Cyprus-Forum.com

[Bananiot]

I strongly agree with Nikitas that both sides viewed the 1960 as merely a cornerstone for their respective objectives. The Greek Cypriot side (ie the government) in order to prepare the ground for enosis and the Turksih Cypriot extremists in order to achieve taksim (partition) at all costs. Makarios moved away from enosis only in 1967, after the Kofinou fiasco. when he realised at last that politics is the art of the feasible and shifted policy from the desirable (ευκταίο) to the feasible (εφικτό). Until then it was all about enosis and the Parliament voted unanimously on this along of course with AKEL which by then followed Makarios closely.

When Makarios made a U turn, during the period of the junta, he upset many people, who by now saw him as an obstacle to enosis. These were violent people who would go to any length to achieve their aims. They were killing Greek Cypriots and surely they would show no merci to any Turkish Cypriots that might have got in thier way. Makarios men possibly showed excess zeal in confronting some of the enosis supporters too. When the coup was staged and 99% of the people that on paper supported Makarios had no clue how to deal with the 1%, Turkey finally invaded. She had the perfect excuse. The invasion could have easily taken place in 1964 or in 1967 but the dreaded foreigners saved our skin then. We did not learn our lessons then and it was just a matter of time then when it would happen. However, certain members in this forum claim that Turkey would have invaded us anyway, thus, we were never in control of our fate, according to this logic. The same people call me a defeatist ...

[the_snake_and_the_crane]

I find it very difficult to talk to people that sport a moronic laughter (ha-ha-ha etc) but anyway, you claim that 99% of Greek Cypriots did not want enosis and you also seem to think that our troubles started in 1974. Nothing much to add really.

No Bananiot - amongst other things you said the most important Greek Cypriots, the ones that mattered, were the ones that did want Enosis. In 1974, how much of a percentage of the Greek Cypriot community wanted union with Greece?

Stop being a confused communist weasal, with the common sense of the average 'Bombo' villager and answer my post.

[Bananiot]

What was your question snake?

[the_snake_and_the_crane]

Incase you missed it, here it is again (and i removed the 'ha ha' for your benefit)...


------------------------------------------

I'll wait until Piratis provides the evidence first before telling you that Turkey could have never invaded if it weren't for the "patriots" of the time who did everything in their power to bring Turkey in while shouting sick nationalist slogans, pretty much like you, snake.

...and which nationalist slogans have i shouted?...and does having a very small ultra-nationalist community within a much larger community, mean that they should all be invaded and ethnically cleansed by a foreign power? With your logic, im sure you would not be so contradictive and agree that Turkey should also be invaded and ethnically cleansed - because their ultra nationalism / facism is a hell of a lot worse than what Cyprus had in the 1960's and 70's. Dont you agree??

When I say my community I mean those that mattered in my community, who basically were the ones that shared the loot after we were granted independence. With thier actions they brought Turkey in, after first turning Turkey into a player. Let me tell you a secret while I am at it. The bitch that gave birth to these monsters that destroyed Cyprus is in heat, once again.

Ok Bananiot, so what your saying is the large majority of Greek Cypriots, over 99% who did not want Enosis with Greece did not matter and were NOT important BUT the tiny minority who DID want Enosis with Greece in 1974 mattered a great deal??? Is that what your saying??? For some kind of socialist or whatever you are - you dont place much importance for the ordinary Cypriot, who make the up the fabric of our society, do you!?

Bananiot you have some twisted love affair with Greek nationalists and love to hate them. Deep down you WANT there to be Greek nationalists about because of there wasnt, youd find nothing else to moan about. Your so warped that you place Greek nationalists of higher importance and significance in Cyprus, then the rest / 99% of the Greek Cypriot community.

[EPSILON]

I strongly agree with Nikitas that both sides viewed the 1960 as merely a cornerstone for their respective objectives. The Greek Cypriot side (ie the government) in order to prepare the ground for enosis and the Turksih Cypriot extremists in order to achieve taksim (partition) at all costs. Makarios moved away from enosis only in 1967, after the Kofinou fiasco. when he realised at last that politics is the art of the feasible and shifted policy from the desirable (ευκταίο) to the feasible (εφικτό). Until then it was all about enosis and the Parliament voted unanimously on this along of course with AKEL which by then followed Makarios closely.

When Makarios made a U turn, during the period of the junta, he upset many people, who by now saw him as an obstacle to enosis. These were violent people who would go to any length to achieve their aims. They were killing Greek Cypriots and surely they would show no merci to any Turkish Cypriots that might have got in thier way. Makarios men possibly showed excess zeal in confronting some of the enosis supporters too. When the coup was staged and 99% of the people that on paper supported Makarios had no clue how to deal with the 1%, Turkey finally invaded. She had the perfect excuse. The invasion could have easily taken place in 1964 or in 1967 but the dreaded foreigners saved our skin then. We did not learn our lessons then and it was just a matter of time then when it would happen. However, certain members in this forum claim that Turkey would have invaded us anyway, thus, we were never in control of our fate, according to this logic. The same people call me a defeatist ...

Pesronally I have not yet be convisted that Makarios indeed changed his target for Enosis. He was just acting in line with the circustances. He was a good politician but unfortunately he over estimated his power.

I repeat that the target of Enosis by the majotity of the population is not a shame, is not a crime, it was absolutely a democratic right.The aim of minority to stop the will of the people is the critical point of the today's problem.

All above of course in regard to the creation of the problem, today there is not Enosis but only the minority's rights which "must be protected" - Lets hope that this will be suceeded without majority to became minority and without majority to change Nationality.

[Nikitas]

Epsilon,

Can you imagine Cyprus as a nomos of Greece with a Nomarhis appointed by Athens? Do you think Cypriots are willing to accept such a situation?


A very topical point is the impression made by the Cypriot fire brigade contingent that is in Greece right now fighting the forest fire. They arrived well organized, properly equipped, got down to business right away and brought the fire in their sector under control. Journalists here were amazed to see that these guys had proper fire resistant uniforms compared to the short sleeved "t" shirts of the mainland firefighters. The same comparison of organization goes across many sectors of administrative action and if union were ever to happen the problems of the mainland would swamp Cyprus. Do you honestly know many Cypriots who are not aware of this?

There was seldom any debate re the practicalities of Enosis. As long as it was an idea it sounded good. When the details were thought about the picture changed.

ON an ideological basis there was another point- union implies union between two equal partners and the outcome is better for each unifying part and the resultant entity. In our case the union was more like a conquest and the big fish would simply swallow the smaller one. Cyprus would not be allowed to contribute to the improvement of Hellenism as a whole, even in areas like public administration and agricultural cooperatives where it is centuries ahead of Greece. One day I will regale you all with tales of Greek buraucracy!

The "Athens centered Greek state" (not my term, used by Greek journalists to criticise their state) was never very tolerant of active and flourishing centers of Hellenism outside its borders. See how it cared for the Greeks of Egypt, of southern Italy, Pontos, Africa etc. not to mention Asia Minor. If it did not control ithem t was not interested.

So the resistance to Union is something that grew and found expression after the rise of the dictatorship. Some see it as betrayal of Greece, some see it as a step forward for Hellenism. Greece and Hellenism are not always synonymous meanings. If you get my point!

[Bananiot]

That is an improvement (removing the ha, ha part) but again you make some unfounded remarks and then base your conclusions on them. Turkey did not come in because of a small nationalist minority. Turkey invaded to fulfill its objectives after we gave her the green light and I do not just mean the coup which we quite conveniently credit to the junta (we seem to have forgotten the internal colaborators recently) but our whole stance since 1960 when we signed an agreement that made the two communities equal partners in Cyprus. In the same way Greece invaded Turkey back in 1919 after Turkey mistreated its Greek minority (that was our excuse). This is how things work in our part of the world. It so happened that Turkey ended up on top in both cases. Tough luck for us but can you imagine the arguments you would be making now had we won the day?

[EPSILON]

Epsilon,

Can you imagine Cyprus as a nomos of Greece with a Nomarhis appointed by Athens? Do you think Cypriots are willing to accept such a situation?


A very topical point is the impression made by the Cypriot fire brigade contingent that is in Greece right now fighting the forest fire. They arrived well organized, properly equipped, got down to business right away and brought the fire in their sector under control. Journalists here were amazed to see that these guys had proper fire resistant uniforms compared to the short sleeved "t" shirts of the mainland firefighters. The same comparison of organization goes across many sectors of administrative action and if union were ever to happen the problems of the mainland would swamp Cyprus. Do you honestly know many Cypriots who are not aware of this?

There was seldom any debate re the practicalities of Enosis. As long as it was an idea it sounded good. When the details were thought about the picture changed.

ON an ideological basis there was another point- union implies union between two equal partners and the outcome is better for each unifying part and the resultant entity. In our case the union was more like a conquest and the big fish would simply swallow the smaller one. Cyprus would not be allowed to contribute to the improvement of Hellenism as a whole, even in areas like public administration and agricultural cooperatives where it is centuries ahead of Greece. One day I will regale you all with tales of Greek buraucracy!

The "Athens centered Greek state" (not my term, used by Greek journalists to criticise their state) was never very tolerant of active and flourishing centers of Hellenism outside its borders. See how it cared for the Greeks of Egypt, of southern Italy, Pontos, Africa etc. not to mention Asia Minor. If it did not control ithem t was not interested.

So the resistance to Union is something that grew and found expression after the rise of the dictatorship. Some see it as betrayal of Greece, some see it as a step forward for Hellenism. Greece and Hellenism are not always synonymous meanings. If you get my point!

Can you show me one point in my posts stating that Cyprus must be united with Greece? Maybe you mixed my postings regarding the history of Cyprus problem with any support to enosis. I never said that the target must be Enosis (even it was this is not possible). What i am trying always to explain is aa)the real reasons of the Cyprus dispute bb) the necessity Gcs to remain Greeks in there efforts to find a solution in order for them to safeguard their future against a giant (Turkey).

I hope i am clear this time

[Nikitas]

Another thought,

If we had taken ourselves seriously as a nation back in 1960 and worked to gain real control of our territory- ie kick out all foreign bases (in due course)

and we had developed a strong army capable of defending our territory, with indigenous Cypriot officers sworn to defend the Cyprus constitution and the state,

would we be in the shit we are in now?

Naturally we would not. But how many of the people here, from both sides of the ethnic divide, can swear that the idea does not ring like "betrayal" when expressed in their own language?

Not many I bet. Any mention of true independence back in the 60s was taboo. People who talked like that were often ostracised and some were assassinated by "patriots" of both sides. Allegiance to Cyprus was never taken seriously then, and from the posts I see here it is not exactly a priority now.

So if that is the situation, and a disproportionately powerful adversary is occupying 37 per cent of Cyprus, what do we do now to minimize possibly worse developments in the future?

Summarising the outcomes proposed by some here the way seems to be two independent states, a federation or a unified state. Is there any other outcome that has been mentioned and proposed that I did not catch? Is anyone still thinking that Union with Greece can be a possible and realistic outcome? How can that happen? And dont anyone tell me that EU membership is tantamount to union, because England and Holland are members of the EU but in no way united!

[EPSILON]

Another thought,

If we had taken ourselves seriously as a nation back in 1960 and worked to gain real control of our territory- ie kick out all foreign bases (in due course)

and we had developed a strong army capable of defending our territory, with indigenous Cypriot officers sworn to defend the Cyprus constitution and the state,

would we be in the shit we are in now?

Naturally we would not. But how many of the people here, from both sides of the ethnic divide, can swear that the idea does not ring like "betrayal" when expressed in their own language?

Not many I bet. Any mention of true independence back in the 60s was taboo. People who talked like that were often ostracised and some were assassinated by "patriots" of both sides. Allegiance to Cyprus was never taken seriously then, and from the posts I see here it is not exactly a priority now.

So if that is the situation, and a disproportionately powerful adversary is occupying 37 per cent of Cyprus, what do we do now to minimize possibly worse developments in the future?

Summarising the outcomes proposed by some here the way seems to be two independent states, a federation or a unified state. Is there any other outcome that has been mentioned and proposed that I did not catch? Is anyone still thinking that Union with Greece can be a possible and realistic outcome? How can that happen? And dont anyone tell me that EU membership is tantamount to union, because England and Holland are members of the EU but in no way united!

Can be a state, the Cyprus state, free of all you mentioned, but fully democratic without descriminations.Every citizen to be what ever he likes, Greek, Turk, Zulu but all to have one vote, to pay the same taxes,to be equal against the law-etc etc- is this remind you something? if yes this must be a European country and not the country of Annan or similar plan