DT. wrote:observer wrote:DTWhether you believe that or not, the only legitimate right Turkey had under the treaty of guarantee was to restore the territorial and constitutional integrity of the Republic of Cyprus under the 1960 constitution.
NOT to partition and setup a foreign separate entity on the island.
I do believe it. I also believe that Makarios destroyed the 1960 Constitution in 1963. The two views are not incompatable.
At Geneva in August 1974 the leaders of the GC community and the TC community failed to agree on returning to the 1960 constitution and agreed on a BBF. Failure to agree on the details has meant separation for 34 years.
The treaty of gaurantee did not state that a guarantor can invade and partition the island in case a BBF is not agreed. It states that the territorial and constituional integrity of the Republic of Cyprus must be restored.
I always wonder in the CF debates whether people really do have a sense of history and politics ? Most of the discussions are blessed with that wonderful wisdom of hindsight. How could these people - GCs, TCs, Turks, Greeks, Brits, whoever - have been so inconsistent ? Is it so impossible a thought that different parties made mistakes, changed their minds, shifted their policies, tried to cover up, realised errors, corrected for mistakes.
It seems to me that it is perfectly plausible (and tenable) that T. intervened with one purpose in mind but, internal political battles included, found or created different circumstances which in turn generated new and different purposes or ambitions. In contrast I don't see any reason why we should expect a consistent, unvarying policy over several decades - neither for Turkey, RoC, TRNC, UK, etc, or for local political forces and movements.
