Cyprus-Forum.com

[observer]

Piratis

It was Makarios who first proposed independence for Cyprus, not you. And what Makarios meant by independance was one free Cyprus, with no foreign troops and where all Cypriots would be equal

Piratis

Of course Cypriots wanted be part of a free Greek state instead of the fake independence which made us a protectorate of UK and Turkey.

OK. I'll leave you to argue it out amongst yourself.

[denizaksulu]

Piratis

It was Makarios who first proposed independence for Cyprus, not you. And what Makarios meant by independance was one free Cyprus, with no foreign troops and where all Cypriots would be equal

Piratis

Of course Cypriots wanted be part of a free Greek state instead of the fake independence which made us a protectorate of UK and Turkey.

OK. I'll leave you to argue it out amongst yourself.

Nice one!

[Eric dayi]

Piratis

It was Makarios who first proposed independence for Cyprus, not you. And what Makarios meant by independance was one free Cyprus, with no foreign troops and where all Cypriots would be equal

Piratis

Of course Cypriots wanted be part of a free Greek state instead of the fake independence which made us a protectorate of UK and Turkey.

OK. I'll leave you to argue it out amongst yourself.

Is Piratis the perfect example of what is known as a man with a "forked tongue"?

[Tim Drayton]

The thing that I find quite simple to understand is that Makarios said over and over again, in many different interviews and speeches, that he wanted Cyprus to become part of Greece - like Crete - like Rodos.

I don't equate this with independence for Cyprus or "one free Cyprus". I equate it with being a province of Greece. So did his one time ally Grivas. So did EOKA. So did Athens. So does the whole of the informed world. with the curious exception of some GCs

It's this rewriting and airbrushing of history that makes me so suspicious.

There are some GCs who openly say that in the 1950s and 1960s GCs wanted enosis but the idea faded in the 1970s and now very few people want enosis. I can live with that. It's out in the open and honest, perhaps the person saying it is honest.

But then there are a number of GCs who deny against all the evidence that they ever wanted enosis, and they were only fighting for independence from Britain. Starting off with such an enormous lie, why should I trust any promise they make?

I am reading a book entitled "Cyprus 1957-1963 From Colonial Conflict to Constitutional Crisis" by Diana Weston Markides.

On page 118 of this book we learn that Makarios made an impassioned speech on the anniversary of the commencement of the EOKA struggle in 1963 which was reported in the London Times under the headline "Greek Cypriots Still Aim at Enosis".

On page 120, we then learn that the British and American governments took Makarios to task for making this speech, and it seems that,

"Makarios explained the political difficulties in making speeches to the Greek Cypriots, especially on national anniversaries, and attributed the nationalistic speeches to the need for caution in the process of disengagement from the enosis dream. If he and his ministers did not take into account the fact that many Greek Cypriots were not reconciled to the Zurich and London agreements, then enosis could become 'a rallying cry to which all dissidents would respond."

Do people here think there is any truth to this? Did Makarios have a tendency to play to the gallery in some of his public pronouncements while actually harbouring a different agenda? If so, is it really fair to take some of these statememnts out of context?

I am genuinely curious to know what people who lived through this period think.

[Oracle]

Piratis

It was Makarios who first proposed independence for Cyprus, not you. And what Makarios meant by independance was one free Cyprus, with no foreign troops and where all Cypriots would be equal

Piratis

Of course Cypriots wanted be part of a free Greek state instead of the fake independence which made us a protectorate of UK and Turkey.

OK. I'll leave you to argue it out amongst yourself.

There is no argument.

That which Piratis states is true.

It may not be what you want to hear, but believe it or not we have never and will never want to be part of a Turkish state.

In the past there were fewer alternatives.

Now we are as part of Greece as any other partner EU countries.

So get used to it!

[Kifeas]

The thing that I find quite simple to understand is that Makarios said over and over again, in many different interviews and speeches, that he wanted Cyprus to become part of Greece - like Crete - like Rodos.

I don't equate this with independence for Cyprus or "one free Cyprus". I equate it with being a province of Greece. So did his one time ally Grivas. So did EOKA. So did Athens. So does the whole of the informed world. with the curious exception of some GCs

It's this rewriting and airbrushing of history that makes me so suspicious.

There are some GCs who openly say that in the 1950s and 1960s GCs wanted enosis but the idea faded in the 1970s and now very few people want enosis. I can live with that. It's out in the open and honest, perhaps the person saying it is honest.

But then there are a number of GCs who deny against all the evidence that they ever wanted enosis, and they were only fighting for independence from Britain. Starting off with such an enormous lie, why should I trust any promise they make?

I am reading a book entitled "Cyprus 1957-1963 From Colonial Conflict to Constitutional Crisis" by Diana Weston Markides.

On page 118 of this book we learn that Makarios made an impassioned speech on the anniversary of the commencement of the EOKA struggle in 1963 which was reported in the London Times under the headline "Greek Cypriots Still Aim at Enosis".

On page 120, we then learn that the British and American governments took Makarios to task for making this speech, and it seems that,

"Makarios explained the political difficulties in making speeches to the Greek Cypriots, especially on national anniversaries, and attributed the nationalistic speeches to the need for caution in the process of disengagement from the enosis dream. If he and his ministers did not take into account the fact that many Greek Cypriots were not reconciled to the Zurich and London agreements, then enosis could become 'a rallying cry to which all dissidents would respond."

Do people here think there is any truth to this? Did Makarios have a tendency to play to the gallery in some of his public pronouncements while actually harbouring a different agenda? If so, is it really fair to take some of these statememnts out of context?

I am genuinely curious to know what people who lived through this period think.

Yes Tim, like every politician (remember Machiavelli's doctrine,) Makarios did play it to the gallery, in many of his public speeches. In other words, depending on who the audience was and what he believed they wanted to hear, he would choose to act accordingly. The problem with Makarios is that he was a bit more reckless than he should have been, due to immaturity and lack of adequate foresight!

Similar speeches can been found to have been made by Kutchuk and Denktash, all throughout the period in question. Kutchuk was a bit more careful than Makarios, but then you had Denktash who was the real authority among the TC community (TMT leader,) who would have made speeches undermining the future of the Republic.

[Piratis]

Piratis

It was Makarios who first proposed independence for Cyprus, not you. And what Makarios meant by independance was one free Cyprus, with no foreign troops and where all Cypriots would be equal

Piratis

Of course Cypriots wanted be part of a free Greek state instead of the fake independence which made us a protectorate of UK and Turkey.

OK. I'll leave you to argue it out amongst yourself.

What is not clear observer?

Union with Greece or a true independence were both legitimate and acceptable options for Cypriots.

A fake independence where some others write our constidution instead of us, and foreigners maintain their troops on our island, was of course not something desirable. (and will never be)

[Get Real!]

Do people here think there is any truth to this? Did Makarios have a tendency to play to the gallery in some of his public pronouncements while actually harbouring a different agenda? If so, is it really fair to take some of these statememnts out of context?

Makarios, granted amnesty to those who attempted to assassinate and depose him on two separate occasions, and that act alone says a lot about the kind of man he was…

[Nikitas]

"No Piratis Cyprus was never part of Greece or ever a Greek island"

And Ankara was not part of Turkey before 1923. Greece as a nation state came about in the 1820s. So the same argument could be used against all parts of Greece, or Turkey, or any other nation state.

As for it being part of the larger concept of the Greek world, well it was part of several Greek empires and dynasties, including the Byzantine empire which lasted about one thousand years. That is good enough to determine the nature of the island's culture and ethnic makeup. And this has endured successive invasions and conquests. Trying to deny this is not exactly the best way to make friends and influence people VP.

[Nikitas]

Still waiting for a clear explanation of the idea of political equality of the two communities under a BBF solution and how this combines with EU principles of individual human rights.