Cyprus-Forum.com

[alexISS]

Thanks alexISS, I have noted that you say the treaty was not "Broken", until you mention that Turkey did brake the terms. Please find out more.

First of all, the Lausanne treaty is a sum of many agreements signed, the nullification of one of them does not denote the nullification of the whole treaty.
I say "nullified" and not "broken" because certain articles concerning the (de)militirization of the islands were invalidated by other treaties that were (later) signed by both Greece and Turkey as mentioned in the link I earlier provided. Among those newer treaties is the UN charter's Article 103, which states that a country's right to defend itself overrides any previous conventional obligation.

I like to hear it from the "horses mouth". (english expression; I am sure you are familiar with it. I never knowingly insult. GR keep quite)
Regards

My knowledge of the english language may be somewhat limited (especially my knowledge of expressions) since I haven't lived in an English speaking country, but I'm pretty sure I can understand when I'm being insulted

[denizaksulu]

Thanks again alexISS. So what would apply to Greece (re: her defence)obviously would apply to Turkey? The USA saw a threat from Cuba and the Missile Crisis. Perhaps they see (Turkey) Cyprus as a new Cuba?
Regards
DA

[alexISS]

Thanks again alexISS. So what would apply to Greece (re: her defence)obviously would apply to Turkey? The USA saw a threat from Cuba and the Missile Crisis. Perhaps they see (Turkey) Cyprus as a new Cuba?
Regards
DA

Do you mean that Turkey invaded Cyprus because it was becoming a threat? If that was the case then Turkey could just do what Greece did and militarize its southeastern coasts. Greece didn't invade when Turkey became a threat, did she?

[denizaksulu]

alexISS, thanks. I ask you questions which I believe you can or might answer truthfully. You ask me the above questions. I am searching for answers which might differ from mine. What the Turkish Military might think is any bodies' guess. I am trying to see your point of view as a Greek. You do things your way. Turkey did it their way, perhaps "killing two birds with one stone" so to speak. Namely ridding itself of the threat of a "Cuban" style encirclement and protecting the TCs at the same time.
As you know its westerly neighbors could no longer be trusted, the same westerly neighbours fomenting and supporting PKK activity in the east, it must have felt threatened enough to take this action.
Personally I dont see eye to eye with Turkey regarding the "overstaying" in Cyprus, but that is a diffeent issue. The threat was deemed to be there.
Regards
DA

[denizaksulu]

I have to go to the end of term BBQ now. All enjoy the weekend, and those of you in the eastern mediterranean PEACE and lovely weather. Cont.... next monday.
Regards DA

[alexISS]

alexISS, thanks. I ask you questions which I believe you can or might answer truthfully. You ask me the above questions. I am searching for answers which might differ from mine. What the Turkish Military might think is any bodies' guess. I am trying to see your point of view as a Greek. You do things your way. Turkey did it their way, perhaps "killing two birds with one stone" so to speak. Namely ridding itself of the threat of a "Cuban" style encirclement and protecting the TCs at the same time.
As you know its westerly neighbors could no longer be trusted, the same westerly neighbours fomenting and supporting PKK activity in the east, it must have felt threatened enough to take this action.
Personally I dont see eye to eye with Turkey regarding the "overstaying" in Cyprus, but that is a diffeent issue. The threat was deemed to be there.
Regards
DA

The difference is that, whatever way Greece reacted to the fear of her neighbour, she did not invade and/or occupy foreign land. We should also not forget that, from Kemal's era up to the end of WWII the Greco-Turkish relations were just fine... What happened afterwards is the question that, if answered, might make things clearer regarding our present situation

[alexISS]

I have to go to the end of term BBQ now. All enjoy the weekend, and those of you in the eastern mediterranean PEACE and lovely weather. Cont.... next monday.
Regards DA

Have a great weekend
Kalo SK

[SN]

Someody please correct me but were the Aegean Islands supposed to remain de-militarised (apart from locally conscripted contingents) according to the Laussanne Treaty? And does it or should the airspace be included? Is anything "in Force"? GCs need not answer but are welcome. Is SN still around or has he gone aground?
Regards
DA

Here is what neutral sources and not Greek sources claim about the de-militarisation of the islands

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aegean_dispute


Demilitarized status
The question of the demilitarized status of some major Greek islands is complicated by a number of facts. Several of the Greek islands in the eastern Aegean as well as the Turkish straits region were placed under various regimes of demilitarization in different international treaties. The regimes developed over time, resulting in difficulties of treaty-interpretation. The military status of the islands in question did however not constitute a serious problem in the bilateral relations until the Cyprus crisis of 1974, after which both Greece and Turkey re-interpreted the stipulations of the treaties. Greece, claiming an inalienable right to defend itself against Turkish aggression, reinforced its military and National Guard forces in the region. Turkey, on the other hand, denounces this as an aggressive act by Greece and as a breach of international treaties.[4] From a legal perspective, three groups of islands may be distinguished: (a) the islands right off the Turkish Dardanelles straits, i.e. Lemnos and Samothrace; (b) the Dodecanese islands in the southeast Aegean; and (c) the remaining northeast Aegean islands (Lesbos, Chios, Samos, and Ikaria).



While the L treaty is not broken,both Greece and Turkey continue to use it as an excuse to promote their anachronistic agendas.
Mainly the minority issue is based on the L Treaty,where both countries insist on not recognizing ethnic minorities but only religious one.
Each country's interpretation of the L treaty is based according their agendas.

Specially regarding Greece the propaganda that the Greek officials use is the ''constant fear'' that we allegedly have from Turkey.Which is a bullshit claim all together.

As i said in the past Greece is not Cyprus.It has one of the most modern airforces in the world(in fact i witnessed that first hand since i did my military service on the airforce).Greece has nothing to fear from Turkey since Turkey has made it clear that it respects Greece's sovereing rights.

Another interesting point is that while the so-called violations from Turkey of the Athens FIR,Turkey has repeatdly stated that it recognizes the Athens FIR after the 80's.


Internally Greece uses this artificial argument that Greece is somehow threatened by Turkey,mainly to propagandize its people and to expand its imperialistic agenda.Note that no neighbouring country to Turkey has gone to the extremes Greece is going.

If Turkey has a share of responsibilities about the current situation,Greece has also a big share.

[SN]

alexISS, thanks. I ask you questions which I believe you can or might answer truthfully. You ask me the above questions. I am searching for answers which might differ from mine. What the Turkish Military might think is any bodies' guess. I am trying to see your point of view as a Greek. You do things your way. Turkey did it their way, perhaps "killing two birds with one stone" so to speak. Namely ridding itself of the threat of a "Cuban" style encirclement and protecting the TCs at the same time.
As you know its westerly neighbors could no longer be trusted, the same westerly neighbours fomenting and supporting PKK activity in the east, it must have felt threatened enough to take this action.
Personally I dont see eye to eye with Turkey regarding the "overstaying" in Cyprus, but that is a diffeent issue. The threat was deemed to be there.
Regards
DA

The difference is that, whatever way Greece reacted to the fear of her neighbour,

Greece has no fear what so ever from Turkey.This is merely what victim propagandized Greek citizens believe.

[DT.]

Someody please correct me but were the Aegean Islands supposed to remain de-militarised (apart from locally conscripted contingents) according to the Laussanne Treaty? And does it or should the airspace be included? Is anything "in Force"? GCs need not answer but are welcome. Is SN still around or has he gone aground?
Regards
DA

Here is what neutral sources and not Greek sources claim about the de-militarisation of the islands

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aegean_dispute


Demilitarized status
The question of the demilitarized status of some major Greek islands is complicated by a number of facts. Several of the Greek islands in the eastern Aegean as well as the Turkish straits region were placed under various regimes of demilitarization in different international treaties. The regimes developed over time, resulting in difficulties of treaty-interpretation. The military status of the islands in question did however not constitute a serious problem in the bilateral relations until the Cyprus crisis of 1974, after which both Greece and Turkey re-interpreted the stipulations of the treaties. Greece, claiming an inalienable right to defend itself against Turkish aggression, reinforced its military and National Guard forces in the region. Turkey, on the other hand, denounces this as an aggressive act by Greece and as a breach of international treaties.[4] From a legal perspective, three groups of islands may be distinguished: (a) the islands right off the Turkish Dardanelles straits, i.e. Lemnos and Samothrace; (b) the Dodecanese islands in the southeast Aegean; and (c) the remaining northeast Aegean islands (Lesbos, Chios, Samos, and Ikaria).



While the L treaty is not broken,both Greece and Turkey continue to use it as an excuse to promote their anachronistic agendas.
Mainly the minority issue is based on the L Treaty,where both countries insist on not recognizing ethnic minorities but only religious one.
Each country's interpretation of the L treaty is based according their agendas.

Specially regarding Greece the propaganda that the Greek officials use is the ''constant fear'' that we allegedly have from Turkey.Which is a bullshit claim all together.

As i said in the past Greece is not Cyprus.It has one of the most modern airforces in the world(in fact i witnessed that first hand since i did my military service on the airforce).Greece has nothing to fear from Turkey since Turkey has made it clear that it respects Greece's sovereing rights.

Another interesting point is that while the so-called violations from Turkey of the Athens FIR,Turkey has repeatdly stated that it recognizes the Athens FIR after the 80's.


Internally Greece uses this artificial argument that Greece is somehow threatened by Turkey,mainly to propagandize its people and to expand its imperialistic agenda.Note that no neighbouring country to Turkey has gone to the extremes Greece is going.

If Turkey has a share of responsibilities about the current situation,Greece has also a big share.

If Greece has nothing to fear from Turkey then why doesn't she increase her jurisdiction to 12 miles out to sea like every other country in the world?