Cyprus-Forum.com

[Talisker]

What I mean is - once the military objectives have been achieved, what are the long term consequences for the invading nation? There are so many examples where the invader has had initial military success, but the long term consequences for that nation have been disastrous.

For example:
Napoleon-led French invasion of Russia (1821) - loss of 90% of the invading forces, French humiliation.
German invasion of Poland (1939) and Russia (1941) - destruction and division of Germany for decades afterwards.
More recently Argentinian invasion of the Falklands (1982), and the US/UK invasion of Iraq (ongoing).

Invasion and occupation lasting decades or even centuries can still result in non-acceptance by the the indigenous population, and ultimate defeat and exclusion of the occupier e.g. Turkish occupation of Greece, 1458 - 1821.

In 1974 Turkey may have won the battle in Cyprus, and achieved some military (and political?) objectives, but has it been worth it? Has Turkey won the war? What are the advantages to Turkey in maintaining its occupation - a financial drain on a developing nation, the target of condemnation by the international community, exclusion from the EU and the opportunities afforded upon membership, etc?

Seems to me, that the longterm consequences of ill-advised invasion can be negative for the invader.

Anyone got any comments on this?

[Tim Drayton]

Every Empire in history has ultimately collapsed, so in the very long term we can say that miilitary invasions do not ultimately work.

However, some invasions have worked for a very long time. The Roman conquest of Gaul took place between 121 BC and 51 BC, and the Romans did not lose control of Gaul until 486 AD. That was a pretty good innings.

I don't think there is any useful rule of historic determinism. Every invasion has to be examined on its own terms.

[rotate]

Invasions/wars are often more to do with the internal politics of a failing regime or a regime seeking ascendency over its rivals at home.
Give the people a common enemy, sweeten with perceived threats from the 'other' and bingo even the most unpopular government becomes the saviour of the nation.

In his book 1984, George Orwell sums up the process very nicely.

[Get Real!]

The nightmares of logistics ultimately kick in for any invader, the US being a prime recent example of this… the phenomenal cost of this “adventure” (700 trillion?) has brought a financial giant on its knees.

The other serious issue is that of demographics which affects both the invaded and the invader. The Turkish Cypriots are a product of such an invasion and 400 years on they are still a nuisance to Cyprus due to their inability to fit in.

The invader always leaves behind a small portion of itself which can become the reason for strife in the future… minorities seem to be the curse of the 21st century.

[Get Real!]

dp

[Talisker]

The nightmares of logistics ultimately kick in for any invader, the US being a prime recent example of this… the phenomenal cost of this “adventure” (700 trillion?) has brought a financial giant on its knees.

The other serious issue is that of demographics which affects both the invaded and the invader. The Turkish Cypriots are a product of such an invasion and 400 years on they are still a nuisance to Cyprus due to their inability to fit in.

The invader always leaves behind a small portion of itself which can become the reason for strife in the future… minorities seem to be the curse of the 21st century.

Prefer another 'C' word regarding 21C - challenge - but this is as much a problem of mass immigration and population mobility as it is a result of invasion and occupation. However, that is an interesting point you make about the demographic legacy of invasions, particularly in relation to Cyprus.

As far as logistics, I guess the Cyprus situation is unique in that the invader is not amongst the invaded people now i.e. occupying land and not the indigenous community (small, localised parts of the GC community notwithstanding, unless the TC community considers itself to be 'occupied'). Therefore there are few security issues to worry the Turkish army these last 34 years i.e. no guerrlla-style attacks from GCs to contend with due to the Green line, so in this case the logistics may not be as problematic as in other occupation situations (e.g. Iraq currently).

[Get Real!]

We must differentiate between LEGAL ENRTY into a country whereby the foreigner pledges in writing to abide by the rules and regulations of that country, as opposed to REMNANTS of a past invasion whereby the foreigner is forever a renegade and unwanted.

The “Turkish Cypriots” are neither Turkish nor Cypriot, but Ottoman remnants as they REJECTED both Turkey (1923) AND Cyprus (1960) and have thus isolated themselves into an obscure minority unable to blend in with anybody. The ability to adapt to change is fundamental to a people’s survival and these remnants have failed miserably in that respect.

On a different note, the recent debacle of Ossetia is another good example of a minority causing problems in a mainland. Technically, a sovereign country like Georgia, has the right to exercise full control in all four corners of its territory but this becomes very difficult and counterproductive when a giant neighbor like Russia creates a special status for a portion of Georgia’s population thus spearing them on to revolt. It’s another sad case where a minority is being allowed to play games by a giant neighbor at the expense of the victim country. Serbia… another!

[Get Real!]

I forgot to mention that the ulterior motive of these powers that interfere in smaller countries is to keep neighboring countries fragmented and “manageable” and certainly not because of some humanitarian soft spot they have for the corresponding minority!

[Viewpoint]

GR whats your problem with TCs you may call us remnants of the Ottomans but this does not change the fact that we have just as much right to this island as you do, or do you argue otherwise? We have the right to live in peace, protected from danger manipulation or discrimination which was your bad track record of the past and why we demand safeguards today.

[dinos]

The nightmares of logistics ultimately kick in for any invader, the US being a prime recent example of this… the phenomenal cost of this “adventure” (700 trillion?) has brought a financial giant on its knees.

I think the cost of the Iraq invasion is around $700 billion and expected to hit $1.6 trillion. This has very little to do with the degraded state of the US economy - it's the real estate and banking collapses that have done that. The banking collapse was caused by sub-prime mortgages and ultra-low interest rates which were enabled by the government's (and the federal reserve's) do-nothing regulatory policies the past several years.

Other than that, you make very valid points about the realities of invasion on the invading force; logistical and otherwise...