Cyprus-Forum.com

[YFred]

I believe Turkey exercised her rights to intervene in 1974 when the coup happened because that's what she signed up to do. In fact, she should have intervened much earlier in 1963 when the TCs were no longer in the RoC government, then just perhaps, we wouldn’t have had the crises in 1974 and today would be a different Cyprus. So the question I have is, why didn't they.? By not doing so in 1963, Turkey had already violated her own signature to be a guarantor for the whole island. It is beyond me as to why she did not do that. So in short, Turkey had failed her duties to protect the TCs and the GCs as well as restoring the government. Do you have any ideas Bir, as to why Turkey did not intervene in 1963.?

Excellent question. Besides the Guarantor powers were supposed to intervene only for the purpose of securing the Constitutional Order. Not for doing ethnic cleansing… 1963 was clearly a constitutional disorder.

I personally don’t know the answer to your above question Kikapu. I tend to agree with your speculations, however only a historian who will study in depth the sitution in Turkey, Greece, Cyprus as well as the role of UK/USA during that period could perhaps give a safe answer. I will have a look at my records from the CyprusConflict web side to see if I could find something.

Turkey was ready and very eager to intervene Cyprus in 64 but USA strictly stopped it..in 74 they changed their minds..God knows why

[Pyrpolizer]

1...do you believe the core of the Cyprus problem was a desire by Turkey to expand her territories????


not to expand her territories but to jump into the mediteranean, and protect her south belly.Also get some of the strategic importance of Cyprus

2...Do you think the TC climb into the enclaves in 1963 was simply to open the way for Turkish occupation??? They had no legitimate fears for their lives????

For both reasons


3...Would you consider the TC move into enclaves as "ethnic cleansing"?
Or does that only apply to the GC expulsion from the North???

Yes I would

Let us get your honest opinion on these points...You do not of course have to answer these questions....You can simply say it is none of my business...But ,please, don't side step them again and pretend to answer...

In red my answers dear Bir. Kiks can of course reply separately.

[Viewpoint]

I am stating how it is in the hijacked "RoC" and the natural process that TCs would face against an all GC panel who are racist and vegence seeking, can you prove that they did not evluate the candidate in this manner, no you cannot so why expose us to double standards and disappointment when we already know we do not stand a chnace in your GC state.

He probably get one field a week....now do you want the job?

VP, you are truelly talking rubbish, you are just looking for excuse after excuse to claim your partition dreams.

Look, when I worked in Nicosia, i had 2 TCs working for me, they used to travel all the way from Kyrenia, they would many times arrive late for work, I would always cut them slack over the other GCs / foreign workers, in fact I took these boys under my wing believe it or not. Your arguement is flawed, I know because I have been in a position to employ TCs and others. the ones suited to the job got it, whoever he was.

please don't keep going on about how we would shit all over the TCs, it is totally bollocks you are talking.

And what type of work do these TCs do?

They were what you call labourers just like some of the GCs and the other foreigners. They were not particularly qualified and I could easily have replaced them if I felt like it as they were arriving late most days of the week. I chose not to as I appreciated the distance they had to travel, so I cut them some slack.

This is actual physical fact that your job fears are unfounded, just excuses to pus for your partitionist aims. And this is coming from someone, well you know well my thoughts on you lot.

Its called cheap labour, or even exploited labour, if you had nothing to gain you would have sacked them without batting an eyelid.

You said you'd rather go to Italy or France rather than seeking work in RoC. Imagine hundreds of TCs have gone to Italy. They don't even know the language. Now you TELL ME what jobs they would get. And BE HONEST.
I am all ears.

You obviously dont know about the TC brain drain of youth who are educated abroad (where they learn the language) tend not to return, they are getting jobs in all walks of life ,in countries that span from the USA to Turkey doctors lawyers bankers etc, why would they ever want to go south, they understand they have far more unbiased less exposed to discrimination opportunities in these countries than going south and waiting for racists revenge seeking GCs to decide on their futures downgrading them to menial labour intensified jobs the GCs do not want to do.

[Tim Drayton]

http://cyprus-conflict.org/materials/johnsonletter.html

Letter to Prime Minister Inonu from President Johnson dated June 5, 1964

Dear Mr. Prime Minister,
I am gravely concerned by the information which I have had through Ambassador Hare from you and your Foreign Minister that the Turkish Government is contemplating a decision to intervene by military force to occupy a portion of Cyprus. I wish to emphasize, in the fullest friendship and frankness, that I do not consider that such a course of action by Turkey, fraught with such far reaching consequences, is consistent with the commitment of your government to consult fully in advance with the United States. Ambassador Hare has indicated that you postponed your decision for a few hours in order to obtain my views. I put to you personally whether you really believe that it is appropriate for your government, in effect, to present an ultimatum to an ally who has demonstrated such staunch support over the years as has the United States for Turkey. I must, therefore, first urge you to accept the responsibility for complete consultation with the United States before any such action is taken.
It is my impression that you believe that such intervention by Turkey is permissible under the provisions of the Treaty of Guarantee of 1960. I must call your attention, however, to our understanding that the proposed intervention by Turkey would be for the purpose of supporting an attempt by Turkish Cypriot leaders to partition the island, a solution which is specifically excluded by the Treaty of Guarantee. Further, that treaty requires consultation among the guarantor powers. It is the view of the United States that the possibilities of such consultation have by no means been exhausted in this situation and that, therefore, the reservation of the right to take unilateral action is not yet applicable.
I must call to your attention also, Mr. Prime Minister, the obligations of NATO. There can be no question in your mind that a Turkish intervention in Cyprus would lead to a military engagement between Turkish and Greek forces. Secretary of State Rusk declared at the recent meeting of the ministerial council of NATO in The Hague that war between Turkey and Greece must be considered as "literally unthinkable". Adhesion to NATO, in its very essence, means that NATO countries will not wage war on each other. Germany and France have buried centuries of animosity and hostility in becoming NATO allies; nothing less can be expected from Greece and Turkey. Furthermore, a military intervention in Cyprus by Turkey could lead to direct involvement by the Soviet Union. I hope you will understand that your NATO allies have not had a chance to consider whether they have an obligation to protect Turkey against the Soviet Union if Turkey takes a step which results in Soviet intervention without the full consent and understanding of its NATO allies.
Further, Mr. Prime Minister, I am concerned about the obligations of Turkey as a member of the United Nations. The United Nations has provided forces on the island to keep the peace. Their task has been difficult but, during the past several weeks, they have been progressively successful in reducing the incidents of violence on that island. The United Nations Mediator has not yet completed his work. I have no doubt that the general membership of the United Nations would react in the strongest terms to unilateral action by Turkey which would defy the efforts of the United Nations and destroy any prospect that the United Nations could assist in obtaining a reasonable and peaceful settlement of this difficult problem.
I wish also, Mr. Prime Minister, to call your attention to the bilateral agreeement between the United States and Turkey in the field of military assistance. Under Article IV of the agreement with Turkey of July 1947, your government is required to obtain United States consent for the use of military assistance for purposes other than those for which such assistance was furnished. Your government has on several occasions acknowledged to the United States that you fully understand this condition. I must tell you in all candor that the United States cannot agree to the use of any United States supplied military equipment for a Turkish intervention in Cyprus under present circumstances.
Moving to the practical results of the contemplated Turkish move, I feel obligated to call to your attention in the most friendly fashion that fact that such a Turkish move could lead to the slaughter of tens of thousands of Turkish Cypriots on the island of Cyprus. Such an action on your part would unleash the furies and there is no way by which military action on your part could be sufficiently effective to prevent wholesale destruction of many of those whom you are trying to protect. The presence of United Nations forces could not prevent such a catastrophe.
You may consider that what I have said is much too severe and that we are disregardful of Turkish interests in the Cyprus situation. I should like to assure you that this is not the case. We have exerted ourselves both publicly and privately to assure the safety of Turkish Cypriots and to insist that a final solution of the Cyprus problem should rest upon the consent of the parties most directly concerned. It is possible that you feel in Ankara that the United States has not been sufficiently active in your behalf. But surely you know that our policy has caused the liveliest resentment in Athens (where demonstrations have been aimed against us) and has led to a basic alienation between the United States and Archbishop Makarios. As I said to your Foreign Minister in our conversation just a few weeks ago, we value very highly our relations with Turkey. We have considered you as a great ally with fundamental common interests. Your security and prosperity have been a deep concern of the American people and we have expressed that concern in the most practical terms. You and we have fought together to resist the ambitions of the communist world revolution. This solidarity has meant a great deal to us and I would hope that it means a great deal to your government and to your people. We have no intention of lending any support to any solution of Cyprus which endangers the Turkish Cypriot community. We have not been able to find a final solution because this is, admittedly, one of the most complex problems on earth. But I wish to assure you that we have been deeply concerned about the interests of Turkey and of the Turkish Cypriots and will remain so.
Finally, Mr. Prime Minister, I must tell you that you have posed the gravest issues of war and peace. These are issues which go far beyond the bilateral relations between Turkey and the United States. They not only will certainly involve war between Turkey and Greece but could involve wider hostilities because of the unpredictable consequences which a unilateral intervention in Cyprus could produce. You have your responsibilities as chief of the government of Turkey; I also have mine as President of the United States. I must, therefore, inform you in the deepest friendship that unless I can have your assurance that you will not take such action without further and fullest consultation I cannot accept your injunction to Ambassador Hare of secrecy and must immediately ask for emergency meetings of the NATO Council and of the United Nations Security Council.
I wish it were possible for us to have a personal discussion of this situation. Unfortunately, because of the special circumstances of our present constitutional position, I am not able to leave the United States. If you could come here for a full discussion I would welcome it. I do feel that you and I carry a very heavy responsibility for the general peace and for the possibilities of a sane and peaceful resolution of the Cyprus problem. I ask you, therefore, to delay any decisions which you and your colleagues might have-in mind until you and I have had the fullest and frankest consultation.
Sincerely.
LYNDON B. JOHNSON

[YFred]

http://cyprus-conflict.org/materials/johnsonletter.html

Letter to Prime Minister Inonu from President Johnson dated June 5, 1964

Dear Mr. Prime Minister,
I am gravely concerned by the information which I have had through Ambassador Hare from you and your Foreign Minister that the Turkish Government is contemplating a decision to intervene by military force to occupy a portion of Cyprus. I wish to emphasize, in the fullest friendship and frankness, that I do not consider that such a course of action by Turkey, fraught with such far reaching consequences, is consistent with the commitment of your government to consult fully in advance with the United States. Ambassador Hare has indicated that you postponed your decision for a few hours in order to obtain my views. I put to you personally whether you really believe that it is appropriate for your government, in effect, to present an ultimatum to an ally who has demonstrated such staunch support over the years as has the United States for Turkey. I must, therefore, first urge you to accept the responsibility for complete consultation with the United States before any such action is taken.
It is my impression that you believe that such intervention by Turkey is permissible under the provisions of the Treaty of Guarantee of 1960. I must call your attention, however, to our understanding that the proposed intervention by Turkey would be for the purpose of supporting an attempt by Turkish Cypriot leaders to partition the island, a solution which is specifically excluded by the Treaty of Guarantee. Further, that treaty requires consultation among the guarantor powers. It is the view of the United States that the possibilities of such consultation have by no means been exhausted in this situation and that, therefore, the reservation of the right to take unilateral action is not yet applicable.
I must call to your attention also, Mr. Prime Minister, the obligations of NATO. There can be no question in your mind that a Turkish intervention in Cyprus would lead to a military engagement between Turkish and Greek forces. Secretary of State Rusk declared at the recent meeting of the ministerial council of NATO in The Hague that war between Turkey and Greece must be considered as "literally unthinkable". Adhesion to NATO, in its very essence, means that NATO countries will not wage war on each other. Germany and France have buried centuries of animosity and hostility in becoming NATO allies; nothing less can be expected from Greece and Turkey. Furthermore, a military intervention in Cyprus by Turkey could lead to direct involvement by the Soviet Union. I hope you will understand that your NATO allies have not had a chance to consider whether they have an obligation to protect Turkey against the Soviet Union if Turkey takes a step which results in Soviet intervention without the full consent and understanding of its NATO allies.
Further, Mr. Prime Minister, I am concerned about the obligations of Turkey as a member of the United Nations. The United Nations has provided forces on the island to keep the peace. Their task has been difficult but, during the past several weeks, they have been progressively successful in reducing the incidents of violence on that island. The United Nations Mediator has not yet completed his work. I have no doubt that the general membership of the United Nations would react in the strongest terms to unilateral action by Turkey which would defy the efforts of the United Nations and destroy any prospect that the United Nations could assist in obtaining a reasonable and peaceful settlement of this difficult problem.
I wish also, Mr. Prime Minister, to call your attention to the bilateral agreeement between the United States and Turkey in the field of military assistance. Under Article IV of the agreement with Turkey of July 1947, your government is required to obtain United States consent for the use of military assistance for purposes other than those for which such assistance was furnished. Your government has on several occasions acknowledged to the United States that you fully understand this condition. I must tell you in all candor that the United States cannot agree to the use of any United States supplied military equipment for a Turkish intervention in Cyprus under present circumstances.
Moving to the practical results of the contemplated Turkish move, I feel obligated to call to your attention in the most friendly fashion that fact that such a Turkish move could lead to the slaughter of tens of thousands of Turkish Cypriots on the island of Cyprus. Such an action on your part would unleash the furies and there is no way by which military action on your part could be sufficiently effective to prevent wholesale destruction of many of those whom you are trying to protect. The presence of United Nations forces could not prevent such a catastrophe.
You may consider that what I have said is much too severe and that we are disregardful of Turkish interests in the Cyprus situation. I should like to assure you that this is not the case. We have exerted ourselves both publicly and privately to assure the safety of Turkish Cypriots and to insist that a final solution of the Cyprus problem should rest upon the consent of the parties most directly concerned. It is possible that you feel in Ankara that the United States has not been sufficiently active in your behalf. But surely you know that our policy has caused the liveliest resentment in Athens (where demonstrations have been aimed against us) and has led to a basic alienation between the United States and Archbishop Makarios. As I said to your Foreign Minister in our conversation just a few weeks ago, we value very highly our relations with Turkey. We have considered you as a great ally with fundamental common interests. Your security and prosperity have been a deep concern of the American people and we have expressed that concern in the most practical terms. You and we have fought together to resist the ambitions of the communist world revolution. This solidarity has meant a great deal to us and I would hope that it means a great deal to your government and to your people. We have no intention of lending any support to any solution of Cyprus which endangers the Turkish Cypriot community. We have not been able to find a final solution because this is, admittedly, one of the most complex problems on earth. But I wish to assure you that we have been deeply concerned about the interests of Turkey and of the Turkish Cypriots and will remain so.
Finally, Mr. Prime Minister, I must tell you that you have posed the gravest issues of war and peace. These are issues which go far beyond the bilateral relations between Turkey and the United States. They not only will certainly involve war between Turkey and Greece but could involve wider hostilities because of the unpredictable consequences which a unilateral intervention in Cyprus could produce. You have your responsibilities as chief of the government of Turkey; I also have mine as President of the United States. I must, therefore, inform you in the deepest friendship that unless I can have your assurance that you will not take such action without further and fullest consultation I cannot accept your injunction to Ambassador Hare of secrecy and must immediately ask for emergency meetings of the NATO Council and of the United Nations Security Council.
I wish it were possible for us to have a personal discussion of this situation. Unfortunately, because of the special circumstances of our present constitutional position, I am not able to leave the United States. If you could come here for a full discussion I would welcome it. I do feel that you and I carry a very heavy responsibility for the general peace and for the possibilities of a sane and peaceful resolution of the Cyprus problem. I ask you, therefore, to delay any decisions which you and your colleagues might have-in mind until you and I have had the fullest and frankest consultation.
Sincerely.
LYNDON B. JOHNSON

Thanks for that Tim. Can we reasonably deduce from the letter above that indeed the USA gave the backing as well as the guarantors inc Greece, perhaps some more secret for the 74?

[karma]

http://cyprus-conflict.org/materials/johnsonletter.html

Letter to Prime Minister Inonu from President Johnson dated June 5, 1964

Dear Mr. Prime Minister,
I am gravely concerned by the information which I have had through Ambassador Hare from you and your Foreign Minister that the Turkish Government is contemplating a decision to intervene by military force to occupy a portion of Cyprus. I wish to emphasize, in the fullest friendship and frankness, that I do not consider that such a course of action by Turkey, fraught with such far reaching consequences, is consistent with the commitment of your government to consult fully in advance with the United States. Ambassador Hare has indicated that you postponed your decision for a few hours in order to obtain my views. I put to you personally whether you really believe that it is appropriate for your government, in effect, to present an ultimatum to an ally who has demonstrated such staunch support over the years as has the United States for Turkey. I must, therefore, first urge you to accept the responsibility for complete consultation with the United States before any such action is taken.
It is my impression that you believe that such intervention by Turkey is permissible under the provisions of the Treaty of Guarantee of 1960. I must call your attention, however, to our understanding that the proposed intervention by Turkey would be for the purpose of supporting an attempt by Turkish Cypriot leaders to partition the island, a solution which is specifically excluded by the Treaty of Guarantee. Further, that treaty requires consultation among the guarantor powers. It is the view of the United States that the possibilities of such consultation have by no means been exhausted in this situation and that, therefore, the reservation of the right to take unilateral action is not yet applicable.
I must call to your attention also, Mr. Prime Minister, the obligations of NATO. There can be no question in your mind that a Turkish intervention in Cyprus would lead to a military engagement between Turkish and Greek forces. Secretary of State Rusk declared at the recent meeting of the ministerial council of NATO in The Hague that war between Turkey and Greece must be considered as "literally unthinkable". Adhesion to NATO, in its very essence, means that NATO countries will not wage war on each other. Germany and France have buried centuries of animosity and hostility in becoming NATO allies; nothing less can be expected from Greece and Turkey. Furthermore, a military intervention in Cyprus by Turkey could lead to direct involvement by the Soviet Union. I hope you will understand that your NATO allies have not had a chance to consider whether they have an obligation to protect Turkey against the Soviet Union if Turkey takes a step which results in Soviet intervention without the full consent and understanding of its NATO allies.
Further, Mr. Prime Minister, I am concerned about the obligations of Turkey as a member of the United Nations. The United Nations has provided forces on the island to keep the peace. Their task has been difficult but, during the past several weeks, they have been progressively successful in reducing the incidents of violence on that island. The United Nations Mediator has not yet completed his work. I have no doubt that the general membership of the United Nations would react in the strongest terms to unilateral action by Turkey which would defy the efforts of the United Nations and destroy any prospect that the United Nations could assist in obtaining a reasonable and peaceful settlement of this difficult problem.
I wish also, Mr. Prime Minister, to call your attention to the bilateral agreeement between the United States and Turkey in the field of military assistance. Under Article IV of the agreement with Turkey of July 1947, your government is required to obtain United States consent for the use of military assistance for purposes other than those for which such assistance was furnished. Your government has on several occasions acknowledged to the United States that you fully understand this condition. I must tell you in all candor that the United States cannot agree to the use of any United States supplied military equipment for a Turkish intervention in Cyprus under present circumstances.
Moving to the practical results of the contemplated Turkish move, I feel obligated to call to your attention in the most friendly fashion that fact that such a Turkish move could lead to the slaughter of tens of thousands of Turkish Cypriots on the island of Cyprus. Such an action on your part would unleash the furies and there is no way by which military action on your part could be sufficiently effective to prevent wholesale destruction of many of those whom you are trying to protect. The presence of United Nations forces could not prevent such a catastrophe.
You may consider that what I have said is much too severe and that we are disregardful of Turkish interests in the Cyprus situation. I should like to assure you that this is not the case. We have exerted ourselves both publicly and privately to assure the safety of Turkish Cypriots and to insist that a final solution of the Cyprus problem should rest upon the consent of the parties most directly concerned. It is possible that you feel in Ankara that the United States has not been sufficiently active in your behalf. But surely you know that our policy has caused the liveliest resentment in Athens (where demonstrations have been aimed against us) and has led to a basic alienation between the United States and Archbishop Makarios. As I said to your Foreign Minister in our conversation just a few weeks ago, we value very highly our relations with Turkey. We have considered you as a great ally with fundamental common interests. Your security and prosperity have been a deep concern of the American people and we have expressed that concern in the most practical terms. You and we have fought together to resist the ambitions of the communist world revolution. This solidarity has meant a great deal to us and I would hope that it means a great deal to your government and to your people. We have no intention of lending any support to any solution of Cyprus which endangers the Turkish Cypriot community. We have not been able to find a final solution because this is, admittedly, one of the most complex problems on earth. But I wish to assure you that we have been deeply concerned about the interests of Turkey and of the Turkish Cypriots and will remain so.
Finally, Mr. Prime Minister, I must tell you that you have posed the gravest issues of war and peace. These are issues which go far beyond the bilateral relations between Turkey and the United States. They not only will certainly involve war between Turkey and Greece but could involve wider hostilities because of the unpredictable consequences which a unilateral intervention in Cyprus could produce. You have your responsibilities as chief of the government of Turkey; I also have mine as President of the United States. I must, therefore, inform you in the deepest friendship that unless I can have your assurance that you will not take such action without further and fullest consultation I cannot accept your injunction to Ambassador Hare of secrecy and must immediately ask for emergency meetings of the NATO Council and of the United Nations Security Council.
I wish it were possible for us to have a personal discussion of this situation. Unfortunately, because of the special circumstances of our present constitutional position, I am not able to leave the United States. If you could come here for a full discussion I would welcome it. I do feel that you and I carry a very heavy responsibility for the general peace and for the possibilities of a sane and peaceful resolution of the Cyprus problem. I ask you, therefore, to delay any decisions which you and your colleagues might have-in mind until you and I have had the fullest and frankest consultation.
Sincerely.
LYNDON B. JOHNSON

thx Tim, this is really an important document.. I am afraid you are not tht lucky to find the second but very different letter sent from the same ''white house'' to Ecevit 10 years later

[Pyrpolizer]

I am stating how it is in the hijacked "RoC" and the natural process that TCs would face against an all GC panel who are racist and vegence seeking, can you prove that they did not evluate the candidate in this manner, no you cannot so why expose us to double standards and disappointment when we already know we do not stand a chnace in your GC state.

He probably get one field a week....now do you want the job?

VP, you are truelly talking rubbish, you are just looking for excuse after excuse to claim your partition dreams.

Look, when I worked in Nicosia, i had 2 TCs working for me, they used to travel all the way from Kyrenia, they would many times arrive late for work, I would always cut them slack over the other GCs / foreign workers, in fact I took these boys under my wing believe it or not. Your arguement is flawed, I know because I have been in a position to employ TCs and others. the ones suited to the job got it, whoever he was.

please don't keep going on about how we would shit all over the TCs, it is totally bollocks you are talking.

And what type of work do these TCs do?

They were what you call labourers just like some of the GCs and the other foreigners. They were not particularly qualified and I could easily have replaced them if I felt like it as they were arriving late most days of the week. I chose not to as I appreciated the distance they had to travel, so I cut them some slack.

This is actual physical fact that your job fears are unfounded, just excuses to pus for your partitionist aims. And this is coming from someone, well you know well my thoughts on you lot.

Its called cheap labour, or even exploited labour, if you had nothing to gain you would have sacked them without batting an eyelid.

You said you'd rather go to Italy or France rather than seeking work in RoC. Imagine hundreds of TCs have gone to Italy. They don't even know the language. Now you TELL ME what jobs they would get. And BE HONEST.
I am all ears.

You obviously dont know about the TC brain drain of youth who are educated abroad (where they learn the language) tend not to return, they are getting jobs in all walks of life ,in countries that span from the USA to Turkey doctors lawyers bankers etc, why would they ever want to go south, they understand they have far more unbiased less exposed to discrimination opportunities in these countries than going south and waiting for racists revenge seeking GCs to decide on their futures downgrading them to menial labour intensified jobs the GCs do not want to do.

The same happens to GCs who get education abroad.
That's NOT what I asked you, and certainly that's NOT the situation of the TCs coming to the RoC seeking jobs.

Now will you care focus and answer?

[Pyrpolizer]

http://cyprus-conflict.org/materials/johnsonletter.html

Letter to Prime Minister Inonu from President Johnson dated June 5, 1964

Dear Mr. Prime Minister,
I am gravely concerned by the information which I have had through Ambassador Hare from you and your Foreign Minister that the Turkish Government is contemplating a decision to intervene by military force to occupy a portion of Cyprus. I wish to emphasize, in the fullest friendship and frankness, that I do not consider that such a course of action by Turkey, fraught with such far reaching consequences, is consistent with the commitment of your government to consult fully in advance with the United States. Ambassador Hare has indicated that you postponed your decision for a few hours in order to obtain my views. I put to you personally whether you really believe that it is appropriate for your government, in effect, to present an ultimatum to an ally who has demonstrated such staunch support over the years as has the United States for Turkey. I must, therefore, first urge you to accept the responsibility for complete consultation with the United States before any such action is taken.
It is my impression that you believe that such intervention by Turkey is permissible under the provisions of the Treaty of Guarantee of 1960. I must call your attention, however, to our understanding that the proposed intervention by Turkey would be for the purpose of supporting an attempt by Turkish Cypriot leaders to partition the island, a solution which is specifically excluded by the Treaty of Guarantee. Further, that treaty requires consultation among the guarantor powers. It is the view of the United States that the possibilities of such consultation have by no means been exhausted in this situation and that, therefore, the reservation of the right to take unilateral action is not yet applicable.
I must call to your attention also, Mr. Prime Minister, the obligations of NATO. There can be no question in your mind that a Turkish intervention in Cyprus would lead to a military engagement between Turkish and Greek forces. Secretary of State Rusk declared at the recent meeting of the ministerial council of NATO in The Hague that war between Turkey and Greece must be considered as "literally unthinkable". Adhesion to NATO, in its very essence, means that NATO countries will not wage war on each other. Germany and France have buried centuries of animosity and hostility in becoming NATO allies; nothing less can be expected from Greece and Turkey. Furthermore, a military intervention in Cyprus by Turkey could lead to direct involvement by the Soviet Union. I hope you will understand that your NATO allies have not had a chance to consider whether they have an obligation to protect Turkey against the Soviet Union if Turkey takes a step which results in Soviet intervention without the full consent and understanding of its NATO allies.
Further, Mr. Prime Minister, I am concerned about the obligations of Turkey as a member of the United Nations. The United Nations has provided forces on the island to keep the peace. Their task has been difficult but, during the past several weeks, they have been progressively successful in reducing the incidents of violence on that island. The United Nations Mediator has not yet completed his work. I have no doubt that the general membership of the United Nations would react in the strongest terms to unilateral action by Turkey which would defy the efforts of the United Nations and destroy any prospect that the United Nations could assist in obtaining a reasonable and peaceful settlement of this difficult problem.
I wish also, Mr. Prime Minister, to call your attention to the bilateral agreeement between the United States and Turkey in the field of military assistance. Under Article IV of the agreement with Turkey of July 1947, your government is required to obtain United States consent for the use of military assistance for purposes other than those for which such assistance was furnished. Your government has on several occasions acknowledged to the United States that you fully understand this condition. I must tell you in all candor that the United States cannot agree to the use of any United States supplied military equipment for a Turkish intervention in Cyprus under present circumstances.
Moving to the practical results of the contemplated Turkish move, I feel obligated to call to your attention in the most friendly fashion that fact that such a Turkish move could lead to the slaughter of tens of thousands of Turkish Cypriots on the island of Cyprus. Such an action on your part would unleash the furies and there is no way by which military action on your part could be sufficiently effective to prevent wholesale destruction of many of those whom you are trying to protect. The presence of United Nations forces could not prevent such a catastrophe.
You may consider that what I have said is much too severe and that we are disregardful of Turkish interests in the Cyprus situation. I should like to assure you that this is not the case. We have exerted ourselves both publicly and privately to assure the safety of Turkish Cypriots and to insist that a final solution of the Cyprus problem should rest upon the consent of the parties most directly concerned. It is possible that you feel in Ankara that the United States has not been sufficiently active in your behalf. But surely you know that our policy has caused the liveliest resentment in Athens (where demonstrations have been aimed against us) and has led to a basic alienation between the United States and Archbishop Makarios. As I said to your Foreign Minister in our conversation just a few weeks ago, we value very highly our relations with Turkey. We have considered you as a great ally with fundamental common interests. Your security and prosperity have been a deep concern of the American people and we have expressed that concern in the most practical terms. You and we have fought together to resist the ambitions of the communist world revolution. This solidarity has meant a great deal to us and I would hope that it means a great deal to your government and to your people. We have no intention of lending any support to any solution of Cyprus which endangers the Turkish Cypriot community. We have not been able to find a final solution because this is, admittedly, one of the most complex problems on earth. But I wish to assure you that we have been deeply concerned about the interests of Turkey and of the Turkish Cypriots and will remain so.
Finally, Mr. Prime Minister, I must tell you that you have posed the gravest issues of war and peace. These are issues which go far beyond the bilateral relations between Turkey and the United States. They not only will certainly involve war between Turkey and Greece but could involve wider hostilities because of the unpredictable consequences which a unilateral intervention in Cyprus could produce. You have your responsibilities as chief of the government of Turkey; I also have mine as President of the United States. I must, therefore, inform you in the deepest friendship that unless I can have your assurance that you will not take such action without further and fullest consultation I cannot accept your injunction to Ambassador Hare of secrecy and must immediately ask for emergency meetings of the NATO Council and of the United Nations Security Council.
I wish it were possible for us to have a personal discussion of this situation. Unfortunately, because of the special circumstances of our present constitutional position, I am not able to leave the United States. If you could come here for a full discussion I would welcome it. I do feel that you and I carry a very heavy responsibility for the general peace and for the possibilities of a sane and peaceful resolution of the Cyprus problem. I ask you, therefore, to delay any decisions which you and your colleagues might have-in mind until you and I have had the fullest and frankest consultation.
Sincerely.
LYNDON B. JOHNSON

Thanks Tim.

3 things really schocked me.
a) Turkeys Unilateral decision. Not even consultation with UK. They went directly to USA to ask for permission.
b) To take a portion of Cyprus: Is this what the treaty of Guarantee says?

And then we hear TCs in here telling us to accept Turkish Guarantees in a new solution.

HELL NOOOOOO

[Pyrpolizer]

Tim, that website says cyprus-conflict, but after one logs in it says Cyprus-dispute. Imo someone highjacked the name of the Original Cyprus-Conflict web site which was really impartial and balanced.So careful guys, this new site seems to be a fraud.

[Viewpoint]

I am stating how it is in the hijacked "RoC" and the natural process that TCs would face against an all GC panel who are racist and vegence seeking, can you prove that they did not evluate the candidate in this manner, no you cannot so why expose us to double standards and disappointment when we already know we do not stand a chnace in your GC state.

He probably get one field a week....now do you want the job?

VP, you are truelly talking rubbish, you are just looking for excuse after excuse to claim your partition dreams.

Look, when I worked in Nicosia, i had 2 TCs working for me, they used to travel all the way from Kyrenia, they would many times arrive late for work, I would always cut them slack over the other GCs / foreign workers, in fact I took these boys under my wing believe it or not. Your arguement is flawed, I know because I have been in a position to employ TCs and others. the ones suited to the job got it, whoever he was.

please don't keep going on about how we would shit all over the TCs, it is totally bollocks you are talking.

And what type of work do these TCs do?

They were what you call labourers just like some of the GCs and the other foreigners. They were not particularly qualified and I could easily have replaced them if I felt like it as they were arriving late most days of the week. I chose not to as I appreciated the distance they had to travel, so I cut them some slack.

This is actual physical fact that your job fears are unfounded, just excuses to pus for your partitionist aims. And this is coming from someone, well you know well my thoughts on you lot.

Its called cheap labour, or even exploited labour, if you had nothing to gain you would have sacked them without batting an eyelid.

You said you'd rather go to Italy or France rather than seeking work in RoC. Imagine hundreds of TCs have gone to Italy. They don't even know the language. Now you TELL ME what jobs they would get. And BE HONEST.
I am all ears.

You obviously dont know about the TC brain drain of youth who are educated abroad (where they learn the language) tend not to return, they are getting jobs in all walks of life ,in countries that span from the USA to Turkey doctors lawyers bankers etc, why would they ever want to go south, they understand they have far more unbiased less exposed to discrimination opportunities in these countries than going south and waiting for racists revenge seeking GCs to decide on their futures downgrading them to menial labour intensified jobs the GCs do not want to do.

The same happens to GCs who get education abroad.
That's NOT what I asked you, and certainly that's NOT the situation of the TCs coming to the RoC seeking jobs.

Now will you care focus and answer?

Sorry dont get what you are trying to ask here please try to be much clearer.