Cyprus-Forum.com

[Paphitis]

... and the real reason?

What real reason?

[insan]

Insan Wrote:

It is too hard even impossible to believe that the matter was purely a GC issue while the leader of the Coup was one of the most ferocious(maybe dangerous than Grivas) , pro-enosis man Sampson. There was only one matter that was purely GC issue; left wing- right wing clashes. Even though that wasn't a purely GC issue too; it was an universal issue. What evidences u have that it was purely a GC issue? And what was the issue and it's reasons, btw?

Hello Insan.

The sole purpose of the Coup was to remove President Makarios and even assassinate him altogether as he was proving to be a rather big obstacle to US and NATO interests in the East Mediterranean. The US had fully backed the Coup and were informed and even involved in the plot against The Cypriot Government from the very beginning. The coerced the Greek Generals and gave them the final go ahead to proceed, giving them guarantees that Turkey would not intervene under the Treaty of Guarantee. Shortly afterwards. the US then gave Turkey the green light to proceed with the invasion and claim their prize of annexing Cyprus above the 35th parallel.

The Greek Generals, feeling confident with their US backing went ahead with the Coup, believing that Turkey would not retaliate. Turkey was even informed by the US that the purpose of the Coup was to remove Makarios from power and to destabilise the leftist power base in Cyprus. They also informed Turkey that the Coup will not result in any TC bloodshed and that it was solely a GC affair.

4. General stated that Greece also believed in non-interference and
in a free, independent, sovereign state of Cyprus; Greece would abide
by the decision of the majority of the Greek Cypriots, most of whom
were nationalists, and these nationalists were the ones who had moved
against Makarios. It was immaterial whether these Greek Cypriot nationalists
moved with or without the prior blessing of Greece or
whether Greek officers subsequently assisted them. At this point he
went off on a tangent stating that neither Greece nor the Greek Cypriots
had asked for enosis, that GOT had obviously accepted these developments
in Cyprus, that Turks understood that the matter was an
internal Greek Cypriot affair.

8. In reply to question whether Greeks were in direct touch with
Turks, General stated we have not bothered the Turks; we have not declared enosis. Turks agree that “the principal thorn” (i.e., Makarios) is
gone and, “I am not in touch with the Turks.” He expressed view that
Greece and Turkey could now proceed at some future time to sit down,
talk and solve their differences. Indeed, according to Ioannides Greeks might even be willing to share profits of petroleum finds in a joint exploration
company; however, Greece would never surrender Aegean
continental shelf because this would mean Turkish control of Greek islands.
He also expressed belief that Greek and Turkish Cypriots could
probably solve their difficulties peacefully, quietly and amicably. He
even joked that in a year or perhaps more realistically ten, the Turks
might want to sell their share of Cyprus for increased percentage of
petroleum rights. Again in reply to direct question, General Ioannides
stated that he was not in contact with any Turkish official; however, he
added that Turks were “officially aware” that enosis was not the objective
at this point and that Greek Cypriots did not intend any bloody
action against Turk Cypriots.

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/96606.pdf

Insan Wrote:

On the other hand, Turkey informed whole world that it would be a peace operation to restore the constitutional order. However; the coupists, Greece and pro-coupists didn't believe Turkey and combated against Turkish forces. Then we all faced the inevitable consequences.

The above statement disappoints me Insan. You are insinuating that the Turkish intervention was to restore constitutional order and hence not to claim the long awaited Turkish dream of claiming her PRIZE.

The fact that this was not the case is also in contravention to Turkey's obligations under the 1960 Treaty of Guarantee.

Well, Henry Kissinger disagrees with you:

Unwilling to countenance a middle ground between total victory and total defeat, Greece and Turkey had worked themselves into dead-lock. Turkey was in possession of the PRIZE but lacked international recognition of its legitimacy.

HENRY KISSINGER - YEARS OF RENEWAL (THE CONCLUDING VOLUME OF HIS MEMOIRS >Pg231

Seems like Henry Kissinger knew exactly what the purpose of the intervention was. The prize for Turkey was annexing the northern part of Cyprus - the long sought after partition of Cyprus.

Insan Wrote:

I wonder ur opinios regarding the intention of Sampson and his backing crew. What could had happen if Turkey didn't intervene? What should Turkey and TCs do under those circumstances? He would politically cleanse all Left-winger GCs? Then all left-winger TCs? Then all right-winger TCs? Then suicide himself?

My opinion is that the Nicos Sampson Government would have fallen within days, or weeks. Opposition to the Coup was significant, and the GCs were resisting the coupists all over Cyprus. The Coupists had their hands full with Makarios loyalists and leftist forces. The TCs were not even a factor.

I doubt very much that he would have "cleansed" all leftists. However, there were some prominent leftists and Makarios supporters that would have been in significant jeopardy. My Uncle would have been amongst those due to his involvement setting up the HAM radio broadcast in Paphos where Makarios announced that he was still alive.

Hello Paphitis

Thx for the info and ur opinions u put forward. It is said that Ionnidas was a Turk hater. True? If he was, he lied abt the aim of the coup, Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots. On the other hand, i never heard something abt Makarios being a Turk hater. Nevertheless, I am rather tend to believe that a religous man like Makarios who was directly in communication with the Junta, Eoka-B and even Sampson didn't lie in his speech that he made after a few days following the coup.





taken from a pure documentary abt Cyprus problem.

http://books.google.com/books?id=mQ2822 ... _0#PPA5,M1

[Paphitis]

Thx for the info and ur opinions u put forward. It is said that Ionnidas was a Turk hater. True?

I don't think so.

I have no evidence that implies that Ioannidis was a Turk Hater.

There are many myths circulating about the person. He was certainly anti leftist, but appeared indifferent about Turkey and Turks.

If he was, he lied abt the aim of the coup, Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots.

He did not lie about the aim of the Coup. The Americans were always informed about his aims. He did explain to the US State Department that ENOSIS was off the agenda. The Junta then appointed another President.

On the other hand, i never heard something abt Makarios being a Turk hater.

Makarios was not anti TC either. His purpose was to address the democratic imbalance that was imposed in 1959.

Nevertheless, I am rather tend to believe that a religous man like Makarios who was directly in communication with the Junta, Eoka-B and even Sampson didn't lie in his speech that he made after a few days following the coup.

Makarios was not directly communicating with EOKA B or the Junta. If he was captured then he would have been in a great deal of strife.

EOKA B was Unionist. The Greek Generals however were not interested in ENOSIS at all. They just wanted to depose Makarios and replace him with someone else who was willing to toe the line.

The speech you posted above also seems to verify that ENOSIS was the last thing on the Junta’s agenda.

[Get Real!]

Thx for the info and ur opinions u put forward. It is said that Ionnidas was a Turk hater. True?

I don't think so.

I have no evidence that implies that Ioannidis was a Turk Hater.

What compels you to defend someone like Ioannides?

I think it's silly to argue if Ioannides and his Turkish counterpart hated each other because chances are they did... so what though?

[Paphitis]

Thx for the info and ur opinions u put forward. It is said that Ionnidas was a Turk hater. True?

I don't think so.

I have no evidence that implies that Ioannidis was a Turk Hater.

What compels you to defend someone like Ioannides?

I think it's silly to argue if Ioannides and his Turkish counterpart hated each other because chances are they did... so what though?

Not defending anyone GR!

Just wish to apply a bit of balance, because sometimes there are just too many myths. It is the facts that are important and not individual interpretation.

The question by Insan was whether Ioannides had an ENOSIS agenda or not.

[insan]

Thx for the info and ur opinions u put forward. It is said that Ionnidas was a Turk hater. True?

Nevertheless, I am rather tend to believe that a religous man like Makarios who was directly in communication with the Junta, Eoka-B and even Sampson didn't lie in his speech that he made after a few days following the coup.

Makarios was not directly communicating with EOKA B or the Junta. If he was captured then he would have been in a great deal of strife.

EOKA B was Unionist. The Greek Generals however were not interested in ENOSIS at all. They just wanted to depose Makarios and replace him with someone else who was willing to toe the line.

The speech you posted above also seems to verify that ENOSIS was the last thing on the Junta’s agenda.

In his speech, Makarios accused military Junta being double-faced regarding its Enosis agenda. Further in his speech, Makarios pointed out some facts as evidences regarding the Greek Junta's support to EOKA-B and its actions. However since ur aim in this thread is to counter and balance the "Turkish propaganda" i guess we need to satsify u with our posts?

Cheers Empathy for all

[BirKibrisli]

Thx for the info and ur opinions u put forward. It is said that Ionnidas was a Turk hater. True?

Nevertheless, I am rather tend to believe that a religous man like Makarios who was directly in communication with the Junta, Eoka-B and even Sampson didn't lie in his speech that he made after a few days following the coup.

Makarios was not directly communicating with EOKA B or the Junta. If he was captured then he would have been in a great deal of strife.

EOKA B was Unionist. The Greek Generals however were not interested in ENOSIS at all. They just wanted to depose Makarios and replace him with someone else who was willing to toe the line.

The speech you posted above also seems to verify that ENOSIS was the last thing on the Junta’s agenda.

In his speech, Makarios accused military Junta being double-faced regarding its Enosis agenda. Further in his speech, Makarios pointed out some facts as evidences regarding the Greek Junta's support to EOKA-B and its actions. However since ur aim in this thread is to counter and balance the "Turkish propaganda" i guess we need to satsify u with our posts?

Cheers Empathy for all

Finally......Someone else who thinks without empathy and compassion we will never move on to understanding and respect...which will inevitably lead to a lasting solution...