader,
MY DEPOSITION, Vol.3 ,p.237)
For this sin, 30,000 Turkish Cypriots had to vacate 103 villages and take refuge in safer areas. Moving from one area to another carried the risk of abduction by Greek Cypriot police and the gunmen attached to them. The then Secretary-General reported in his Report of 12 December 1964 to the Security Council that 209 Turkish Cypriots were still missing for the period 1 September 1964 to 12 December 1964 and that there seemed to be little prospect of finding them alive! The dead and wounded from 1963 – 1974 run to more than one thousand. And Mr. Papadopoulos, like his predecessors, has the cheek to claim that not a single Turkish Cypriot was killed during this period, that the Cyprus problem began with the arrival of Turkish troops in 1974 and that the problem was one of occupation and the resultant movement of people who should be entitled to go back to their homes, while claiming that property ownership is a human right which has to be honoured at all costs. The property rights of Turkish Cypriots who were driven away from 103 villages from 1963 to 1974; and the rights of all of the Turkish Cypriot population who left everything in the South after the 1975 Population Exchange Agreement mean nothing to the Greek Cypriot leadership. Mr. Papadopoulos is on record as saying that Turkish Cypriot claims will be taken up after the settlement of the Cyprus problem, which as I indicated above, will have to wait until eternity, i.e. the time Turkish Cypriots will bow to Greek Cypriot domination and accept to be a minority in a Greek Cyprus!
Mr. Papadopoulos alleges that the Republic of Cyprus (meaning the one they hijacked in name, and destroyed in fact) "supports the strengthening of the UN system". If so, he should stop exploiting the UN system by falsely alleging at UN platforms that he represents Cyprus and that "the problem" started in 1974 with the arrival of Turkey. At least the UN knows that the problem arose eleven years earlier in 1963, because UNFICYP has been stationed in Cyprus since March 1964 in order to prevent the utter destruction of the Turkish Cypriot people.
If Mr. Papadopoulos is sincere on his views about the Israeli-Palestinian question, then it is high time he had a second look at Cyprus, where violence ended only with the arrival of Turkey in 1974, saving not only Turkish Cypriot lives but also tens of thousands of Greek Cypriot lives. The then Secretary- General of AKEL, the Greek Cypriot communist party, is on record saying that ten thousand AKEL members were on the "execution list of the Junta"! So, what Mr. Papadopoulos wants for the Israeli-Palestinian dispute, namely "the arrest of violence", has already happened in Cyprus, thanks to the sacrifices of Turkey, who lost nearly one thousand lives in her attempt to bring peace and stability to the island.
Mr. Papadopoulos wants more emphasis to be given to improving living conditions in order to normalize people’s lives to the greatest possible extent. How decent of him to say so, but in Cyprus he has followed exactly the contrary policy for forty years in order to bring Turkish Cypriots to heel, and even now, in EU circles, he is doing his utmost in order to prevent the EU honouring its promises to the Turkish Cypriot side that it would lift embargoes if they voted "yes" in the referendum! Such a hypocritical approach should not be "let past" by the United Nations.
Again Mr. Papadopoulos says, and I quote, "Our support remains focused on the end of the occupation and on a just and viable settlement, based on UN resolutions and for the realization of the aspirations of the Palestinian people for the establishment of an independent state, living side by side with Israel, in conditions of sustainable peace and security."
Applying the same phraseology and logic, Turkish Cypriots have been seeking a viable, sustainable peace and security for the last forty years and have been waiting for the end of the occupation of the seat of the partnership government by the Greek Cypriot side. Turkish Cypriots have been waiting for an acknowledgement by the Greek Cypriot side (as confirmed in the separate simultaneous referenda of April 24, 2004) that it has no mandate to claim to represent "The Republic of Cyprus" (which they destroyed in 1963 by ejecting Turkish Cypriots from it) nor have they any right to represent Turkish Cypriots or impose their political will on the Turkish Cypriot people. We have been expecting Greek Cypriot leaders to acknowledge the wrongs done to Turkish Cypriots from 1963 to 1974 and to start negotiations on effective compensation as a way for starting a meaningful dialogue for peaceful, side-by-side co-existence which is the only way for bringing about a new partnership between the two peoples of Cyprus. Continuing the illegal occupation of the seat of government, pretending that the Republic of Cyprus is still functional, alleging that all was well and peaceful in the island until Turkey came and occupied Cyprus is not the way to a viable and sustainable solution.
Since Mr. Papadopoulos underlined in his Statement in New York the undeniable truth that "the aspiration of humanity revolves around achieving the full respect of human rights, democracy, and the rule of law", the Turkish Cypriot people call upon him to implement in Cyprus what he preached in New York. What is the position of Turkish Cypriots (since 1963) as regards human rights? How can anyone speak about human rights without conceding to a politically equal people the right to choose their own representatives? Is this not "the fundamental basis for human dignity and happiness"? How can the Greek Cypriot leadership on their own claim to represent Cyprus and to be the government of Cyprus and deny Turkish Cypriots their democratic/ constitutional right to elect their own representatives and choose their own government?
Mr. Papadopoulos is proud that "Cyprus is now a full member of the EU". He should be proud of succeeding in his misrepresentations to the EU countries that he represents the whole of Cyprus and all of its people. By now everyone knows that there exists a second people in the island, who have given no mandate to any Greek Cypriot leader to represent them internationally or otherwise. That is why the Greek Cypriot leadership has not been able to extend its illegal occupation to North Cyprus and that is why the EU now realizes what a big mistake has been made in allowing the Greek Cypriot application to proceed to full membership!
On Cyprus, Mr. Papadopoulos, in complete forgetfulness of the 1963-1974 period, the notorious Akritas Plan of which he was one of the architects and implementers, and in complete disregard of the destroyed rights of Turkish Cypriots and the isolation into which they have been thrust for the last 40 years, has again misrepresented the problem by saying, "This year marks 30 years since the occupation of Cyprus territory as a result of the invasion of the island by Turkish troops". Mr. Papadopoulos forgets one glaring reality, endorsed several times by the Security Council, that "Cyprus is the homeland of both peoples". Hence, the military attempt of one of them to convert the joint homeland into "His homeland" and then hand it over to Greece, and the resistance of Turkish Cypriots to this attempt, in saving their share in the homeland, is THE Cyprus problem! Therefore, Turkey’s arrival in 1974 (after witnessing the attempt for eleven years to wipe off the map all Turkish Cypriots) the arrival of Turkey under the powers given to it by the 1960 international Treaties and the Constitution is not "occupation of Cyprus", but preventing the occupation of the Turkish Cypriot HOME by Greek Cypriots helped by Greece! It is high time all concerned had a second look at the facts and re-diagnosed the Cyprus problem thus getting rid of the confusion created by Greece and Greek Cypriot lobbying.
As to the "relentless efforts by the Greek Cypriots (for 30 years) to achieve a just and peaceful settlement" I have nothing to add to the statements of all those who declared that they were deceived by the Greek Cypriot leadership into believing that the Greek Cypriot side really wanted a just and peaceful settlement. What Greek Cypriot leaders wanted – and now want – is international confirmation that they are the owners, the only people of Cyprus and that Turkish Cypriots are a mere minority amongst the people of Cyprus!
After the double referenda in the island, the historical truth that there are two separate peoples in the island, equal in status, has become so apparent that it should need no further effort or argument to convince all onlookers and all EU countries that one of these two peoples can in no way represent the other, or speak for the whole island. It is high time therefore to correct past images, re-visit old Resolutions which have no bearing on reality and tell Mr. Papadopoulos that "he truly represents 75% of the Greek Cypriot people who have voted that they do not want a partnership with Turkish Cypriots on the basis of equality". Hence he should have no further say about how the EU deals with the people in the North.
It is unfortunate that neither the EU nor the UN has found time to have an impartial diagnosis of what "the Cyprus problem" is all about. Is it a problem which began in 1974 with the arrival of Turkey, or is it a Greek / Greek Cypriot attempt to convert a partnership Republic into a Greek Cypriot Republic by eliminating or suppressing the "Turkish Cypriot partner"? The remedy for each problem is different. Recognition of the Turkish Cypriot partner’s equal sovereign status and the right of the Turkish Cypriot people to self-determination is the avenue through which the problem can be solved, which has, in fact, half-solved itself by both sides agreeing, at least in theory, on geographical separation, exchange of population, political equality and co-operation for international purposes at the very top. It is also agreed by all concerned that one side has no right to speak for, or represent the other, as re-established anew in the April 2004 referenda. So, how can Mr. Papadopoulos ignore all these realities and still address the United Nations as the President of Cyprus! He is President of the Greek Cypriots who elected him and has no mandate to talk for, and on behalf of, the Turkish Cypriot people. Turkish Cypriots have been facing an attempt at colonization by Greek / Greek Cypriot forces for the last 40 years. And this threat continues unabated because the Greek Cypriot side still claims the right to overpower Turkish Cypriots in the North. It is this danger which the world should eliminate by telling the Greek Cypriot side that they have no such right; that property questions which affect both sides equally can be settled (and should have been settled long ago) through property exchange and just compensation and that the claim to return en masse to their properties will endanger any peaceful co-existence in the future.
Luckily for all concerned, President of the Greek Cypriot Bar Association has put it on record that the property question affects both sides and that this problem should be handled politically.
Asked about the Greek Cypriot Supreme Court decision to return his property back to a Turkish Cypriot living in South Cyprus, he said (Cyprus Mail, 29 September 2004):
"The court decided outside of today’s realities in Cyprus. It dealt with individual rights to property protected in the Constitution and the European Convention of Human Rights. But the problem is not legal, it’s political, and won’t be solved by an appeal or even suspending the decision until the appeal is over. It needs a political solution…"
The support of the international community given to the Greek Cypriots in their "relentless efforts to achieve a just and peaceful settlement" has so far been based on misinformation and misconceptions, and therefore is baseless because of the fact that there has not been an impartial diagnosis of the problem! Therefore what was supported (and what is being supported) till today cannot be described as "efforts for the settlement of the Cyprus problem" but rather as "efforts for settling the problem in line with Greek Cypriot policy" - which is tantamount to depriving Turkish Cypriots of their basic corporate rights as the co-founders of the 1960 Republic.
I adopt and repeat Mr. Papadopoulos’s statement to the effect that "the question and eagerness for a solution never meant that we would accept any settlement proposed, nor that we would embark on an adventure, condemned to fail with irreversible consequences". This statement is more than just a statement for Turkish Cypriots who were led to believe that the 1960 Agreements, guaranteed by three powers, with Turkey and Greece maintaining a token force in the island, was a foolproof guarantee against any Greek Cypriot attempt to unite the island with Greece. We were grossly deceived, and in the 40th year we are expected to sign another paper-agreement and abandon our solid foundation as a sovereign Republic in the North and rely on the good-will of the Greek Cypriot side, which has lied even to its own people about the events of 1963-1974, making the Greek Cypriot youth believe that until 1974 all was peaceful and friendly with Turkish Cypriots who, all of a sudden, in 1974 changed their minds and helped Turkey to invade Cyprus and, thus, did all the harm to them in complete disloyalty to Cyprus and to their Greek Cypriot brothers and sisters. This kind of an approach only helps the cultivation of enmity against Turkish Cypriots and Turkey and the continuation of the demand for retribution. It is, therefore, relevant to quote here a statement from a book entitled "Barbarism Against the Turkish Cypriots - The Other Side of the Coin" by Antonis Angastiniotis recently published.
"Most of the Greek Cypriot youth know very little about the incidents, which led to the partition of the island. The tragic events of 1974 have been used as a huge camouflage covering the prior events, which initially caused the partition of the Island. It has always annoyed me to see in the history books taught in our schools, that after a lengthy explanation of the heroic deeds of EOKA members, a big leap to 1974 is made. Either no incident took place between 1960 and 1974, or nobody wants to discuss the incidents of this period. While researching the developments of the period, I came to the conclusion that the second is the case."
Mr. Antonis Angastiniotis has made public that his book (and the documentary he prepared as a result of his discovery) was not allowed to be circulated in the South. Here is his statement:
WHY AM I DIGGING UP THE PAST?
"....I am repeatedly asked why do I scratch old wounds and not let the past be forgotten. The answer is quite simple: Because the wounds are not old… Had they been so, we wouldn’t still have mourning mothers in black garments, weapons, soldiers and barricades around us. Although I am a person who has been permanently residing on this island for the last forty years, I have begun to discover the other side of the realities on the Island only last year, and every reality I discover leaves a deep scar on my soul.
When you manage to jump over the propaganda wall and realize that half of the truth has been deliberately distorted and hidden from you, suddenly the past becomes a frightening present. You realize that if you are curious to discover further truths, you have to dig the soil hard enough for your hands to start bleeding. If you speak your mind, you run the risk of being branded as a traitor, your life comes under threat and most of your friends turn their backs on you. You might even be left completely alone..."
In view of the fact that Mr. Papadopoulos denies the mass murders, destruction of villages and what Turkish Cypriots suffered as a result of the destruction of the partnership Republic in 1963 in the name of Enosis, (neo-colonization of the Turkish Cypriots by uniting the island with Greece) it is relevant that I should quote some of the news items from the international press of those days:
TURKS BRUTALLY MURDERED
"It is nonsense to claim, as the Greeks do, that all casualties were caused by fighting between armed men of both sides. On Christmas Eve many Turkish people were brutally attacked and murdered in their suburban homes, including the wife and three small children of the Turkish head of army medical services - allegedly by a group of forty men, many in army boots and greatcoats."
31 December 1963 DAILY HERALD (London)
IN A SILENT VILLAGE IN ONE NIGHT OF TERROR 350 MEN, WOMEN AND CHILDREN VANISHED
"In this village of shame today I found grim evidence of the hatred between Greek and Turk that has bedevilled this beautiful island. A few days ago, 1,000 people lived here, in their solid, stone built homes which hug the coast road to Kyrenia, 13 miles from Nicosia. Then in a night of terror 350 villagers - men, women and children - vanished. They were all Turks. Today I was one of two British correspondents to drive to the village to investigate the mystery. In the dusty village street I found hungry Greek children playing listlessly. From doorways men and women eyed me suspiciously. When I asked where are the Turks, the women averted their gaze. The men shuffled their feet and said "We don’t know. They just left."
Peter Moorhead reporting from the village of Skylloura, Cyprus.
1 January 1964
DAILY HERALD (London)
AN APPALLING SIGHT
"….And when I came across the Turkish homes they were an appalling sight. Apart from the walls, they just did not exist. I doubt if a napalm bomb attack could have created more devastation. I counted 40 blackened brick and concrete ‘shells’ that had once been homes. Each house had been deliberately fired by petrol. Under red tile roofs which had caved in, I found a twisted mass of bed springs, children’s cots and cribs, and ankle deep grey ashes of what had once been chairs, tables, wardrobes…."
In the neighbouring village of Ayios Vassilios, a mile away, I counted 16 wrecked and burned out homes. They were all Turkish. From this village more than 100 Turks had also vanished. In neither village did I find a scrap of damage to any Greek house."
1 January 1964
DAILY SKETCH (London)
SAVAGERY OF EOKA MEN
" . . Turkish homes in the city had been set ablaze by arrows tipped with paraffin-soaked rags, and hundreds of hard core EOKA men were prowling towns and villages under arms."
Reported by Louis Kirby from Nicosia.
2 January 1964
DAILY TELEGRAPH (London)
TURKS TO BE EXTERMINATED
"... On the Greek Cypriot side the extremists resent President Makarios’s acceptance of British intervention and would have preferred the fighting to continue, leading to the extermination of the Turkish community."
4 January 1964
NEW YORK HERALD TRIBUNE
The UN Secretary General’s report of 12 December 1964, S6102, stated:
"In the report of 10 September, it was indicated that as of 1 September, 232 Turkish Cypriots were missing, according to the list compiled by the Turkish Cypriot Missing Persons Bureau. Since that date, UNFICYP was informed that twenty-three Turkish Cypriots have been accounted for and their names have been deleted from the list of missing persons; this leaves 209 Turkish Cypriots still missing. Efforts to trace those missing will be continued by ICRC and UNFICYP, but there seems to be little prospect of finding them alive."
The UN Secretary-General’s report of 15 June 1964, S/5764 stated:
"…According to information received from the Joint Relief Commission, there are approximately 55,000 Turkish Cypriots in need of relief in the form of basic foodstuffs and medical supplies. Of the total number, approximately 16,900 have left their homes and moved to other villages and towns. Of these, about 60 per cent are living in the Nicosia and Kyrenia Districts. It is reported that a total of eighty-six villages have received refugees. The supplies for the relief rations and other aid such as clothes and medicines have been donated to the Turkish Cypriot Communal Chamber by the Turkish Red Crescent Society with Headquarters in Ankara. Five shipments consisting of approximately 3,231 tons have so far arrived in Cyprus…"
"…Around Nicosia there exist three refugee camps where 1,500 persons are living in tents. Over half of them are children and there is great concern about their health during the summer months when the heat will cause dehydration, particularly in the very young and the old…"
Below are some quotations from the World Press at the time of the Greek military coup in 1974 and the Turkish intervention which followed:
"…15 July is an invasion. It is a clear attack from the outside and a flagrant violation of the independence and sovereignty of the Republic of Cyprus. The invasion is continuing as long as there are Greek officers in Cyprus."
The address of Archbishop Makarios, President of the Cyprus Republic, to
the UN Security Council on 19 July 1974
This is what Sampson, who was made "President" of Cyprus by the Greek Junta after the coup, but forced out by the Turkish intervention, said:
"I was about to proclaim Enosis when I quit."
Nicos Sampson, reported in the
CYPRUS MAIL, 17 July 1974
TOURIST’S GRIM ACCOUNT OF BURIALS
IN MASS GRAVES
"…After landing at RAF Lyneham, Wiltshire, Mr. Derek Reed, aged 31, said he had seen bodies being buried in a mass grave near Paphos after last Monday’s coup.
"People who were told by Makarios to lay down their guns were shot out of hand by the National Guard", he said "they were buried in mass graves."
THE TIMES, 22 July 1974
The Times’s correspondent, David Leigh, wrote:
"Thousands of Turkish Cypriots were taken hostage after the invasion of Cyprus, Turkish women were raped, children were shot in the street and the Turkish quarter of Limasol was burnt out by the National Guard."
David Leigh, THE TIMES (of London)
23 July 1974, p.1b&c
Jean Neuvecelle of France Soir too witnessed many acts of barbarity in the Famagusta region. "I saw with my own eyes the shameful incidents", he wrote, and continued:
"The Greeks burned Turkish mosques and set fire to Turkish homes… Defenceless Turkish villagers, who have no weapons, live in an atmosphere of terror, created by the Greek marauders… The Turks who can save their lives run to the nearby hills and are able to do nothing but watch the callous looting of their homes."
FRANCE SOIR, Issue of July 24, 1974
On the Annan Plan, which Mr. Papadopoulos led his people to reject by 75% "No" votes, I can say little except endorse your views, Mr. Secretary-General, stated in your Report of 28 May 2004 where you say that "What was rejected was the solution itself rather than a mere blueprint" (para.83).
That this was the position of each and every leader with whom I negotiated as from 1968 has been my confirmed view. As long as the Greek Cypriot wing of a partnership state (which was destroyed by Greek Cypriots in order to hijack it and move into Enosis), is treated as "the government of Cyprus", they feel they have succeeded and that no one can deprive them of their "claim of legitimacy" over the whole island". In other words, Greek Cypriots are refusing to compromise on a problem which has already been settled in their favour. They do not need Turkish Cypriots in order to be "the legitimate government of Cyprus" because – contrary to the Rule of Law and the facts – they are treated as such by all concerned. So why should they re-establish a partnership with Turkish Cypriots who, inevitably, they believe and expect, will collapse as a result of the isolation that they have imposed on them. Unfortunately, all those who have accepted the Greek Cypriot side, in complete disregard of its long standing previous record of violations of human rights, treat Turkish Cypriot resistance to the Greek Cypriot attempt to impose its political will on them as "intransigence". Hence the refusal of the Greek Cypriot side to compromise on the title of "the government of Cyprus", well knowing that Turkish Cypriots will never concede this hijacked title to them.
Mr. Papadopoulos alleges that the Greek Cypriot side "is committed to a solution which will ensure the reunification of the country, its economy and its people".
This commitment is based on the idea that there is only one people in Cyprus. This has to be corrected if reunification is the aim. You cannot unify ONE people. There are two peoples in Cyprus of different ethnic origin, different religion and language, with diversely opposing national affiliation. It was the trick resorted to by Greece and the Greek Cypriot side asking for self-determination for the people of Cyprus, as a means for achieving Enosis, as far back as 1954 when they applied to the United Nations. The immediate reaction of Turkish Cypriots and of Turkey was that the Greek Cypriot people could not speak for the whole island; there were two peoples in Cyprus and one of them could not, through the use of the right of self-determination, impose its will on the other and colonize it by uniting the island with Greece. By 1956, the British colonial government conceded the fact that the right of self-determination, in the case of Cyprus, if used, would be used by the two sides separately. The then British Colonial Secretary Alan Lennox Boyd said:
"When the international and strategic situation permits, and provided self-government is working satisfactorily, Her Majesty’s Government will be ready to review the question of the application of self-determination.
When the time comes for this review, that is, when these conditions have been fulfilled, it will be the purpose of Her Majesty’s Government to ensure that any exercise of self-determination should be effected in such a manner that the Turkish Cypriot community, no less than the Greek Cypriot community, shall, in the special circumstances of Cyprus, be given freedom to decide for themselves their future status. In other words, Her Majesty’s Government recognise that the exercise of self-determination in such a mixed population must include partition among the eventual options."
(Statement on Cyprus in the UK House
of Commons on 19 December 1956)
British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan confirmed later that:
"If in the long run our hopes are dashed and every effort fails; if we are thrown back on other solutions which we all agree would be undesirable, then Her Majesty’s Government will stand by their pledges. These, of course, include among others those contained in the statement which my Right Hon. Friend, the Colonial Secretary, made on 19 December 1956."
(Statement on Cyprus in the UK House of Commons on 26 June 1958 during a debate of the Macmillan Plan)
It was this reality which led Greece and the Greek Cypriot side to agree to a partnership Republic on the basis of political equality and functional federation. The Greek Cypriot leadership, however, set on a course, at the outset, to destroy this partnership and unite the island with Greece at all costs. Their destructive criminal activities did not in any way "evaporate" the right of self-determination of the Turkish Cypriot people. This was proved at the double referenda of April 2004.
It is relevant to mention here that my proposal, in the course of the negotiations, to put in the Annan Plan that two peoples exist in Cyprus and that it is these politically equal peoples, ex-partners, who are going to be reunified under a new, bi-zonal partnership, was totally rejected by the Greek Cypriot side. "There is only one people, composed of two communities" I was told. It is, therefore, sad that there has been no change at all in the Greek Cypriot attitude to this day.
The country has been divided because of the Greek Cypriot attempt to nullify the Turkish Cypriot homeland and convert the bi-communal partnership Republic into a Greek Cypriot Republic. It can be reunified by conceding the right of the Turkish Cypriots to keep a safe homeland in the North in a bi-zonal set-up, provided the Greek Cypriot demand to be the government of all the island is cast aside.
If the fact that sovereignty emanates equally (as also spelt out in the UN Set of Ideas of 1992) from the two peoples (ex co-founder partners of the hijacked Republic of Cyprus) is accepted, then it would be quite easy to establish a bi-zonal federation / confederation and to unify the island under that roof. All that is needed for re-unification is for the Greek Cypriot side to abandon the idea that they are (or will ever be accepted by Turkish Cypriots) to be the legitimate government of Cyprus. This is what has impeded a settlement for 40 years. The governments which have been misled into believing that the problem in Cyprus is the attempt to divide a unitary state and a Cypriot nation, should awake to the fact that there has never been a unitary state and a Cypriot nation, and that what has fallen apart are the two co-founder partners of a partnership state because the Greek Cypriot partner decided to take over the partnership and convert it into a Greek Cypriot state. This is confirmed in the following statement of the former Greek Cypriot President, Mr. Glafcos Clerides, who is considered to be a moderate by many in the international community:
GREEK CYPRIOT PREOCCUPATION
"Just as the Greek Cypriot preoccupation was that Cyprus should be a Greek Cypriot state, with a protected Turkish Cypriot minority, the Turkish preoccupation was to defeat any such effort and to maintain the partnership concepts, which in their opinion the Zurich Agreement created between the two communities. The conflict, therefore, was a conflict of principle and for that principle both sides were prepared to go on arguing an even, if need be, to fight, rather than compromise.
The same principle is still in conflict, even today, though a federal solution has been accepted – and though a federation is nothing more than a constitutional partnership of the component states, provinces or cantons which make up the federation.
(From the memoirs of Mr. Glafcos Clerides,
former Greek Cypriot Leader,
MY DEPOSITION, Vol. 3, p.105)
On another count, Mr. Papadopoulos wants "the withdrawal of Turkish troops". This will naturally happen when there is an agreed settlement. Until then, contrary to the claim of the self-appointed "government of Cyprus", which continues to feel entitled to take over the North and to allow Greece to maintain military bases on the island, Turkish Cypriots are under constant threat and they need the protection of the Turkish army. Some argue that 25-30 thousand soldiers are too many, without realizing that with their well-trained reserves of about 70-80 thousand, the Greek Cypriots can summon a force of 100 thousand in 24-48 hours. Every able bodied Greek Cypriot living along the border villages is equipped with military weapons and ammunition. The threat to Turkish Cypriots who reject the title of the Greek Cypriots to be the government of Cyprus is real, and will be greater and more real once Turkish soldiers leave the island. For Turkish Cypriots, this is a vital security matter.
Then, Mr. Papadopoulos wants "the settlers" to leave the island. What he calls settlers are Turkish men and women who came to the island under an agreement between the TRNC and Turkey to make-up for the gap in the employment needs of the Turkish Cypriot economy.
Some of these people, who stayed in North Cyprus for more than five years and integrated into the economy and society, have acquired TRNC citizenship. Some have married local girls, and have children, now at university age. They have put their efforts into the economy of the land and they are part of the life of what makes the TRNC. Without them the economy would collapse, agriculture die, the construction sector would come to a standstill, and the tourism sector dwindle, creating a vacuum from which Greek Cypriots wish to benefit
The phenomenon of immigrants and "foreign workers", who eventually acquire the citizenship of the land where they have been working for more than five years, is an accepted practice all over the world. The TRNC should not be treated any differently.
Indeed, Mrs. Katy Clerides, an enlightened Greek Cypriot politician, the daughter of Mr. Glafcos Clerides, the ex President of the Greek Cypriot side, told the daily Turkish Cypriot newspaper "Kýbrýs” on 25 August 2004 that these people should not be treated as Mr. Papadopoulos wants them to be treated: pushed out of Cyprus!
She stated:
"While many Greek Cypriots may not like what I say, it is a fact that the hearts of many settlers beat here, because they grew up here, went to school here and this is the only place they know…"
She came under fierce criticism in South Cyprus for her comments but defended her views in the Greek Cypriot daily newspaper "Alithia" on 22 September 2004 when she stated:
"Unfortunately the demand for the expelling of all settlers does not find support in the international arena. Therefore, we have to understand that some settlers will remain in Cyprus after a settlement"
Indeed the Greek Cypriot leadership’s view is that all Turkish Cypriots are "four hundred years old guests in Cyprus"! Hence the demand that so called "settlers" leave the island "for the sake of a settlement." Leaving Turkish Cypriots stateless, ousted from all organs of the Republic in the hope that we would collapse, has given us the right to survive as a Communal Corporate political body at all costs, rather than bow to the status of a minority in a Greek Cyprus. Mr. Papadopoulos is complaining because we took care of our collective rights, our people and our economy. He has no right to dictate to us now who should be our citizen and who should not.
On the Greek Cypriot side, over the years and as from 1960, quite a number of soldiers serving in the Greek contingent were given Cyprus passports and citizenship and kept in the island in preparation for the 1963 onslaught on us. Several of these young men were found in hiding during the war of 1974 and they were handed over to the Greek Cypriot side, some of them by myself. "Pontus Greeks", to the tune of 20,000, have been imported into the island in order to boost the population ratio while Orthodox Christians from Russia and other places have been given Cyprus citizenship for the same purpose.
The number of Turkish Cypriots who emigrated from the island after the onslaught of 1963 to this day because of the economic restrictions imposed on us cannot be minimized. Many Turkish Cypriots look upon higher education as a means to overcome the isolation imposed upon them and emigrate from the island, in search of jobs, especially to Turkey, Great Britain and recently to the United States, resulting in a brain-drain. Therefore, there are not many Turkish Cypriot men left for technical jobs, or jobs in the construction, tourism and agricultural sectors. But for the so-called "settlers", who fill up the jobs for which there are not enough Turkish Cypriots, our economic life would come to a standstill.
Mr. Papadopoulos wants "respect of human rights for all Cyprus". If he is sincere, he should start paying compensation to Turkish Cypriots for destroying their lives, expectations and honour, as well as their houses and property since 1963 to this day. He should agree to the setting up of a joint board to determine the damage caused and how this could be compensated and should agree to stop its unjustly acquired advantage of legitimacy to thrash Turkish Cypriots and Turkey through unilateral action. He should concede that it is against any notion of human rights to destroy peoples lives, to oust people from their homes, force them to live in enclaves, deny all their constitutional and human rights, relentlessly destroy their economy, and then, after a voluntary exchange of populations and political agreement on bi-zonality, insist on the right to return of all "refugees" (forgetting the 40 year occupation of the seat of the partnership government and that what has come about since then is a result of that occupation) and try to sever all Turkish Cypriots from the roots that they have established over the last 30 years as a consequence of the agreement on bi-zonality. And when one Turkish Cypriot who has chosen to live in the South wins his case for the return of his property, the whole Greek Cypriot population rises in alarm!
We invite Mr. Papadopoulos and all concerned, including the ECHR, to accept the ruling of the Greek Cypriot Attorney-General that these property questions should be settled politically and that courts cannot deal with them disregarding the political realities.
Mr. Papadopoulos wants underlying structures for a functioning economy, the functioning and workability of the new state of affairs, the just resolution of the land and property issues in accordance with the decisions of the ECHR, and the respect for the right of return of "refugees." All these, put together in the light of the Greek Cypriot view that until 1974 there was nothing wrong in Cyprus; that all was peaceful etc; that the government of Cyprus consists of 100% Greek Cypriots; that what is needed is the satisfaction of the Greek Cypriot side on all these issues, indicate that Mr. Papadopoulos is not after an agreed solution in the form of a new partnership but merely after the extension of Greek Cypriot authority to the North; in other words, a return to pre-1974.
"The most paramount feature of any settlement is the ability to install a sense of security into the people", says Mr. Papadopoulos. True! In Cyprus, who needed more sense of security in the face of the "Enosis Movement" conducted by the Church and its leader, who became "the President of Cyprus"? The 1960 Agreements had devised the tripartite system of guarantee to give this sense of security to both parties. Now the party who deliberately destroyed this, and put the lives and liberties of Turkish Cypriots at great risk, continues to claim to be the government of all in need of further security.
The statement of Mr. Papadopoulos that, "The mistakes of the past must not be repeated" could have meant a great deal to us had he acknowledged, apologized and compensated Turkish Cypriots for all the damage his side caused in the name of Enosis. It is high time for Mr. Papadopoulos to comprehend and consider the realities which the preparation and application of the destructive policy embodied in the Akritas Plan have created in the island. Basing himself on a self-assumed title, he cannot forever claim the right to extend his authority to the North. If this intention continues, then partnership and unification cannot be an option for Cyprus until the Greek Cypriot side changes course and accepts the realities they created with guns.
As he says, "the people who will have to live with any solution are in the best position to judge what is suitable for them". The Greek Cypriot people are as much entitled to decide what is best for them as Turkish Cypriot people are. In Cyprus, these decisions have to coincide for a fair settlement to be achieved. For this to happen, it is necessary that the contestants are on a par and one of them is not allowed, any longer, to continue to claim to be the legitimate government of the other, or of all Cyprus. This position is not tenable under the Rule of Law, and the facts and realities of the last 40 years do not support such a spurious claim. A settlement on misconception or on illegalities cannot last even if forced down the throats of the two parties. What is wanted is truth, what is needed is an impartial diagnosis of the problem; what is wanted is respect for the equality of the two parties, and treating Turkish Cypriots merely as 25% of the population whose rights should be protected in a settlement is not equality. Turkish Cypriots are one of the two peoples, one of the two national units who will either live side by side without unification, or will work out the principles of a new permanent partnership which will enable them to co-operate (as good neighbours who need and respect each other) in the international arena for the good of both sides.
It is regrettable that Mr. Papadopoulos, who has put up all the obstacles and created all the difficulties preventing the EU from making life easier for Turkish Cypriots, can afford to state to the august body of the UN General Assembly that his government "is pursuing policies aiming to enhance the economic development of the Turkish Cypriots". The record of obstacles is very long and evident. I need not elaborate on it. All "openings" promised by Mr. Papadopoulos aim at forcing Turkish Cypriots to accept his authority as the legitimate government of Cyprus. This, of course, is quite unacceptable to the Turkish Cypriots.
It will be a repetition on my part to re-state what the problem is not, in view of the statement by Mr. Papadopoulos that, "This problem is the result of a military invasion and continued occupation of part of the territory of a sovereign state". This sovereign state was a partnership state, the homeland of both co-founder national Communities. The criminal Greek and Greek Cypriot conspiracy to take over the whole island and convert it into a Greek land with the resultant national resistance of the Turkish Cypriot partner to save its share of the homeland and prevent the colonization of the state is the Cyprus problem. It is this resistance of Turkish Cypriots which prevented the colonization of the island! Mr. Papadopoulos cannot claim unilaterally the right to speak for the sovereign state which his policies have split into two. The double referenda in which he took part for and on behalf of the Greek Cypriot people is a clear answer to such a claim. He has no right, no mandate to speak for Turkish Cypriots, or to accuse Turkey, which sacrificed her sons in order to prevent the colonization of the island. It is due to Turkey’s efforts and sacrifices that there still exist a chance for unifying the island, otherwise it could have been colonized by Greece in spite of the 1960 International Treaties which were devised in order to prevent such an eventuality.
On the question of the missing persons issue, Mr. Papadopoulos is well aware that the autonomous Missing Persons Committee (MPC), established by the UN, was constantly undermined by his representatives who refused to strike out any of the names of those who were confirmed as having been killed, thus proving, later at the ECHR, "the ineffectiveness" of this committee as a propaganda tool against Turkey. 90% of Turkish Cypriot missing persons are unarmed civilians including babies, young mothers, old grandparents, children of 9 months to 4-5 years, all elementary school children aged 11 in one village, whereas 90% of Greek Cypriot alleged "missing persons" are soldiers, armed militia who are known to have died in combat and, due to the summer heat buried wherever they fell dead. We tried to send over to the Greek Cypriot side the initial Greek / Greek Cypriot soldiers killed in the first day of the fighting but the "officers" of Mr. Nicos Sampson refused to take them. Thus, they had to be buried on the Turkish Cypriot side.
Furthermore, the Greek Cypriot leadership has not accounted for the intra-Greek killings and mass murders between 15 – 20 July 1974, some of whose graves are on the territory of the TRNC, but Greek Cypriot leaders have consistently refused to give us information about these burial places because they have listed all these Greek Cypriots killed by Greek Cypriots on the missing persons list in order to conceal their internal carnage.
As regards the statement of Mr. Papadopoulos that: "…the United Nations Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP), assigned with the task to manage the status quo inflicted 30 years ago, should remain specific to the situation on the ground" indicates the criminal amnesia about the atrocities committed from 1963 to 1974, forgetting even the fact that UNFICYP has been in the island since 1964 in order to contain the status quo created by the Greek Cypriots unsuccessful coup against the bi-national partnership status of the Republic of Cyprus. Unless this amnesia is cured and the Greek Cypriot leadership acknowledges the glaring fact that it is they who created "the Cyprus problem" and that it is they who are presenting the problem as a problem arising (eleven years after the event) in 1974, there is no hope that "the problem" can be settled on the false pretence that the Greek Cypriots are the legitimate government of Cyprus on their own. The way to open the door for forgiveness, reconciliation, healing and resolution in Cyprus is for Greek Cypriots to realise the necessity that they have to apologize to Turkish Cypriots for what they have done. Simon Bahceli reported in the English language Greek Cypriot daily "Cyprus Mail" on 4 November 2004 that Greek Cypriot film maker and writer Antonis Angastiniotis said the media has effectively banned a film he made, portraying the mass killing of Turkish Cypriots in the villages of Murataða (Maratha), Atlilar (Aloa) and Sandallar (Sandalari) in 1974. The newspaper quoted Angastiniotis as saying:
"We claim European standards, European principles, European laws, but the TV channels did not even ask to look at the film…All Turkish Cypriots know what happened in these villages. It is the Greek Cypriots who do not…Let’s face it: truth is truth. As a state you have to be able to face your faults, your mistakes, your history…The Greek Cypriot of the neighbouring villages, along with army personnel attacked the villages. They shot the children, the mothers and the old people left in the villages…For me this became a nightmare because all these years I had been convinced that everything we had done was right".
"The accession of Cyprus to the European Union in conjunction with the lack of an agreement on the settlement of the Cyprus problem, in spite of our efforts and our preference for a settlement prior to accession, signifies the end of an era and the beginning of a new one" says Mr. Papadopoulos.
That half Cyprus has become an EU member; that it is the Greek Cypriot side who has brought about this anomalous condition by deceiving the world (especially the EU and the UN); that they have no legal mandate to represent the whole island; and that the era of such deception should end and a new era based on the proper diagnosis of the problem should begin is the honest expectation of Turkish Cypriots who have been on the suffering side of the coin since 1963.
Mr. Papadopoulos refers to Cyprus as "his country", and expects Turkey to be squeezed by EU countries in order to bow to Greek Cypriot demands and agree to make Cyprus Mr. Papadopoulos’s country. He wants to be partners with
Turkey, not realizing that this cannot be done unless and until he agrees to accept the Turkish Cypriot people as his immediate partner and stops treating them as his hostage or subordinate. In their over-confident and "all or nothing" approach, Greek Cypriots must be prevented from using their unjustly and illegitimately acquired weight in Brussels to continue to hurt the Turkish Cypriot people and to get everything they want, which they have not been able to get at the negotiating table.
In spite of the violence, suffering and deprivation that they have been subjected to for nearly half a century, the Turkish Cypriot people have managed to protect their distinct identity, inherent constitutive power, right to determine their own future and the future of Cyprus, and political equality. Although I will continue with my efforts to bring about a fair win-win settlement to the Cyprus issue beyond April 2005, I am really sad that in spite of all our efforts we have not been able to reach an agreement with the Greek Cypriot side that would uphold the mutually agreed and United Nations endorsed principles of political equality, bi-zonality and partnership during my terms of office.
As someone who has always respected you as a person, in particular your sense of justice and fair play, I wish you, Mr. Secretary-General, all the best in the increasingly more complex task of helping maintain international peace and security, developing friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and in achieving international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, humanitarian or human rights character.
Please accept, Your Excellency, the assurances of my highest consideration.
Rauf R. Denktaþ
President
Coming from Denktash it's without a doubt biased but he does raise some valid points....
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.E. Mr. Kofi ANNAN
Secretary-General
of the United Nations
New York.
To start with, let me point out once again that there is no legal foundation, no legitimacy in the Greek Cypriot claim that an administration composed of one hundred percent Greek Cypriots is the legitimate government of the Republic of Cyprus. This Republic was a bi-national partnership Republic established under the international Cyprus Treaties of 1959/60 on 16 August 1960, with equal political powers vested in both co-founder partners, who elected their representatives separately, one not having the right to speak for or represent the other. As is well-known there has been no such joint government in the island since 1963, as a result of the coup against the partnership state by Archbishop Makarios and his team of "leaders", in line with the notorious Akritas Plan which has been published as a UN document under Document No. A/33/115; S/12722 dated 30 May 1978.
The treatment afforded to the Greek Cypriot side by the world at large as "the legitimate government of Cyprus" - in spite of its record of bloodshed, terrorism, defiance of the rule of law, the declaration that the Constitution is dead and buried, and the importation of Greek arms and troops to the tune of 20,000 in contravention of Security Council Resolutions - has been the main obstacle to a negotiated settlement. The Greek Cypriot leadership which had failed to achieve its aim of converting the island into a Greek Cypriot Republic (and Turkish Cypriots into a protected minority) prior to uniting the island with Greece, was deprived of any scintilla of motivation for a negotiated settlement when its unilateral application for EU membership was accepted by the EU as a proper application on behalf of the whole island. A partnership settlement would be contrary to the "national will and testament" of Archbishop Makarios to the effect that by what he had done (i.e. constituting a 100% Greek Cypriot administration as the government of the Republic of Cyprus) he had brought Cyprus to the nearest point to Enosis (union with Greece) and no one should make concessions on this, except for Enosis!
This is the only main, incontrovertible reason for the non-settlement of the Cyprus problem over the years. The acceptance of this one-legged "partnership state" as a candidate and now a full member of the EU has finally blocked the way to any settlement short of the unconditional submission of the Turkish Cypriot side to the political will of the Greek Cypriot administration.
With this short introduction I would like to further analyse the Statement of Mr. Tassos Papadopoulos at the General Assembly:
It hurts the Turkish Cypriot people to listen to Mr. Papadopoulos talk about his "concerted efforts to eliminate terrorism and its underlying causes" when he has publicly lied to the Khaleej Times of 4 September 2004, by declaring that there was not one single Turkish Cypriot killed during the 1963-1974 period. The era of terror and terrorism cannot be obliterated from the minds of Turkish Cypriots, especially when mass graves of civilians, including 16-day old babies, children from one year old to 14-15 years old, aged people of 70-90 years old have been massacred just because they were Turkish Cypriots, who opposed Enosis and defended their vested rights as co-founder partners of the defunct Republic of 1960. The unforgivable sin of Turkish Cypriots was not accepting the Greek Cypriot administration as "the legitimate government of Cyprus" and not bowing to the offer to become a minority in a Greek Cyprus as recorded by Mr. Glafcos Clerides in his memoirs MY DEPOSITION Vol. 3, page 237.
Greek Cypriot Aim
"The aim of the Greek Cypriot Constitutional policy in the talks was a moderate modification of the Plaza plan, which provided limited participation of the Turks in the organs of the independent state of Cyprus, always on a minority basis. This policy also did not succeed, because the Turkish side, though more flexible, remained unretreating on the issue of accepting a minority status for the Turkish Cypriots."
(From the memoirs of Mr.Glafcos Clerides,
former Greek Cypriot Leader,
MY DEPOSITION, Vol.3 ,p.237)
For this sin, 30,000 Turkish Cypriots had to vacate 103 villages and take refuge in safer areas. Moving from one area to another carried the risk of abduction by Greek Cypriot police and the gunmen attached to them. The then Secretary-General reported in his Report of 12 December 1964 to the Security Council that 209 Turkish Cypriots were still missing for the period 1 September 1964 to 12 December 1964 and that there seemed to be little prospect of finding them alive! The dead and wounded from 1963 – 1974 run to more than one thousand. And Mr. Papadopoulos, like his predecessors, has the cheek to claim that not a single Turkish Cypriot was killed during this period, that the Cyprus problem began with the arrival of Turkish troops in 1974 and that the problem was one of occupation and the resultant movement of people who should be entitled to go back to their homes, while claiming that property ownership is a human right which has to be honoured at all costs. The property rights of Turkish Cypriots who were driven away from 103 villages from 1963 to 1974; and the rights of all of the Turkish Cypriot population who left everything in the South after the 1975 Population Exchange Agreement mean nothing to the Greek Cypriot leadership. Mr. Papadopoulos is on record as saying that Turkish Cypriot claims will be taken up after the settlement of the Cyprus problem, which as I indicated above, will have to wait until eternity, i.e. the time Turkish Cypriots will bow to Greek Cypriot domination and accept to be a minority in a Greek Cyprus!
Mr. Papadopoulos alleges that the Republic of Cyprus (meaning the one they hijacked in name, and destroyed in fact) "supports the strengthening of the UN system". If so, he should stop exploiting the UN system by falsely alleging at UN platforms that he represents Cyprus and that "the problem" started in 1974 with the arrival of Turkey. At least the UN knows that the problem arose eleven years earlier in 1963, because UNFICYP has been stationed in Cyprus since March 1964 in order to prevent the utter destruction of the Turkish Cypriot people.
If Mr. Papadopoulos is sincere on his views about the Israeli-Palestinian question, then it is high time he had a second look at Cyprus, where violence ended only with the arrival of Turkey in 1974, saving not only Turkish Cypriot lives but also tens of thousands of Greek Cypriot lives. The then Secretary- General of AKEL, the Greek Cypriot communist party, is on record saying that ten thousand AKEL members were on the "execution list of the Junta"! So, what Mr. Papadopoulos wants for the Israeli-Palestinian dispute, namely "the arrest of violence", has already happened in Cyprus, thanks to the sacrifices of Turkey, who lost nearly one thousand lives in her attempt to bring peace and stability to the island.
Mr. Papadopoulos wants more emphasis to be given to improving living conditions in order to normalize people’s lives to the greatest possible extent. How decent of him to say so, but in Cyprus he has followed exactly the contrary policy for forty years in order to bring Turkish Cypriots to heel, and even now, in EU circles, he is doing his utmost in order to prevent the EU honouring its promises to the Turkish Cypriot side that it would lift embargoes if they voted "yes" in the referendum! Such a hypocritical approach should not be "let past" by the United Nations.
Again Mr. Papadopoulos says, and I quote, "Our support remains focused on the end of the occupation and on a just and viable settlement, based on UN resolutions and for the realization of the aspirations of the Palestinian people for the establishment of an independent state, living side by side with Israel, in conditions of sustainable peace and security."
Applying the same phraseology and logic, Turkish Cypriots have been seeking a viable, sustainable peace and security for the last forty years and have been waiting for the end of the occupation of the seat of the partnership government by the Greek Cypriot side. Turkish Cypriots have been waiting for an acknowledgement by the Greek Cypriot side (as confirmed in the separate simultaneous referenda of April 24, 2004) that it has no mandate to claim to represent "The Republic of Cyprus" (which they destroyed in 1963 by ejecting Turkish Cypriots from it) nor have they any right to represent Turkish Cypriots or impose their political will on the Turkish Cypriot people. We have been expecting Greek Cypriot leaders to acknowledge the wrongs done to Turkish Cypriots from 1963 to 1974 and to start negotiations on effective compensation as a way for starting a meaningful dialogue for peaceful, side-by-side co-existence which is the only way for bringing about a new partnership between the two peoples of Cyprus. Continuing the illegal occupation of the seat of government, pretending that the Republic of Cyprus is still functional, alleging that all was well and peaceful in the island until Turkey came and occupied Cyprus is not the way to a viable and sustainable solution.
Since Mr. Papadopoulos underlined in his Statement in New York the undeniable truth that "the aspiration of humanity revolves around achieving the full respect of human rights, democracy, and the rule of law", the Turkish Cypriot people call upon him to implement in Cyprus what he preached in New York. What is the position of Turkish Cypriots (since 1963) as regards human rights? How can anyone speak about human rights without conceding to a politically equal people the right to choose their own representatives? Is this not "the fundamental basis for human dignity and happiness"? How can the Greek Cypriot leadership on their own claim to represent Cyprus and to be the government of Cyprus and deny Turkish Cypriots their democratic/ constitutional right to elect their own representatives and choose their own government?
Mr. Papadopoulos is proud that "Cyprus is now a full member of the EU". He should be proud of succeeding in his misrepresentations to the EU countries that he represents the whole of Cyprus and all of its people. By now everyone knows that there exists a second people in the island, who have given no mandate to any Greek Cypriot leader to represent them internationally or otherwise. That is why the Greek Cypriot leadership has not been able to extend its illegal occupation to North Cyprus and that is why the EU now realizes what a big mistake has been made in allowing the Greek Cypriot application to proceed to full membership!
On Cyprus, Mr. Papadopoulos, in complete forgetfulness of the 1963-1974 period, the notorious Akritas Plan of which he was one of the architects and implementers, and in complete disregard of the destroyed rights of Turkish Cypriots and the isolation into which they have been thrust for the last 40 years, has again misrepresented the problem by saying, "This year marks 30 years since the occupation of Cyprus territory as a result of the invasion of the island by Turkish troops". Mr. Papadopoulos forgets one glaring reality, endorsed several times by the Security Council, that "Cyprus is the homeland of both peoples". Hence, the military attempt of one of them to convert the joint homeland into "His homeland" and then hand it over to Greece, and the resistance of Turkish Cypriots to this attempt, in saving their share in the homeland, is THE Cyprus problem! Therefore, Turkey’s arrival in 1974 (after witnessing the attempt for eleven years to wipe off the map all Turkish Cypriots) the arrival of Turkey under the powers given to it by the 1960 international Treaties and the Constitution is not "occupation of Cyprus", but preventing the occupation of the Turkish Cypriot HOME by Greek Cypriots helped by Greece! It is high time all concerned had a second look at the facts and re-diagnosed the Cyprus problem thus getting rid of the confusion created by Greece and Greek Cypriot lobbying.
As to the "relentless efforts by the Greek Cypriots (for 30 years) to achieve a just and peaceful settlement" I have nothing to add to the statements of all those who declared that they were deceived by the Greek Cypriot leadership into believing that the Greek Cypriot side really wanted a just and peaceful settlement. What Greek Cypriot leaders wanted – and now want – is international confirmation that they are the owners, the only people of Cyprus and that Turkish Cypriots are a mere minority amongst the people of Cyprus!
After the double referenda in the island, the historical truth that there are two separate peoples in the island, equal in status, has become so apparent that it should need no further effort or argument to convince all onlookers and all EU countries that one of these two peoples can in no way represent the other, or speak for the whole island. It is high time therefore to correct past images, re-visit old Resolutions which have no bearing on reality and tell Mr. Papadopoulos that "he truly represents 75% of the Greek Cypriot people who have voted that they do not want a partnership with Turkish Cypriots on the basis of equality". Hence he should have no further say about how the EU deals with the people in the North.
It is unfortunate that neither the EU nor the UN has found time to have an impartial diagnosis of what "the Cyprus problem" is all about. Is it a problem which began in 1974 with the arrival of Turkey, or is it a Greek / Greek Cypriot attempt to convert a partnership Republic into a Greek Cypriot Republic by eliminating or suppressing the "Turkish Cypriot partner"? The remedy for each problem is different. Recognition of the Turkish Cypriot partner’s equal sovereign status and the right of the Turkish Cypriot people to self-determination is the avenue through which the problem can be solved, which has, in fact, half-solved itself by both sides agreeing, at least in theory, on geographical separation, exchange of population, political equality and co-operation for international purposes at the very top. It is also agreed by all concerned that one side has no right to speak for, or represent the other, as re-established anew in the April 2004 referenda. So, how can Mr. Papadopoulos ignore all these realities and still address the United Nations as the President of Cyprus! He is President of the Greek Cypriots who elected him and has no mandate to talk for, and on behalf of, the Turkish Cypriot people. Turkish Cypriots have been facing an attempt at colonization by Greek / Greek Cypriot forces for the last 40 years. And this threat continues unabated because the Greek Cypriot side still claims the right to overpower Turkish Cypriots in the North. It is this danger which the world should eliminate by telling the Greek Cypriot side that they have no such right; that property questions which affect both sides equally can be settled (and should have been settled long ago) through property exchange and just compensation and that the claim to return en masse to their properties will endanger any peaceful co-existence in the future.
Luckily for all concerned, President of the Greek Cypriot Bar Association has put it on record that the property question affects both sides and that this problem should be handled politically.
Asked about the Greek Cypriot Supreme Court decision to return his property back to a Turkish Cypriot living in South Cyprus, he said (Cyprus Mail, 29 September 2004):
"The court decided outside of today’s realities in Cyprus. It dealt with individual rights to property protected in the Constitution and the European Convention of Human Rights. But the problem is not legal, it’s political, and won’t be solved by an appeal or even suspending the decision until the appeal is over. It needs a political solution…"
The support of the international community given to the Greek Cypriots in their "relentless efforts to achieve a just and peaceful settlement" has so far been based on misinformation and misconceptions, and therefore is baseless because of the fact that there has not been an impartial diagnosis of the problem! Therefore what was supported (and what is being supported) till today cannot be described as "efforts for the settlement of the Cyprus problem" but rather as "efforts for settling the problem in line with Greek Cypriot policy" - which is tantamount to depriving Turkish Cypriots of their basic corporate rights as the co-founders of the 1960 Republic.
I adopt and repeat Mr. Papadopoulos’s statement to the effect that "the question and eagerness for a solution never meant that we would accept any settlement proposed, nor that we would embark on an adventure, condemned to fail with irreversible consequences". This statement is more than just a statement for Turkish Cypriots who were led to believe that the 1960 Agreements, guaranteed by three powers, with Turkey and Greece maintaining a token force in the island, was a foolproof guarantee against any Greek Cypriot attempt to unite the island with Greece. We were grossly deceived, and in the 40th year we are expected to sign another paper-agreement and abandon our solid foundation as a sovereign Republic in the North and rely on the good-will of the Greek Cypriot side, which has lied even to its own people about the events of 1963-1974, making the Greek Cypriot youth believe that until 1974 all was peaceful and friendly with Turkish Cypriots who, all of a sudden, in 1974 changed their minds and helped Turkey to invade Cyprus and, thus, did all the harm to them in complete disloyalty to Cyprus and to their Greek Cypriot brothers and sisters. This kind of an approach only helps the cultivation of enmity against Turkish Cypriots and Turkey and the continuation of the demand for retribution. It is, therefore, relevant to quote here a statement from a book entitled "Barbarism Against the Turkish Cypriots - The Other Side of the Coin" by Antonis Angastiniotis recently published.
"Most of the Greek Cypriot youth know very little about the incidents, which led to the partition of the island. The tragic events of 1974 have been used as a huge camouflage covering the prior events, which initially caused the partition of the Island. It has always annoyed me to see in the history books taught in our schools, that after a lengthy explanation of the heroic deeds of EOKA members, a big leap to 1974 is made. Either no incident took place between 1960 and 1974, or nobody wants to discuss the incidents of this period. While researching the developments of the period, I came to the conclusion that the second is the case."
Mr. Antonis Angastiniotis has made public that his book (and the documentary he prepared as a result of his discovery) was not allowed to be circulated in the South. Here is his statement:
WHY AM I DIGGING UP THE PAST?
"....I am repeatedly asked why do I scratch old wounds and not let the past be forgotten. The answer is quite simple: Because the wounds are not old… Had they been so, we wouldn’t still have mourning mothers in black garments, weapons, soldiers and barricades around us. Although I am a person who has been permanently residing on this island for the last forty years, I have begun to discover the other side of the realities on the Island only last year, and every reality I discover leaves a deep scar on my soul.
When you manage to jump over the propaganda wall and realize that half of the truth has been deliberately distorted and hidden from you, suddenly the past becomes a frightening present. You realize that if you are curious to discover further truths, you have to dig the soil hard enough for your hands to start bleeding. If you speak your mind, you run the risk of being branded as a traitor, your life comes under threat and most of your friends turn their backs on you. You might even be left completely alone..."
In view of the fact that Mr. Papadopoulos denies the mass murders, destruction of villages and what Turkish Cypriots suffered as a result of the destruction of the partnership Republic in 1963 in the name of Enosis, (neo-colonization of the Turkish Cypriots by uniting the island with Greece) it is relevant that I should quote some of the news items from the international press of those days:
TURKS BRUTALLY MURDERED
"It is nonsense to claim, as the Greeks do, that all casualties were caused by fighting between armed men of both sides. On Christmas Eve many Turkish people were brutally attacked and murdered in their suburban homes, including the wife and three small children of the Turkish head of army medical services - allegedly by a group of forty men, many in army boots and greatcoats."
31 December 1963 DAILY HERALD (London)
IN A SILENT VILLAGE IN ONE NIGHT OF TERROR 350 MEN, WOMEN AND CHILDREN VANISHED
"In this village of shame today I found grim evidence of the hatred between Greek and Turk that has bedevilled this beautiful island. A few days ago, 1,000 people lived here, in their solid, stone built homes which hug the coast road to Kyrenia, 13 miles from Nicosia. Then in a night of terror 350 villagers - men, women and children - vanished. They were all Turks. Today I was one of two British correspondents to drive to the village to investigate the mystery. In the dusty village street I found hungry Greek children playing listlessly. From doorways men and women eyed me suspiciously. When I asked where are the Turks, the women averted their gaze. The men shuffled their feet and said "We don’t know. They just left."
Peter Moorhead reporting from the village of Skylloura, Cyprus.
1 January 1964
DAILY HERALD (London)
AN APPALLING SIGHT
"….And when I came across the Turkish homes they were an appalling sight. Apart from the walls, they just did not exist. I doubt if a napalm bomb attack could have created more devastation. I counted 40 blackened brick and concrete ‘shells’ that had once been homes. Each house had been deliberately fired by petrol. Under red tile roofs which had caved in, I found a twisted mass of bed springs, children’s cots and cribs, and ankle deep grey ashes of what had once been chairs, tables, wardrobes…."
In the neighbouring village of Ayios Vassilios, a mile away, I counted 16 wrecked and burned out homes. They were all Turkish. From this village more than 100 Turks had also vanished. In neither village did I find a scrap of damage to any Greek house."
1 January 1964
DAILY SKETCH (London)
SAVAGERY OF EOKA MEN
" . . Turkish homes in the city had been set ablaze by arrows tipped with paraffin-soaked rags, and hundreds of hard core EOKA men were prowling towns and villages under arms."
Reported by Louis Kirby from Nicosia.
2 January 1964
DAILY TELEGRAPH (London)
TURKS TO BE EXTERMINATED
"... On the Greek Cypriot side the extremists resent President Makarios’s acceptance of British intervention and would have preferred the fighting to continue, leading to the extermination of the Turkish community."
4 January 1964
NEW YORK HERALD TRIBUNE
The UN Secretary General’s report of 12 December 1964, S6102, stated:
"In the report of 10 September, it was indicated that as of 1 September, 232 Turkish Cypriots were missing, according to the list compiled by the Turkish Cypriot Missing Persons Bureau. Since that date, UNFICYP was informed that twenty-three Turkish Cypriots have been accounted for and their names have been deleted from the list of missing persons; this leaves 209 Turkish Cypriots still missing. Efforts to trace those missing will be continued by ICRC and UNFICYP, but there seems to be little prospect of finding them alive."
The UN Secretary-General’s report of 15 June 1964, S/5764 stated:
"…According to information received from the Joint Relief Commission, there are approximately 55,000 Turkish Cypriots in need of relief in the form of basic foodstuffs and medical supplies. Of the total number, approximately 16,900 have left their homes and moved to other villages and towns. Of these, about 60 per cent are living in the Nicosia and Kyrenia Districts. It is reported that a total of eighty-six villages have received refugees. The supplies for the relief rations and other aid such as clothes and medicines have been donated to the Turkish Cypriot Communal Chamber by the Turkish Red Crescent Society with Headquarters in Ankara. Five shipments consisting of approximately 3,231 tons have so far arrived in Cyprus…"
"…Around Nicosia there exist three refugee camps where 1,500 persons are living in tents. Over half of them are children and there is great concern about their health during the summer months when the heat will cause dehydration, particularly in the very young and the old…"
Below are some quotations from the World Press at the time of the Greek military coup in 1974 and the Turkish intervention which followed:
"…15 July is an invasion. It is a clear attack from the outside and a flagrant violation of the independence and sovereignty of the Republic of Cyprus. The invasion is continuing as long as there are Greek officers in Cyprus."
The address of Archbishop Makarios, President of the Cyprus Republic, to
the UN Security Council on 19 July 1974
This is what Sampson, who was made "President" of Cyprus by the Greek Junta after the coup, but forced out by the Turkish intervention, said:
"I was about to proclaim Enosis when I quit."
Nicos Sampson, reported in the
CYPRUS MAIL, 17 July 1974
TOURIST’S GRIM ACCOUNT OF BURIALS
IN MASS GRAVES
"…After landing at RAF Lyneham, Wiltshire, Mr. Derek Reed, aged 31, said he had seen bodies being buried in a mass grave near Paphos after last Monday’s coup.
"People who were told by Makarios to lay down their guns were shot out of hand by the National Guard", he said "they were buried in mass graves."
THE TIMES, 22 July 1974
The Times’s correspondent, David Leigh, wrote:
"Thousands of Turkish Cypriots were taken hostage after the invasion of Cyprus, Turkish women were raped, children were shot in the street and the Turkish quarter of Limasol was burnt out by the National Guard."
David Leigh, THE TIMES (of London)
23 July 1974, p.1b&c
Jean Neuvecelle of France Soir too witnessed many acts of barbarity in the Famagusta region. "I saw with my own eyes the shameful incidents", he wrote, and continued:
"The Greeks burned Turkish mosques and set fire to Turkish homes… Defenceless Turkish villagers, who have no weapons, live in an atmosphere of terror, created by the Greek marauders… The Turks who can save their lives run to the nearby hills and are able to do nothing but watch the callous looting of their homes."
FRANCE SOIR, Issue of July 24, 1974
On the Annan Plan, which Mr. Papadopoulos led his people to reject by 75% "No" votes, I can say little except endorse your views, Mr. Secretary-General, stated in your Report of 28 May 2004 where you say that "What was rejected was the solution itself rather than a mere blueprint" (para.83).
That this was the position of each and every leader with whom I negotiated as from 1968 has been my confirmed view. As long as the Greek Cypriot wing of a partnership state (which was destroyed by Greek Cypriots in order to hijack it and move into Enosis), is treated as "the government of Cyprus", they feel they have succeeded and that no one can deprive them of their "claim of legitimacy" over the whole island". In other words, Greek Cypriots are refusing to compromise on a problem which has already been settled in their favour. They do not need Turkish Cypriots in order to be "the legitimate government of Cyprus" because – contrary to the Rule of Law and the facts – they are treated as such by all concerned. So why should they re-establish a partnership with Turkish Cypriots who, inevitably, they believe and expect, will collapse as a result of the isolation that they have imposed on them. Unfortunately, all those who have accepted the Greek Cypriot side, in complete disregard of its long standing previous record of violations of human rights, treat Turkish Cypriot resistance to the Greek Cypriot attempt to impose its political will on them as "intransigence". Hence the refusal of the Greek Cypriot side to compromise on the title of "the government of Cyprus", well knowing that Turkish Cypriots will never concede this hijacked title to them.
Mr. Papadopoulos alleges that the Greek Cypriot side "is committed to a solution which will ensure the reunification of the country, its economy and its people".
This commitment is based on the idea that there is only one people in Cyprus. This has to be corrected if reunification is the aim. You cannot unify ONE people. There are two peoples in Cyprus of different ethnic origin, different religion and language, with diversely opposing national affiliation. It was the trick resorted to by Greece and the Greek Cypriot side asking for self-determination for the people of Cyprus, as a means for achieving Enosis, as far back as 1954 when they applied to the United Nations. The immediate reaction of Turkish Cypriots and of Turkey was that the Greek Cypriot people could not speak for the whole island; there were two peoples in Cyprus and one of them could not, through the use of the right of self-determination, impose its will on the other and colonize it by uniting the island with Greece. By 1956, the British colonial government conceded the fact that the right of self-determination, in the case of Cyprus, if used, would be used by the two sides separately. The then British Colonial Secretary Alan Lennox Boyd said:
"When the international and strategic situation permits, and provided self-government is working satisfactorily, Her Majesty’s Government will be ready to review the question of the application of self-determination.
When the time comes for this review, that is, when these conditions have been fulfilled, it will be the purpose of Her Majesty’s Government to ensure that any exercise of self-determination should be effected in such a manner that the Turkish Cypriot community, no less than the Greek Cypriot community, shall, in the special circumstances of Cyprus, be given freedom to decide for themselves their future status. In other words, Her Majesty’s Government recognise that the exercise of self-determination in such a mixed population must include partition among the eventual options."
(Statement on Cyprus in the UK House
of Commons on 19 December 1956)
British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan confirmed later that:
"If in the long run our hopes are dashed and every effort fails; if we are thrown back on other solutions which we all agree would be undesirable, then Her Majesty’s Government will stand by their pledges. These, of course, include among others those contained in the statement which my Right Hon. Friend, the Colonial Secretary, made on 19 December 1956."
(Statement on Cyprus in the UK House of Commons on 26 June 1958 during a debate of the Macmillan Plan)
It was this reality which led Greece and the Greek Cypriot side to agree to a partnership Republic on the basis of political equality and functional federation. The Greek Cypriot leadership, however, set on a course, at the outset, to destroy this partnership and unite the island with Greece at all costs. Their destructive criminal activities did not in any way "evaporate" the right of self-determination of the Turkish Cypriot people. This was proved at the double referenda of April 2004.
It is relevant to mention here that my proposal, in the course of the negotiations, to put in the Annan Plan that two peoples exist in Cyprus and that it is these politically equal peoples, ex-partners, who are going to be reunified under a new, bi-zonal partnership, was totally rejected by the Greek Cypriot side. "There is only one people, composed of two communities" I was told. It is, therefore, sad that there has been no change at all in the Greek Cypriot attitude to this day.
The country has been divided because of the Greek Cypriot attempt to nullify the Turkish Cypriot homeland and convert the bi-communal partnership Republic into a Greek Cypriot Republic. It can be reunified by conceding the right of the Turkish Cypriots to keep a safe homeland in the North in a bi-zonal set-up, provided the Greek Cypriot demand to be the government of all the island is cast aside.
If the fact that sovereignty emanates equally (as also spelt out in the UN Set of Ideas of 1992) from the two peoples (ex co-founder partners of the hijacked Republic of Cyprus) is accepted, then it would be quite easy to establish a bi-zonal federation / confederation and to unify the island under that roof. All that is needed for re-unification is for the Greek Cypriot side to abandon the idea that they are (or will ever be accepted by Turkish Cypriots) to be the legitimate government of Cyprus. This is what has impeded a settlement for 40 years. The governments which have been misled into believing that the problem in Cyprus is the attempt to divide a unitary state and a Cypriot nation, should awake to the fact that there has never been a unitary state and a Cypriot nation, and that what has fallen apart are the two co-founder partners of a partnership state because the Greek Cypriot partner decided to take over the partnership and convert it into a Greek Cypriot state. This is confirmed in the following statement of the former Greek Cypriot President, Mr. Glafcos Clerides, who is considered to be a moderate by many in the international community:
GREEK CYPRIOT PREOCCUPATION
"Just as the Greek Cypriot preoccupation was that Cyprus should be a Greek Cypriot state, with a protected Turkish Cypriot minority, the Turkish preoccupation was to defeat any such effort and to maintain the partnership concepts, which in their opinion the Zurich Agreement created between the two communities. The conflict, therefore, was a conflict of principle and for that principle both sides were prepared to go on arguing an even, if need be, to fight, rather than compromise.
The same principle is still in conflict, even today, though a federal solution has been accepted – and though a federation is nothing more than a constitutional partnership of the component states, provinces or cantons which make up the federation.
(From the memoirs of Mr. Glafcos Clerides,
former Greek Cypriot Leader,
MY DEPOSITION, Vol. 3, p.105)
On another count, Mr. Papadopoulos wants "the withdrawal of Turkish troops". This will naturally happen when there is an agreed settlement. Until then, contrary to the claim of the self-appointed "government of Cyprus", which continues to feel entitled to take over the North and to allow Greece to maintain military bases on the island, Turkish Cypriots are under constant threat and they need the protection of the Turkish army. Some argue that 25-30 thousand soldiers are too many, without realizing that with their well-trained reserves of about 70-80 thousand, the Greek Cypriots can summon a force of 100 thousand in 24-48 hours. Every able bodied Greek Cypriot living along the border villages is equipped with military weapons and ammunition. The threat to Turkish Cypriots who reject the title of the Greek Cypriots to be the government of Cyprus is real, and will be greater and more real once Turkish soldiers leave the island. For Turkish Cypriots, this is a vital security matter.
Then, Mr. Papadopoulos wants "the settlers" to leave the island. What he calls settlers are Turkish men and women who came to the island under an agreement between the TRNC and Turkey to make-up for the gap in the employment needs of the Turkish Cypriot economy.
Some of these people, who stayed in North Cyprus for more than five years and integrated into the economy and society, have acquired TRNC citizenship. Some have married local girls, and have children, now at university age. They have put their efforts into the economy of the land and they are part of the life of what makes the TRNC. Without them the economy would collapse, agriculture die, the construction sector would come to a standstill, and the tourism sector dwindle, creating a vacuum from which Greek Cypriots wish to benefit
The phenomenon of immigrants and "foreign workers", who eventually acquire the citizenship of the land where they have been working for more than five years, is an accepted practice all over the world. The TRNC should not be treated any differently.
Indeed, Mrs. Katy Clerides, an enlightened Greek Cypriot politician, the daughter of Mr. Glafcos Clerides, the ex President of the Greek Cypriot side, told the daily Turkish Cypriot newspaper "Kýbrýs” on 25 August 2004 that these people should not be treated as Mr. Papadopoulos wants them to be treated: pushed out of Cyprus!
She stated:
"While many Greek Cypriots may not like what I say, it is a fact that the hearts of many settlers beat here, because they grew up here, went to school here and this is the only place they know…"
She came under fierce criticism in South Cyprus for her comments but defended her views in the Greek Cypriot daily newspaper "Alithia" on 22 September 2004 when she stated:
"Unfortunately the demand for the expelling of all settlers does not find support in the international arena. Therefore, we have to understand that some settlers will remain in Cyprus after a settlement"
Indeed the Greek Cypriot leadership’s view is that all Turkish Cypriots are "four hundred years old guests in Cyprus"! Hence the demand that so called "settlers" leave the island "for the sake of a settlement." Leaving Turkish Cypriots stateless, ousted from all organs of the Republic in the hope that we would collapse, has given us the right to survive as a Communal Corporate political body at all costs, rather than bow to the status of a minority in a Greek Cyprus. Mr. Papadopoulos is complaining because we took care of our collective rights, our people and our economy. He has no right to dictate to us now who should be our citizen and who should not.
On the Greek Cypriot side, over the years and as from 1960, quite a number of soldiers serving in the Greek contingent were given Cyprus passports and citizenship and kept in the island in preparation for the 1963 onslaught on us. Several of these young men were found in hiding during the war of 1974 and they were handed over to the Greek Cypriot side, some of them by myself. "Pontus Greeks", to the tune of 20,000, have been imported into the island in order to boost the population ratio while Orthodox Christians from Russia and other places have been given Cyprus citizenship for the same purpose.
The number of Turkish Cypriots who emigrated from the island after the onslaught of 1963 to this day because of the economic restrictions imposed on us cannot be minimized. Many Turkish Cypriots look upon higher education as a means to overcome the isolation imposed upon them and emigrate from the island, in search of jobs, especially to Turkey, Great Britain and recently to the United States, resulting in a brain-drain. Therefore, there are not many Turkish Cypriot men left for technical jobs, or jobs in the construction, tourism and agricultural sectors. But for the so-called "settlers", who fill up the jobs for which there are not enough Turkish Cypriots, our economic life would come to a standstill.
Mr. Papadopoulos wants "respect of human rights for all Cyprus". If he is sincere, he should start paying compensation to Turkish Cypriots for destroying their lives, expectations and honour, as well as their houses and property since 1963 to this day. He should agree to the setting up of a joint board to determine the damage caused and how this could be compensated and should agree to stop its unjustly acquired advantage of legitimacy to thrash Turkish Cypriots and Turkey through unilateral action. He should concede that it is against any notion of human rights to destroy peoples lives, to oust people from their homes, force them to live in enclaves, deny all their constitutional and human rights, relentlessly destroy their economy, and then, after a voluntary exchange of populations and political agreement on bi-zonality, insist on the right to return of all "refugees" (forgetting the 40 year occupation of the seat of the partnership government and that what has come about since then is a result of that occupation) and try to sever all Turkish Cypriots from the roots that they have established over the last 30 years as a consequence of the agreement on bi-zonality. And when one Turkish Cypriot who has chosen to live in the South wins his case for the return of his property, the whole Greek Cypriot population rises in alarm!
We invite Mr. Papadopoulos and all concerned, including the ECHR, to accept the ruling of the Greek Cypriot Attorney-General that these property questions should be settled politically and that courts cannot deal with them disregarding the political realities.
Mr. Papadopoulos wants underlying structures for a functioning economy, the functioning and workability of the new state of affairs, the just resolution of the land and property issues in accordance with the decisions of the ECHR, and the respect for the right of return of "refugees." All these, put together in the light of the Greek Cypriot view that until 1974 there was nothing wrong in Cyprus; that all was peaceful etc; that the government of Cyprus consists of 100% Greek Cypriots; that what is needed is the satisfaction of the Greek Cypriot side on all these issues, indicate that Mr. Papadopoulos is not after an agreed solution in the form of a new partnership but merely after the extension of Greek Cypriot authority to the North; in other words, a return to pre-1974.
"The most paramount feature of any settlement is the ability to install a sense of security into the people", says Mr. Papadopoulos. True! In Cyprus, who needed more sense of security in the face of the "Enosis Movement" conducted by the Church and its leader, who became "the President of Cyprus"? The 1960 Agreements had devised the tripartite system of guarantee to give this sense of security to both parties. Now the party who deliberately destroyed this, and put the lives and liberties of Turkish Cypriots at great risk, continues to claim to be the government of all in need of further security.
The statement of Mr. Papadopoulos that, "The mistakes of the past must not be repeated" could have meant a great deal to us had he acknowledged, apologized and compensated Turkish Cypriots for all the damage his side caused in the name of Enosis. It is high time for Mr. Papadopoulos to comprehend and consider the realities which the preparation and application of the destructive policy embodied in the Akritas Plan have created in the island. Basing himself on a self-assumed title, he cannot forever claim the right to extend his authority to the North. If this intention continues, then partnership and unification cannot be an option for Cyprus until the Greek Cypriot side changes course and accepts the realities they created with guns.
As he says, "the people who will have to live with any solution are in the best position to judge what is suitable for them". The Greek Cypriot people are as much entitled to decide what is best for them as Turkish Cypriot people are. In Cyprus, these decisions have to coincide for a fair settlement to be achieved. For this to happen, it is necessary that the contestants are on a par and one of them is not allowed, any longer, to continue to claim to be the legitimate government of the other, or of all Cyprus. This position is not tenable under the Rule of Law, and the facts and realities of the last 40 years do not support such a spurious claim. A settlement on misconception or on illegalities cannot last even if forced down the throats of the two parties. What is wanted is truth, what is needed is an impartial diagnosis of the problem; what is wanted is respect for the equality of the two parties, and treating Turkish Cypriots merely as 25% of the population whose rights should be protected in a settlement is not equality. Turkish Cypriots are one of the two peoples, one of the two national units who will either live side by side without unification, or will work out the principles of a new permanent partnership which will enable them to co-operate (as good neighbours who need and respect each other) in the international arena for the good of both sides.
It is regrettable that Mr. Papadopoulos, who has put up all the obstacles and created all the difficulties preventing the EU from making life easier for Turkish Cypriots, can afford to state to the august body of the UN General Assembly that his government "is pursuing policies aiming to enhance the economic development of the Turkish Cypriots". The record of obstacles is very long and evident. I need not elaborate on it. All "openings" promised by Mr. Papadopoulos aim at forcing Turkish Cypriots to accept his authority as the legitimate government of Cyprus. This, of course, is quite unacceptable to the Turkish Cypriots.
It will be a repetition on my part to re-state what the problem is not, in view of the statement by Mr. Papadopoulos that, "This problem is the result of a military invasion and continued occupation of part of the territory of a sovereign state". This sovereign state was a partnership state, the homeland of both co-founder national Communities. The criminal Greek and Greek Cypriot conspiracy to take over the whole island and convert it into a Greek land with the resultant national resistance of the Turkish Cypriot partner to save its share of the homeland and prevent the colonization of the state is the Cyprus problem. It is this resistance of Turkish Cypriots which prevented the colonization of the island! Mr. Papadopoulos cannot claim unilaterally the right to speak for the sovereign state which his policies have split into two. The double referenda in which he took part for and on behalf of the Greek Cypriot people is a clear answer to such a claim. He has no right, no mandate to speak for Turkish Cypriots, or to accuse Turkey, which sacrificed her sons in order to prevent the colonization of the island. It is due to Turkey’s efforts and sacrifices that there still exist a chance for unifying the island, otherwise it could have been colonized by Greece in spite of the 1960 International Treaties which were devised in order to prevent such an eventuality.
On the question of the missing persons issue, Mr. Papadopoulos is well aware that the autonomous Missing Persons Committee (MPC), established by the UN, was constantly undermined by his representatives who refused to strike out any of the names of those who were confirmed as having been killed, thus proving, later at the ECHR, "the ineffectiveness" of this committee as a propaganda tool against Turkey. 90% of Turkish Cypriot missing persons are unarmed civilians including babies, young mothers, old grandparents, children of 9 months to 4-5 years, all elementary school children aged 11 in one village, whereas 90% of Greek Cypriot alleged "missing persons" are soldiers, armed militia who are known to have died in combat and, due to the summer heat buried wherever they fell dead. We tried to send over to the Greek Cypriot side the initial Greek / Greek Cypriot soldiers killed in the first day of the fighting but the "officers" of Mr. Nicos Sampson refused to take them. Thus, they had to be buried on the Turkish Cypriot side.
Furthermore, the Greek Cypriot leadership has not accounted for the intra-Greek killings and mass murders between 15 – 20 July 1974, some of whose graves are on the territory of the TRNC, but Greek Cypriot leaders have consistently refused to give us information about these burial places because they have listed all these Greek Cypriots killed by Greek Cypriots on the missing persons list in order to conceal their internal carnage.
As regards the statement of Mr. Papadopoulos that: "…the United Nations Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP), assigned with the task to manage the status quo inflicted 30 years ago, should remain specific to the situation on the ground" indicates the criminal amnesia about the atrocities committed from 1963 to 1974, forgetting even the fact that UNFICYP has been in the island since 1964 in order to contain the status quo created by the Greek Cypriots unsuccessful coup against the bi-national partnership status of the Republic of Cyprus. Unless this amnesia is cured and the Greek Cypriot leadership acknowledges the glaring fact that it is they who created "the Cyprus problem" and that it is they who are presenting the problem as a problem arising (eleven years after the event) in 1974, there is no hope that "the problem" can be settled on the false pretence that the Greek Cypriots are the legitimate government of Cyprus on their own. The way to open the door for forgiveness, reconciliation, healing and resolution in Cyprus is for Greek Cypriots to realise the necessity that they have to apologize to Turkish Cypriots for what they have done. Simon Bahceli reported in the English language Greek Cypriot daily "Cyprus Mail" on 4 November 2004 that Greek Cypriot film maker and writer Antonis Angastiniotis said the media has effectively banned a film he made, portraying the mass killing of Turkish Cypriots in the villages of Murataða (Maratha), Atlilar (Aloa) and Sandallar (Sandalari) in 1974. The newspaper quoted Angastiniotis as saying:
"We claim European standards, European principles, European laws, but the TV channels did not even ask to look at the film…All Turkish Cypriots know what happened in these villages. It is the Greek Cypriots who do not…Let’s face it: truth is truth. As a state you have to be able to face your faults, your mistakes, your history…The Greek Cypriot of the neighbouring villages, along with army personnel attacked the villages. They shot the children, the mothers and the old people left in the villages…For me this became a nightmare because all these years I had been convinced that everything we had done was right".
"The accession of Cyprus to the European Union in conjunction with the lack of an agreement on the settlement of the Cyprus problem, in spite of our efforts and our preference for a settlement prior to accession, signifies the end of an era and the beginning of a new one" says Mr. Papadopoulos.
That half Cyprus has become an EU member; that it is the Greek Cypriot side who has brought about this anomalous condition by deceiving the world (especially the EU and the UN); that they have no legal mandate to represent the whole island; and that the era of such deception should end and a new era based on the proper diagnosis of the problem should begin is the honest expectation of Turkish Cypriots who have been on the suffering side of the coin since 1963.
Mr. Papadopoulos refers to Cyprus as "his country", and expects Turkey to be squeezed by EU countries in order to bow to Greek Cypriot demands and agree to make Cyprus Mr. Papadopoulos’s country. He wants to be partners with
Turkey, not realizing that this cannot be done unless and until he agrees to accept the Turkish Cypriot people as his immediate partner and stops treating them as his hostage or subordinate. In their over-confident and "all or nothing" approach, Greek Cypriots must be prevented from using their unjustly and illegitimately acquired weight in Brussels to continue to hurt the Turkish Cypriot people and to get everything they want, which they have not been able to get at the negotiating table.
In spite of the violence, suffering and deprivation that they have been subjected to for nearly half a century, the Turkish Cypriot people have managed to protect their distinct identity, inherent constitutive power, right to determine their own future and the future of Cyprus, and political equality. Although I will continue with my efforts to bring about a fair win-win settlement to the Cyprus issue beyond April 2005, I am really sad that in spite of all our efforts we have not been able to reach an agreement with the Greek Cypriot side that would uphold the mutually agreed and United Nations endorsed principles of political equality, bi-zonality and partnership during my terms of office.
As someone who has always respected you as a person, in particular your sense of justice and fair play, I wish you, Mr. Secretary-General, all the best in the increasingly more complex task of helping maintain international peace and security, developing friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and in achieving international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, humanitarian or human rights character.
Please accept, Your Excellency, the assurances of my highest consideration.
Rauf R. Denktaþ
President
-
T_C - Main Contributor
- Posts: 3513
- Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 3:16 am
- Location: London
by cypezokyli » Thu May 24, 2007 5:12 pm
R.R. obviously misinterpreted / manipulated the position of loucas charalambous.
when someone critisizes the nationalists of his own community, this does not mean that he accepts the positions of the nationalists of the other community.
this is the tragedy of people who attempt to view history in a different way.... so loucas charalambous will be labelled here as a sell out....while on the other side the same school of thought will say the same about sener levent..... or come along with threads like kikapoulopoulos
when someone critisizes the nationalists of his own community, this does not mean that he accepts the positions of the nationalists of the other community.
this is the tragedy of people who attempt to view history in a different way.... so loucas charalambous will be labelled here as a sell out....while on the other side the same school of thought will say the same about sener levent..... or come along with threads like kikapoulopoulos
- cypezokyli
- Regular Contributor
- Posts: 2563
- Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 6:11 pm
- Location: deutschland
by bigOz » Thu May 24, 2007 5:19 pm
Friggin 'ell TC...! It will take me the rest of the day to read all that!
If I run out of patience, do not expect any GC to spend the next half an hour reading it. I think it may be more sensible if the posts are shorter and more to the point - perhaps divide them into few posts rather than one very long one which no one will really bother to read!
No offence my friend - just a constructive criticism...
If I run out of patience, do not expect any GC to spend the next half an hour reading it. I think it may be more sensible if the posts are shorter and more to the point - perhaps divide them into few posts rather than one very long one which no one will really bother to read!
No offence my friend - just a constructive criticism...
-
bigOz - Regular Contributor
- Posts: 1225
- Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:19 am
- Location: Girne - Cyprus
by T_C » Thu May 24, 2007 5:29 pm
cypezokyli wrote:R.R. obviously misinterpreted / manipulated the position of loucas charalambous.
when someone critisizes the nationalists of his own community, this does not mean that he accepts the positions of the nationalists of the other community.
this is the tragedy of people who attempt to view history in a different way.... so loucas charalambous will be labelled here as a sell out....while on the other side the same school of thought will say the same about sener levent..... or come along with threads like kikapoulopoulos
Oh come on cypezokyli!
I agree with what you said but in all fairness Kikapu isn't much different himself...
Remember "Viewpoint is not a Duck but a Turkey..."
-
T_C - Main Contributor
- Posts: 3513
- Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 3:16 am
- Location: London
by Jerry » Thu May 24, 2007 6:39 pm
Keep the engine of hate and recriminations going chaps. You must be really naive if you don't believe that a GC could counter the post that started this thread with arguments and details of Turkish atrocities over the years. Ah yes but according to your "rules" events before 1963 don't count do they, unless they were anti TC of course. Stop raking up the past, admit that you are equally to blame for the current situation but most of all GROW UP!
- Jerry
- Main Contributor
- Posts: 4730
- Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 12:29 pm
- Location: UK
by Viewpoint » Thu May 24, 2007 6:45 pm
Surely 1960 must be the starting point, it was the only opportunity we had to build a united Cypriot people. Going back hundreds of years asking me to pay for the sins of my ancestors will get us nowhere but asking why your father killed mine and why you did not regard us as equals, discriminated againsy YCs and why the "RoC" did not provide democracy and human rights for all its citizens is more relevant and far more important imo.
-
Viewpoint - Leading Contributor
- Posts: 25214
- Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 2:48 pm
- Location: Nicosia/Lefkosa
by T_C » Thu May 24, 2007 6:47 pm
Jerry wrote:Keep the engine of hate and recriminations going chaps. You must be really naive if you don't believe that a GC could counter the post that started this thread with arguments and details of Turkish atrocities over the years. Ah yes but according to your "rules" events before 1963 don't count do they, unless they were anti TC of course. Stop raking up the past, admit that you are equally to blame for the current situation but most of all GROW UP!
Well why don't you counter it then....?
-
T_C - Main Contributor
- Posts: 3513
- Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 3:16 am
- Location: London
by DT. » Thu May 24, 2007 7:29 pm
turkish_cypriot wrote:Jerry wrote:Keep the engine of hate and recriminations going chaps. You must be really naive if you don't believe that a GC could counter the post that started this thread with arguments and details of Turkish atrocities over the years. Ah yes but according to your "rules" events before 1963 don't count do they, unless they were anti TC of course. Stop raking up the past, admit that you are equally to blame for the current situation but most of all GROW UP!
Well why don't you counter it then....?
hate doing this copy paste but you did ask...this is an article of the Sunday Times summarising the findings of the Council of Europe.
Following the invasion a report was prepared by the Commission of the Council of Europe as a result of a complaint by the Cyprus Government. The report examines alleged breaches of the articles of the Convention of Human Rights of which each member of the Council of Europe (including Turkey) is a signatory. The following is the summary as printed by the "Sunday Times" on 23 January 1977:
KILLING Relevant Article of Human Rights Convention:- Everyone’s right to life shall be protected by law.
The Turkish army embarked on a systematic course of mass killings of civilians unconnected with any war activity.
Evidence given to the Commission: Witness Mrs K said that on 21 July 1974, the second day of the Turkish invasion, she and a group of villages from Elia were captured when, fleeing from bombardment, they tried to reach a range of mountains. All 12 men arrested were civilians. They were separated from the women and shot in front of the women, under orders of a Turkish officer. Some of the men were holding children, three of whom were wounded.
Written statements referred to two more group killings: at Trimithi, eye-witnesses told of the deaths of five men (two shepherds aged 60 and 70, two masons of 20 and 60, and a 19 year-old plumber). At Palekythron 30 Greek Cypriot soldiers being held prisoner were killed by their captors, according to the second statement.
Witness S gave evidence of two other mass killings at Palekythron. In each case, between 30 and 40 soldiers who had surrendered to the advancing Turks were shot. In the second case, the witness said: "the soldiers were transferred to the kilns of the village where they were shot dead and burnt in order not to leave details of what had happened".
Seventeen members of two neighbouring families, including 10 women and five children aged between two and nine were also killed in cold blood at Palekythron, reported witness H, a doctor. Further killings described in the doctor’s notes, recording evidence related to him by patients (either eye-witnesses or victims), included;
· Execution of eight civilians taken prisoner by Turkish soldiers in the area of Prastio, one day after the cease-fire on 16 August 1974.
· Killing by Turkish soldiers of five unarmed Greek Cypriot soldiers who had sought refuge in a house at Voni.
· Shooting of four women, one of whom survived by pretending she was dead.
Further evidence, taken in refugee camps and in the form of written statements, described killings of civilians in homes, streets or fields, as well as the killing of people under arrest or in detention. Eight statements described the killing of soldiers not in combat; five statements referred to a mass grave found in Dherynia.
Commission’s verdict: By 14 votes to one, the Commission considered there were "very strong indications" of violation of Article 2 and killings "committed on a substantial scale".
RAPE Relevant Article:- No one shall be subjected to torture or to in-human or degrading treatment or punishment.
Charge:- Turkish troops were responsible for wholesale and repeated rapes of women of all ages from 12 to 71. Sometimes to such an extent that the victims suffered haemorrhages or became mental wrecks. In some areas, enforced prostitution was practised, all women and girls of a village being collected and put into separate rooms in empty houses where they were raped repeatedly.
In certain cases members of the same family were repeatedly raped, some of them in front of their own children. In other cases women were brutally raped in public.
Rapes were on many occasions accompanied by brutality such as violent biting of the victims, causing severe wounding, banging their heads on the floor and wringing their throats almost to the point of suffocation. In some cases attempts to rape were followed by the stabbing or killing of the victims, including pregnant and mentally-retarded women.
Evidence given to Commission:- Testimony of doctors C and H, who examined the victims. Eye-witnesses and hearsay witnesses also gave evidence, and the Commission had before it written statements from 41 alleged victims.
Dr H said he had confirmed rape in 70 cases, including:-
· A mentally-retarded girl of 24 was raped in her house by 20 soldiers. When she started screaming they threw her from the second floor window. She fractured her spine and was paralysed.
· One day after their arrival at Voni, Turks took girls to a nearby house and raped them. ? One woman from Voni was raped on three occasions by four persons each time. She became pregnant.
· One girl, from Palekythrou, who was held with others in a house, was taken out at gun point and raped.
· At Tanvu, Turkish soldiers tried to rape a 17 year-old girl. She resisted and was shot dead.
· A woman from Gypsou told Dr H that 25 girls were kept by Turks at Marathouvouno as prostitutes.
Another witness said his wife was raped in front of their children. Witness S told of 25 girls who complained to Turkish officers about being raped and were raped again by the officers. A man (name withheld) reported that his wife was stabbed in the neck while resisting rape. His grand-daughter, aged six, had been stabbed and killed by Turkish soldiers attempting to rape her.
A Red Cross witness said that in August 1974, while the island’s telephones were still working, the Red Cross Society received calls from Palekythrou and Kaponti reporting rapes. The Red Cross also took care of 38 women released from Voni and Gypsou detention camps; all had been raped, some in front of their husbands and children. Others had been raped repeatedly, or put in houses frequented with Turkish soldiers.
These women were taken to Akrotiri hospital, in the British Sovereign Base Area, where they were treated. Three were found to be pregnant. Reference was also made to several abortions performed at the base.
Commission’s verdict:- By 12 votes to one the Commission found "that the incidents of rape described in the cases referred to and regarded as established constitute "in-human treatment" and thus violations of Article 3 for which Turkey is responsible under the Convention."
TORTURE Relevant article:- see above under Rape.
Charge: Hundreds of people, including children, women and pensioners, were victims of systematic torture and savage and humiliating treatment during their detention by the Turkish army. They were beaten, according to the allegations, sometimes to the extent of being incapacitated. Many were subjected to whipping, breaking of their teeth, knocking their heads against walls, beating with electrified clubs, stubbing of cigarettes on their skin, jumping and stepping on their chests and hands, pouring dirty liquids on them, piercing them with bayonets, etc.
Many, it was said, were ill-treated to such an extent that they became mental and physical wrecks. The brutalities complained of reached their climax after the cease-fire agreements; in fact, most of the acts described were committed at a time when Turkish armed forces were not engaged in any war activities.
Evidence to Commission: Main witness was a school teacher, one of 2,000 Greek Cypriot men deported to Turkey. He stated that he and his fellow detainees were repeatedly beaten after their arrest, on their way to Adana (in Turkey), in jail at Adana and in prison camp at Amasya.
On ship to Turkey:- "That was another moment of terrible beating again. We were tied all the time. I lost the sense of touch. I could not feel anything for about two or three months. Every time we asked for water or spoke we were beaten."
Arriving at Adana:- "... then, one by one, they led us to prisons, through a long corridor .. Going through that corridor was another terrible experience. There were about 100 soldiers from both sides with sticks, clubs and with their fists beating every one of us while going to the other end of the corridor. I was beaten at least 50 times until I reached the other end.
"In Adana anyone who said he wanted to see a doctor was beaten.
"Beating was on the agenda every day. There were one or two very good, very nice people, but they were afraid to show their kindness, as they told us."
Witness P spoke of:-
· A fellow prisoner who was kicked in the mouth. He lost several teeth "and his lower jaw came off in pieces".
· A Turkish officer, a karate student, who exercised every day by hitting prisoners.
· Fellow prisoners who were hung by the feet over the hole of a lavatory for hours.
· A Turkish second lieutenant who used to prick all prisoners with a pin when they were taken into a yard.
Evidence from Dr H said that prisoners were in an emaciated condition on their return to Cyprus. On nine occasions he had found signs of wounds.
The doctor gave a general description of conditions in Adana and in detention camps in Cyprus (at Pavlides Garage and the Saray Prison in the Turkish quarter of Nicosia) as reported to him by former detainees. Food, he said, consisted of one-eight of a loaf of bread a day, with occasional olives; there were about two buckets of water and two mugs which were never cleaned, from which about 1,000 people had to drink; toilets were filthy, with faeces rising over the basins; floors were covered with faeces and urine; in jail in Adana prisoners were kept 76 to a cell with three towels between them and one block of soap per eight persons per month to wash themselves and their clothes.
One man, it was alleged, had to amputate his own toes with a razor blade as a consequence of ill-treatment. Caught in Achna with another man, they had been beaten up with hard objects. When he asked for a glass of water he was given a glass full of urine. His toes were then stepped on until they became blue, swollen and eventually gangrenous (the other man was said to have been taken to hospital in Nicosia, where he agreed to have his legs amputated. He did not survive the operation).
According to witness S:- "hundreds of Greek Cypriots were beaten and dozens were executed. They have cut off their ears in some cases, like the case of Palekythron and Trahoni ..." (verbatim record).
Verdict by Commission: By 12 votes to one, the Commission concluded that prisoners were in a number of cases physically ill-treated by Turkish soldiers.
"These acts of ill-treatment caused considerable injuries and in at least one case, death of a victim. By their severity they constitute "in-human treatment" in the sense of Article 3, for which Turkey is responsible under the Convention."
LOOTING Relevant article:- Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions.
Charge: In all Turkish-occupied areas the Turkish army systematically looted houses and businesses of Greek Cypriots.
Evidence to Commission: Looting in Kyrenia was described by witness C:- "... The first days of looting of the shops was done by the army of heavy things like refrigerators, laundry machines, television sets" (verbatim record).
For weeks after the invasion, he said, he had watched Turkish naval ships taking on board the looted goods.
Witness K, a barrister, described the pillage of Famagusta:- "At two o’clock an organised, systematic, terrifying, shocking, unbelievable looting started ... We heard the breaking of doors, some of them iron doors, smashing of glass, and we were waiting for them any minute to enter the house. This lasted for about four hours."
Written statements by eye-witnesses of looting were corroborated by several reports by the Secretary-General of the United Nations.
Verdict of Commission: The Commission accepted that looting and robbery on an extensive scale, by Turkish troops and Turkish Cypriots, had taken place. By 12 votes to one, it established that there had been deprivation of possessions of Greek Cypriots on a large scale.
OTHER CHARGES
On four counts:- the Commission concluded that Turkey had also violated an Article of the Convention asserting the right to respect for private and family life, home and correspondence. The Commission also decided that Turkey was continuing to violate the Article by refusing to allow the return of more than 170,000 Greek Cypriot refugees to their homes in the north.
On three counts:- the Commission said Turkey had breached an Article laying down the right to liberty and security of persons by confining more than 2,000 Greek Cypriots in schools and churches.
Finally, the Commission said Turkey had violated two more articles that specify that the rights and freedoms in the Convention shall be secured without discrimination on any grounds, and that anyone whose rights are violated "shall have an effective remedy before a national authority."
The European Commission on Human Rights has outlined in great detail the actions of the Turkish armed forces and the treatment that it handed out to those Greek Cypriot civilians with whom it came into contact. 5,000 Greek Cypriot civilians were murdered, over 1,000 women were raped. Over 1,619 Greek Cypriots were abducted and remain missing, their whereabouts never disclosed by the Turkish authorities. The brutality the Turkish army brought with it was specifically designed to terrify the local Greek Cypriot creating 200,000 refugees.
By 18 August the Turkish army had drawn a line (aptly called the Attila line) across the island, which remains to this day and follows the proposed line suggested in 1957 very closely. The long cherished aims of Kibris Turktur were partly fulfilled and there have been numerous calls since 1974 from Turkish nationalist groups to go on and "finish the job".
An ethnic group, which in 1964 owned about 12% of the land of Cyprus, had managed, by means of violence and manipulation, in gaining control of over 37%.
-
DT. - Leading Contributor
- Posts: 12684
- Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 8:34 pm
- Location: Lefkosia
32 posts
• Page 1 of 4 • 1, 2, 3, 4
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest
© 2002 - 2015 Cyprus-Forum.com
