Cyprus-Forum.com

[Nikitas]

Paphitis,

Turkey is secondary to the US and Britain who did not want Cyprus, and still do not want Cyprus to join NATO. Each for their own reasons. If the whole of the island is NATOified there go the advantages of exclusivity that the British enjoy and can then "sell" to the rest of their allies. For the same reason the Turks have been prevented from setting up a viable NATO standards base in the north, as have the Greeks in the south. The only move to upset the apple cart has come from France but does not seem to be aimed at unsettling British exclusivity in the island, yet.

[Paphitis]

Paphitis,

Turkey is secondary to the US and Britain who did not want Cyprus, and still do not want Cyprus to join NATO. Each for their own reasons. If the whole of the island is NATOified there go the advantages of exclusivity that the British enjoy and can then "sell" to the rest of their allies. For the same reason the Turks have been prevented from setting up a viable NATO standards base in the north, as have the Greeks in the south. The only move to upset the apple cart has come from France but does not seem to be aimed at unsettling British exclusivity in the island, yet.

Do you have anything valid to back that up with?

As far as I am concerned, if Cyprus had the support of the US, then there is nothing Britain could do about this.

If you are talking about Britain's "exclusivity" in selling intelligence to other allies, which is a ridiculous notion because intelligence is not sold but shared; then the US would have loved to break this "exclusivity".

[Nikitas]

Intelligence is shared? How come the sharing with the US did not lead Greece anywhere and when the British arrived they caught the Nov 17 group in a matter of months? It took the slaying of a high ranking British military attache to bring that about.

You judge from the point of view of the Anglosaxon country you live in. Just look up the Europarliament debate on the Echelon network to see how much "sharing" is done with non Anglosaxon countries.

The USA had a Cyprus policy which was pursued with ambivalent actions, like financing local quasi political organizations like EDMA in Cyprus, among the GCs, a right wing pro Enosis group, yet at the same time pushing for partition, perhaps in an effort to break the British exclusivity which was hard wired in the 1960 constitution.

Last time I checked, in a major article in either Vima or Kathimerini, a US diplomat explained that Cyprus should not join NATO, and that must have been just after the Annan plan referendum.

[Bananiot]

This says it all:

He (Grivas) may have abolished the Republic of Cyprus and declared ENOSIS in 1964, a time when Greece had 20,000 troops in Cyprus.

Combined with the already formed CNG, which would have been consumed within the ranks of the Greek Armed Forces, there would have been very little chance of a successful Turkish Invasion. The US also would not have backed any Turkish action as they deemed Grivas to be their man or agent in Cyprus. What would have happened after that is anyone's guess.

Our misfortune (according to Paphitis) is that we failed to allow Grivas to destroy the newly established RoC and achieve ENOSIS when Turkey could do nothing about it (or so he thinks). This sick statement really exposes Paphits who has tried hard to make us believe that he is a democratic person.

Grivas, an illiterate soldier and Makarios, priest turned politician, are the reasons for our state of affair at the moment. Any country with 2 leaders of this calibre is doomed. Cyprus is no exemption. As plain as this.

P.S. Another of our myths has broken down today. Until now we all believed that the Turkish Cypriot football players left KOP (Cyprus Football Federation). Today we learn that the TC's never left. We excluded them! In April 1955, the TC footbal team Centinkayia was to play an official match against Pezoporikos of Larnaca. The staff at GSP in Nicosia, did not allow the TC players to enter the stadium and the excuse was that the ground belonged to the church and the church gave orders not to allow Turks to use it! As from then, no Turkish Cypriot team ever faced a Greek Cypriot team till today. Again, we drew first blood.

[Paphitis]

This says it all:

He (Grivas) may have abolished the Republic of Cyprus and declared ENOSIS in 1964, a time when Greece had 20,000 troops in Cyprus.

Combined with the already formed CNG, which would have been consumed within the ranks of the Greek Armed Forces, there would have been very little chance of a successful Turkish Invasion. The US also would not have backed any Turkish action as they deemed Grivas to be their man or agent in Cyprus. What would have happened after that is anyone's guess.

Our misfortune (according to Paphitis) is that we failed to allow Grivas to destroy the newly established RoC and achieve ENOSIS when Turkey could do nothing about it (or so he thinks). This sick statement really exposes Paphits who has tried hard to make us believe that he is a democratic person.

You babbling fool...

That is not what I said. I was responding to a hypothetical "what if" scenario in response to Oracle's questions. If ENOSIS was ever to be declared, then 1964 was the time to do it, and I was under the impression that this was desired by both Grivas and Makarios; later corrected by Oracle, as this was not the goal post 1960.

[Oracle]

Oracle wrote:

Are you saying that he lacked support amongst Cypriots in 1959/1960?

Grivas certainly did not lack the support in Cyprus. The only Cypriots who did not support Grivas from the outset, were the Communists.

As far as I am concerned, it was unfortunate that President Makarios derived much of his support from the Communists, which kept him in power.

The mere fact that Britain forbid Grivas returning to Cyprus in the Zurich Agreement, is an indication of how much Britain did fear Grivas as a rallying force for most Cypriots against British imperial influence.

If he was allowed to return, I personally would have liked to see some kind of coalition between both Makarios and Grivas, and without the Communist influence which pressured Makarios to align himself with the Soviet Union. Cyprus may have forged better relations with the west and NATO. Makarios did have at one stage an excellent relationship with the late JFK and the US. Things changed when AKEL began to influence Makarios a bit too much and almost turned Cyprus into another Cuba. It is this that perhaps forced the US to coerce the Greek Junta and EOKA B into deposing Makarios. This may have changed things quite drastically, and Cyprus may not be divided today. IMHO

But Grivas was a military officer first and foremost, and would not necessarily have been the world's most ideal politician.

Maybe Makarios and Grivas together were a Dynamic Duo and that's why the Brits sought to split them up. First by the exile of Makarios in the 50's, then the exile of Grivas in the 60's.

Another case of divide and rule.

[Bananiot]

May be Paphitis, but this is what you meant, I know your kind. Now, here is a photo of the players of Centinkayia, waiting to enter GSP to play their match against Pezoporikos. The game was never played because the church could not have Turks soil our grounds. This is the essence of our problems but some people do not want to face the truth because they are looking to win the return match. It does not matter to them if we lose again and destroy ourselves forever, as long as they get their second chance.



Photo taken from today's "Politis"

[Paphitis]

Nikitas Wrote:

Intelligence is shared? How come the sharing with the US did not lead Greece anywhere and when the British arrived they caught the Nov 17 group in a matter of months? It took the slaying of a high ranking British military attache to bring that about.

You judge from the point of view of the Anglosaxon country you live in. Just look up the Europarliament debate on the Echelon network to see how much "sharing" is done with non Anglosaxon countries.

I am more than aware that the intelligence shared between Anglo-Saxon countries is not available to Cyprus, Greece and even Turkey.

That is due to security reasons which deem that those countries cannot be entrusted with this information, which could fall into other hands.

This has much to do with the anti-west forces prevalent in those countries, and US efforts to destabilise them.

Which brings me back to my point. If Cyprus was not so sternly opposed to the West, and Communist influence was stemmed, then things may have turned out different, and Cyprus may not be divided today.

The USA had a Cyprus policy which was pursued with ambivalent actions, like financing local quasi political organizations like EDMA in Cyprus, among the GCs, a right wing pro Enosis group, yet at the same time pushing for partition, perhaps in an effort to break the British exclusivity which was hard wired in the 1960 constitution.

This US policy of partition resulted due to Cyprus forging closer relations with the Soviet Union, through AKEL's influence within the Makarios Government. If this anti west doctrine was not adopted, and Cyprus entered NATO, then Cyprus not only would have benefitted from the security offered, but the US fear of the Soviet Union having a stronghold in the East Mediterranean, may not have eventuated. This may also have prevented the Coup and Invasion.

Last time I checked, in a major article in either Vima or Kathimerini, a US diplomat explained that Cyprus should not join NATO, and that must have been just after the Annan plan referendum.

So what?

One US diplomat, who was pro Turkey and Annan Plan, said that Cyprus should never be a member of NATO.

Big deal!

[Oracle]

May be Paphitis, but this is what you meant, I know your kind. Now, here is a photo of the players of Centinkayia, waiting to enter GSP to play their match against Pezoporikos. The game was never played because the church could not have Turks soil our grounds. This is the essence of our problems but some people do not want to face the truth because they are looking to win the return match. It does not matter to them if we lose again and destroy ourselves forever, as long as they get their second chance.

What's your point?
The Church would not allow us to use their "facility" to have a wedding, without my other half being a baptised Christian. That is their right!

[Paphitis]

Oracle wrote:

Are you saying that he lacked support amongst Cypriots in 1959/1960?

Grivas certainly did not lack the support in Cyprus. The only Cypriots who did not support Grivas from the outset, were the Communists.

As far as I am concerned, it was unfortunate that President Makarios derived much of his support from the Communists, which kept him in power.

The mere fact that Britain forbid Grivas returning to Cyprus in the Zurich Agreement, is an indication of how much Britain did fear Grivas as a rallying force for most Cypriots against British imperial influence.

If he was allowed to return, I personally would have liked to see some kind of coalition between both Makarios and Grivas, and without the Communist influence which pressured Makarios to align himself with the Soviet Union. Cyprus may have forged better relations with the west and NATO. Makarios did have at one stage an excellent relationship with the late JFK and the US. Things changed when AKEL began to influence Makarios a bit too much and almost turned Cyprus into another Cuba. It is this that perhaps forced the US to coerce the Greek Junta and EOKA B into deposing Makarios. This may have changed things quite drastically, and Cyprus may not be divided today. IMHO

But Grivas was a military officer first and foremost, and would not necessarily have been the world's most ideal politician.

Maybe Makarios and Grivas together were a Dynamic Duo and that's why the Brits sought to split them up. First by the exile of Makarios in the 50's, then the exile of Grivas in the 60's.

Another case of divide and rule.

I have no doubt that this is true.

Can you imagine both Makarios' political abilities and love for Cyprus, coupled with Grivas uncompromising will and single-mindedness?

If the 2 were allowed to team up after independence, then things may have been very different, and this is probably what the Brits wanted to avoid...

The Communists would still be offside, but I am adamant that this would not be any loss to Cyprus.