Cyprus-Forum.com

[Nikitas]

Deniz are you implying that if RoC were kept out of the EU then there would be no settlers? Settlers were brought in since day one. First in the form of soldiers' families and later as so called seasonal labor that became permanent.

The village of Karmi in the Kyrenia district was setlled in the 70s. Almost all the settlers there were officers who had participated in the invasion. How would being kept out of the EU reversed that particular situation?

[denizaksulu]

Deniz are you implying that if RoC were kept out of the EU then there would be no settlers? Settlers were brought in since day one. First in the form of soldiers' families and later as so called seasonal labor that became permanent.

The village of Karmi in the Kyrenia district was setlled in the 70s. Almost all the settlers there were officers who had participated in the invasion. How would being kept out of the EU reversed that particular situation?

I did not mean to link them together. The settler issues just got worse from a trickle to a torrent; thus making any solution more complicated.

[Tim Drayton]

Isn't it strange that Kavazoğlu didn't mention just a single word abt EOKA that was just another secret organization funded by Americans? By not mentioning just a single word abt EOKA and it's activities; he made his article sound as written by a pro-EOKA journalist/spy?

It seems like Kavazoğlu ignored the activities of EOKA bcz he thought EOKA had nothing to do with the formation of TMT. Do u agree with Kavazoğlu that EOKA has no role on foundation of TMT and it's activities?

I'll go step by step... there r a lot of other aspects of theis article I'd like to question.

One factor to bear in mind is that Kavazoğlu, as a member of the AKEL cnetral committee, had to toe the party line in everything he said and wrote. It is unfortunate that AKEL made some grave errors and adopted some questionable positions which alienated Turkish Cypriots from it. I think that if at the time there had been a powerful bicommunal left-wing organisation on the ground with strong representation in the Turkish Cypriot community, the fascist TMT would have faced a stiffer task in imposing dictatotiral rule over the community. Let us not forget, though, that one of the first targets of the TMT was the trade union movement, probably the one area in Cyprus in which there existed genuine bicommunal solidarity. As you know, following the attempted assasination of Ahmet Sadi and the successful assisination of Fazıl Önder in 1958, Turkish Cypriots were coerced through a campaign of terror into resigning from the PEO trade union movement. The TMT knew that it had to destroy this kind of bicommunal solidarity if it was to achieve its long term goals.

What were those grave errors made by AKEL, Tim? we need to take into account the then circumstance, Tim. Majority of Cyprus population had been living in rural areas that most of them even hadn't have electricity infrastructure. I don't have any official statistical data regarding the literacy rate of the then Cypriots but I don't think the literacy rate was even over the mid rate.

Furthermore, then there was 2 political trends had taken whole world under it's control and heavy influence... People were either in one group or other... Communists and capitalists; leftists and rightists....

There were so many people in AKEL too, that wished Enosis... perhaps owerwhelming majority of factious men of AKEL.

Under such a political climate, AKEL executives who were perhaps the most literate persons of AKEL; could not defend the independent Cyprus thesis. Though an independent Cyprus under communist regime would have led Cyprus to become just another "satelite" of imperialist USSR.

Anyway, under such political circumstances that AKEL inevitably become officially supporting Enosis; what's the meaning for TCs to stay in AKEL founded trade unions? As long as they stayed in those pro-Enosis trade unions, they would have been considered "pro-Enosis", "traitor", communist TCs; targeted by TMT and hated by all average TCs who were against Enosis. I tend to believe this was the main reason why TMT targeted and assassinated some TC trade unionists.

He held the leaders of the two communities responsible for the events of 1963-64 and he knew very well that it was difficult to live in peace on an island where blood had been shed. He also knew well that the Enosis policy of the Greek Cypriot Leadership was nothing more than supporting the idea of division. His expectations from AKEL were deep regarding this very issue. Tell the Greek Cypriot community the truth and drive them away from the Enosis policy! Otherwise he felt that the future of the Republic of Cyprus would be very dark.

Unfortunately AKEL’s attitude did not meet Kavazoglu’s expectations as the Party insisted on its own self-determination/Enosis decision and whilst doing so left Dervis Ali in a difficult situation. What Kavazoglu said to Vanezos makes clear the tragic situation that he had been dragged into: “Vanezos, I will carry on with this fight as I have been doing so up until this moment. (...) However AKEL’s Enosis policy is not helping me the least bit and puts me in a difficult situation. (...) How can I help build a Turkish-Greek Cypriot friendship as a member of AKEL? What can I say to the Turkish Cypriots that have cooperated with me about the AKEL Enosis policy, what will I say?” These lines clearly explain the tragic situation that Kavazoglu found himself trapped in.

Soon Kavazoğlu became a Don Xiote, "traitor", lonely TC communist, an embarassed AKEL member... The only way for his survival was to escape to a communist country or London as he escaped in 1958... however he prefered to stay in Cyprus; GC dominated areas, chased by both EOKA(the national front) and TMT...

With the article u translated in this thread, he obviously created a pro-EOKA, Enosist impression... Did some AKEL executives force him to write that article?
I don't believe as regard to Cyprus independence and bright future of Cypriot people his only problem was with Denktash, TMT and imperiaslists... In 1964 when he wrote that article, he had problems with GC national Front, Makarios and even AKEL.

He prefered only to harshly critisize Denktash, TMT and imperialists... Why? Had he been balanced, perhaps he wouldn't have been assassinated by TMT... Though still it hasn't been proved that he was assassinated by TMT.

All of your points make sense to me.

One has to remember that this article appeared in a communist party journal in Bulgaria at a time when this country was under Stalinist rule. This was a time of strict censorship there and the contents of the article would also have had to conform to the official party line there.

I only felt that this article was of interest in the way that it attempts to analyse the wiser political consequences of the imposition of TMT rule on the TC community.

I was told by someone who claims to have known Kavazoğlu personally that in private he was very critical of the direction being taken by AKEL on thing like the national question, but as a loyal party member he never made these qualms known in public. This is only heresay, but it tallys with what you have said above.

Before the formation of TMT, there had been several attempts of TCs getting organized under several organizations and fight against Enosis:

Kara Çete, 9 Eylül Cephesi and Volkan r the ones I know formed by pure TCs. They didn't have any guerilla training, they didn't have contemporary weapons... They all failed to lead a counter-struggle against EOKA and Enosists.

After 3 years the formation of EOKA and it's continueing activities in Cyprus with colloboration and cooperation of some Turkish militay personel, Right winged Turkish leadership formed TMT and began organizing TCs towards it's goal that was partition.

What alternatively could TC leadership or TC community do under the circumstances of late 50s and mid-60s?

It seems to me that everything had gone in perfect correlation of then the circumstances.

Was it just a chain of random events, each one causing the next, or was some kind of master plan or conspiracy behind it all? This is the fundamental question I ask myself and do not know the answer. I really appreciate this input from people like you with first-hand experience of events which helps me to better understand what went on.

I will redirect u some articles in Turkish that confirms my opinions abt formation of TMT:

http://www.kibrisgazetesi.com/index.php ... /Ana_sayfa

written by an ex-TMT member; now a journalist.

http://www.kibrisgazetesi.com/printa.ph ... 8&art=3895

In this article the same journalist A Tolgay make refference to a fierce opposition between Kara Çete and Volkan but does not mention anything abt the reasons behind this fierce opposition.

http://www.stwing.upenn.edu/~durduran/h ... _2006.html

An ex-Volkan member tells what he knows abt Volkan and it's activities. Here again, it confirms my opinions abt those TC resistance organizations.


http://www.yeniduzengazetesi.com/haber_ ... &print=yes

An ex-TMT man İsmail Bozkurt talks abt his memoirs.

The full story from 1954 to 1960 which u can reach by following the below link also confirms my opinions regarding the formation and activities of early TC resistance organizations.

CYPRUS 1954-1959
SGM Herbert A. Friedman (Ret.) and Brigadier General Ioannis Paschalidis

http://www.psywarrior.com/cyprus.html

Tim u will laugh a lot when u read the funny, amateurish first Volkan leaflet.


Now another question may spring to our minds...

Why did the formation of TMT, the first serious TC resitance organization take so long to be established?

1) TCs had already been struggling against EOKA and Enosis in British police auxiliaries. In the begining there was no need to form an EOKA alike TC organization... and maybe existence of similar organization would have caused more blood shed...

2) There was a possibility of GCs accepting Rad Cliff Plan in 1956 and later Mc Millan Plan in 1957. However none of these plans were accepted by then the Greek and GC leaderships. EOKA kept attacking British targets... Then came TMT with the same professional guerilla tactics of EOKA. After abt 8 months lasted TMT activities, Grivas had to accept a cease fire...

I have looked at the above sources.

I can't help feeling that we are talking at cross purposes. You are looking at events purely from within the Turkish Cypriot community. You set out from the genuine concerns that Turkish Cypriots in that period had about their security and future. The early home-made resistance organisations were too amateurish to avail those concerns, so it is no surprise that when the TMT, backed by the massive resources of Turkey's Special War Department, came along it was soon able to push these other organisations out of the way and managed to achieve things that were perceived to be beneficial to the community. This is what the articles you have quoted are saying.

What I am doing is to look at things from a broader perspective and ask if certain outside forces were not, in setting up the TMT under the direct aegis of the Turkish deep state, exploiting the genuine fears of the Turkish Cypriot community at the time and under the guise of assisting the Turkish Cypriots were not simply - as Özker Özgür would years later comment - using them to accomplish some greater historic goal.

[Nikitas]

"using them to accomplish some greater historic goal."

And the puzzle in this forum is the denial of many TC forumers to accept this. Even in the face of statements from the highest officials of Turkey, people like Ecevit- "we solved the Cyprus problem in 1974", "double union is out of the question because it would make Greece a Middle Eastern power", "ceding the Dodecanese to Greece was a huge mistake", or Kenan Evren "those who ask for the removal of Turkish troops from Cyprus know nothing about nationalism", and lately Erdoghan "what if people leave Cyprus, we have more people to put there", "we got what we wanted without ceding an inch of territory or removing one single soldier".

Even the daily increase of settlers, the arbitrary naturalisations, the rapid turkification of their surroundings are not enough indication for the TCs that something peculiar is happening in the north of Cyprus.

The TCs were obviously the major excuse for Turkey moving into Cyprus, and they are no longer needed as an excuse for the troops to stay, since a bigger excuse has been formed with the importation of settlers.

Not that the Greek side is free of historical blunders. Greece never wanted to get involved in Cyprus, this much is clear from the start of the Enosis campaign. It subsequently reversed policy for a few years and then again changed under the dictatorship who subscribed to the notion that the communist threat was bigger than any Turkish plans might have been. And again today when Greece is refusing to assert any rights and to be more visible in the settlement process.

As for the GCs, in the 40s and 50s the level of political sophistication, after centuries of colonialism, was less than zero. It was a time of black and white approaches to all issues. It is easy to criticise with hindsight, but who in the 50s would ever imagine that some day Cyprus would be a full member of the EU, or have a higher standard of living than either motherland? If only there had been a way to allow Cypriots to realise that their potenetial was bigger than becoming an outlying district of either Greece or Turkey things would be so different today.

[insan]

"using them to accomplish some greater historic goal."

And the puzzle in this forum is the denial of many TC forumers to accept this. Even in the face of statements from the highest officials of Turkey, people like Ecevit- "we solved the Cyprus problem in 1974", "double union is out of the question because it would make Greece a Middle Eastern power", "ceding the Dodecanese to Greece was a huge mistake", or Kenan Evren "those who ask for the removal of Turkish troops from Cyprus know nothing about nationalism", and lately Erdoghan "what if people leave Cyprus, we have more people to put there", "we got what we wanted without ceding an inch of territory or removing one single soldier".

Even the daily increase of settlers, the arbitrary naturalisations, the rapid turkification of their surroundings are not enough indication for the TCs that something peculiar is happening in the north of Cyprus.

The TCs were obviously the major excuse for Turkey moving into Cyprus, and they are no longer needed as an excuse for the troops to stay, since a bigger excuse has been formed with the importation of settlers.

Not that the Greek side is free of historical blunders. Greece never wanted to get involved in Cyprus, this much is clear from the start of the Enosis campaign. It subsequently reversed policy for a few years and then again changed under the dictatorship who subscribed to the notion that the communist threat was bigger than any Turkish plans might have been. And again today when Greece is refusing to assert any rights and to be more visible in the settlement process.

As for the GCs, in the 40s and 50s the level of political sophistication, after centuries of colonialism, was less than zero. It was a time of black and white approaches to all issues. It is easy to criticise with hindsight, but who in the 50s would ever imagine that some day Cyprus would be a full member of the EU, or have a higher standard of living than either motherland? If only there had been a way to allow Cypriots to realise that their potenetial was bigger than becoming an outlying district of either Greece or Turkey things would be so different today.

None of the TCs denied Turkey and TCs have always had common interets(national, economical, security) in Cyprus.

However most of the GCs deny that Greece and GCs have common interests(national, economical, security)in Cyprus.

[DT.]

"using them to accomplish some greater historic goal."

And the puzzle in this forum is the denial of many TC forumers to accept this. Even in the face of statements from the highest officials of Turkey, people like Ecevit- "we solved the Cyprus problem in 1974", "double union is out of the question because it would make Greece a Middle Eastern power", "ceding the Dodecanese to Greece was a huge mistake", or Kenan Evren "those who ask for the removal of Turkish troops from Cyprus know nothing about nationalism", and lately Erdoghan "what if people leave Cyprus, we have more people to put there", "we got what we wanted without ceding an inch of territory or removing one single soldier".

Even the daily increase of settlers, the arbitrary naturalisations, the rapid turkification of their surroundings are not enough indication for the TCs that something peculiar is happening in the north of Cyprus.

The TCs were obviously the major excuse for Turkey moving into Cyprus, and they are no longer needed as an excuse for the troops to stay, since a bigger excuse has been formed with the importation of settlers.

Not that the Greek side is free of historical blunders. Greece never wanted to get involved in Cyprus, this much is clear from the start of the Enosis campaign. It subsequently reversed policy for a few years and then again changed under the dictatorship who subscribed to the notion that the communist threat was bigger than any Turkish plans might have been. And again today when Greece is refusing to assert any rights and to be more visible in the settlement process.

As for the GCs, in the 40s and 50s the level of political sophistication, after centuries of colonialism, was less than zero. It was a time of black and white approaches to all issues. It is easy to criticise with hindsight, but who in the 50s would ever imagine that some day Cyprus would be a full member of the EU, or have a higher standard of living than either motherland? If only there had been a way to allow Cypriots to realise that their potenetial was bigger than becoming an outlying district of either Greece or Turkey things would be so different today.

None of the TCs denied Turkey and TCs have always had common interets(national, economical, security) in Cyprus.

However most of the GCs deny that Greece and GCs have common interests(national, economical, security)in Cyprus.

The only policy we have in common with Greece at the moment is that both our borders are under threat from a common enemy. Remove this risk and there will be no differences between bilateral relations with Greece and bilateral relations with Italy.

[insan]

Isn't it strange that Kavazoğlu didn't mention just a single word abt EOKA that was just another secret organization funded by Americans? By not mentioning just a single word abt EOKA and it's activities; he made his article sound as written by a pro-EOKA journalist/spy?

It seems like Kavazoğlu ignored the activities of EOKA bcz he thought EOKA had nothing to do with the formation of TMT. Do u agree with Kavazoğlu that EOKA has no role on foundation of TMT and it's activities?

I'll go step by step... there r a lot of other aspects of theis article I'd like to question.

One factor to bear in mind is that Kavazoğlu, as a member of the AKEL cnetral committee, had to toe the party line in everything he said and wrote. It is unfortunate that AKEL made some grave errors and adopted some questionable positions which alienated Turkish Cypriots from it. I think that if at the time there had been a powerful bicommunal left-wing organisation on the ground with strong representation in the Turkish Cypriot community, the fascist TMT would have faced a stiffer task in imposing dictatotiral rule over the community. Let us not forget, though, that one of the first targets of the TMT was the trade union movement, probably the one area in Cyprus in which there existed genuine bicommunal solidarity. As you know, following the attempted assasination of Ahmet Sadi and the successful assisination of Fazıl Önder in 1958, Turkish Cypriots were coerced through a campaign of terror into resigning from the PEO trade union movement. The TMT knew that it had to destroy this kind of bicommunal solidarity if it was to achieve its long term goals.

What were those grave errors made by AKEL, Tim? we need to take into account the then circumstance, Tim. Majority of Cyprus population had been living in rural areas that most of them even hadn't have electricity infrastructure. I don't have any official statistical data regarding the literacy rate of the then Cypriots but I don't think the literacy rate was even over the mid rate.

Furthermore, then there was 2 political trends had taken whole world under it's control and heavy influence... People were either in one group or other... Communists and capitalists; leftists and rightists....

There were so many people in AKEL too, that wished Enosis... perhaps owerwhelming majority of factious men of AKEL.

Under such a political climate, AKEL executives who were perhaps the most literate persons of AKEL; could not defend the independent Cyprus thesis. Though an independent Cyprus under communist regime would have led Cyprus to become just another "satelite" of imperialist USSR.

Anyway, under such political circumstances that AKEL inevitably become officially supporting Enosis; what's the meaning for TCs to stay in AKEL founded trade unions? As long as they stayed in those pro-Enosis trade unions, they would have been considered "pro-Enosis", "traitor", communist TCs; targeted by TMT and hated by all average TCs who were against Enosis. I tend to believe this was the main reason why TMT targeted and assassinated some TC trade unionists.

He held the leaders of the two communities responsible for the events of 1963-64 and he knew very well that it was difficult to live in peace on an island where blood had been shed. He also knew well that the Enosis policy of the Greek Cypriot Leadership was nothing more than supporting the idea of division. His expectations from AKEL were deep regarding this very issue. Tell the Greek Cypriot community the truth and drive them away from the Enosis policy! Otherwise he felt that the future of the Republic of Cyprus would be very dark.

Unfortunately AKEL’s attitude did not meet Kavazoglu’s expectations as the Party insisted on its own self-determination/Enosis decision and whilst doing so left Dervis Ali in a difficult situation. What Kavazoglu said to Vanezos makes clear the tragic situation that he had been dragged into: “Vanezos, I will carry on with this fight as I have been doing so up until this moment. (...) However AKEL’s Enosis policy is not helping me the least bit and puts me in a difficult situation. (...) How can I help build a Turkish-Greek Cypriot friendship as a member of AKEL? What can I say to the Turkish Cypriots that have cooperated with me about the AKEL Enosis policy, what will I say?” These lines clearly explain the tragic situation that Kavazoglu found himself trapped in.

Soon Kavazoğlu became a Don Xiote, "traitor", lonely TC communist, an embarassed AKEL member... The only way for his survival was to escape to a communist country or London as he escaped in 1958... however he prefered to stay in Cyprus; GC dominated areas, chased by both EOKA(the national front) and TMT...

With the article u translated in this thread, he obviously created a pro-EOKA, Enosist impression... Did some AKEL executives force him to write that article?
I don't believe as regard to Cyprus independence and bright future of Cypriot people his only problem was with Denktash, TMT and imperiaslists... In 1964 when he wrote that article, he had problems with GC national Front, Makarios and even AKEL.

He prefered only to harshly critisize Denktash, TMT and imperialists... Why? Had he been balanced, perhaps he wouldn't have been assassinated by TMT... Though still it hasn't been proved that he was assassinated by TMT.

All of your points make sense to me.

One has to remember that this article appeared in a communist party journal in Bulgaria at a time when this country was under Stalinist rule. This was a time of strict censorship there and the contents of the article would also have had to conform to the official party line there.

I only felt that this article was of interest in the way that it attempts to analyse the wiser political consequences of the imposition of TMT rule on the TC community.

I was told by someone who claims to have known Kavazoğlu personally that in private he was very critical of the direction being taken by AKEL on thing like the national question, but as a loyal party member he never made these qualms known in public. This is only heresay, but it tallys with what you have said above.

Before the formation of TMT, there had been several attempts of TCs getting organized under several organizations and fight against Enosis:

Kara Çete, 9 Eylül Cephesi and Volkan r the ones I know formed by pure TCs. They didn't have any guerilla training, they didn't have contemporary weapons... They all failed to lead a counter-struggle against EOKA and Enosists.

After 3 years the formation of EOKA and it's continueing activities in Cyprus with colloboration and cooperation of some Turkish militay personel, Right winged Turkish leadership formed TMT and began organizing TCs towards it's goal that was partition.

What alternatively could TC leadership or TC community do under the circumstances of late 50s and mid-60s?

It seems to me that everything had gone in perfect correlation of then the circumstances.

Was it just a chain of random events, each one causing the next, or was some kind of master plan or conspiracy behind it all? This is the fundamental question I ask myself and do not know the answer. I really appreciate this input from people like you with first-hand experience of events which helps me to better understand what went on.

I will redirect u some articles in Turkish that confirms my opinions abt formation of TMT:

http://www.kibrisgazetesi.com/index.php ... /Ana_sayfa

written by an ex-TMT member; now a journalist.

http://www.kibrisgazetesi.com/printa.ph ... 8&art=3895

In this article the same journalist A Tolgay make refference to a fierce opposition between Kara Çete and Volkan but does not mention anything abt the reasons behind this fierce opposition.

http://www.stwing.upenn.edu/~durduran/h ... _2006.html

An ex-Volkan member tells what he knows abt Volkan and it's activities. Here again, it confirms my opinions abt those TC resistance organizations.


http://www.yeniduzengazetesi.com/haber_ ... &print=yes

An ex-TMT man İsmail Bozkurt talks abt his memoirs.

The full story from 1954 to 1960 which u can reach by following the below link also confirms my opinions regarding the formation and activities of early TC resistance organizations.

CYPRUS 1954-1959
SGM Herbert A. Friedman (Ret.) and Brigadier General Ioannis Paschalidis

http://www.psywarrior.com/cyprus.html

Tim u will laugh a lot when u read the funny, amateurish first Volkan leaflet.


Now another question may spring to our minds...

Why did the formation of TMT, the first serious TC resitance organization take so long to be established?

1) TCs had already been struggling against EOKA and Enosis in British police auxiliaries. In the begining there was no need to form an EOKA alike TC organization... and maybe existence of similar organization would have caused more blood shed...

2) There was a possibility of GCs accepting Rad Cliff Plan in 1956 and later Mc Millan Plan in 1957. However none of these plans were accepted by then the Greek and GC leaderships. EOKA kept attacking British targets... Then came TMT with the same professional guerilla tactics of EOKA. After abt 8 months lasted TMT activities, Grivas had to accept a cease fire...

I have looked at the above sources.

I can't help feeling that we are talking at cross purposes. You are looking at events purely from within the Turkish Cypriot community. You set out from the genuine concerns that Turkish Cypriots in that period had about their security and future. The early home-made resistance organisations were too amateurish to avail those concerns, so it is no surprise that when the TMT, backed by the massive resources of Turkey's Special War Department, came along it was soon able to push these other organisations out of the way and managed to achieve things that were perceived to be beneficial to the community. This is what the articles you have quoted are saying.

What I am doing is to look at things from a broader perspective and ask if certain outside forces were not, in setting up the TMT under the direct aegis of the Turkish deep state, exploiting the genuine fears of the Turkish Cypriot community at the time and under the guise of assisting the Turkish Cypriots were not simply - as Özker Özgür would years later comment - using them to accomplish some greater historic goal.

Tim, there was no need for Turkey to use TC community to accomplish the common goal. A common goal that arised from common interests of vast majority of TCs and vast majority of Turkey. Extreme leftists and some of the leftists have different points of views regarding the issue but this does not change the fact that vast majority of TCs supported/supporting the collaboration and cooperation with Turkey for our interests.

The problem is, while GCs collaborating and cooperating with Greece for their own interests(politically, economically, culturally and militarilly); they have never allowed us to collaborate and cooperate with Turkey for our interests(politically, economically, culturally and militarilly).

Respect to be respected. Simple as that.

[insan]

"using them to accomplish some greater historic goal."

And the puzzle in this forum is the denial of many TC forumers to accept this. Even in the face of statements from the highest officials of Turkey, people like Ecevit- "we solved the Cyprus problem in 1974", "double union is out of the question because it would make Greece a Middle Eastern power", "ceding the Dodecanese to Greece was a huge mistake", or Kenan Evren "those who ask for the removal of Turkish troops from Cyprus know nothing about nationalism", and lately Erdoghan "what if people leave Cyprus, we have more people to put there", "we got what we wanted without ceding an inch of territory or removing one single soldier".

Even the daily increase of settlers, the arbitrary naturalisations, the rapid turkification of their surroundings are not enough indication for the TCs that something peculiar is happening in the north of Cyprus.

The TCs were obviously the major excuse for Turkey moving into Cyprus, and they are no longer needed as an excuse for the troops to stay, since a bigger excuse has been formed with the importation of settlers.

Not that the Greek side is free of historical blunders. Greece never wanted to get involved in Cyprus, this much is clear from the start of the Enosis campaign. It subsequently reversed policy for a few years and then again changed under the dictatorship who subscribed to the notion that the communist threat was bigger than any Turkish plans might have been. And again today when Greece is refusing to assert any rights and to be more visible in the settlement process.

As for the GCs, in the 40s and 50s the level of political sophistication, after centuries of colonialism, was less than zero. It was a time of black and white approaches to all issues. It is easy to criticise with hindsight, but who in the 50s would ever imagine that some day Cyprus would be a full member of the EU, or have a higher standard of living than either motherland? If only there had been a way to allow Cypriots to realise that their potenetial was bigger than becoming an outlying district of either Greece or Turkey things would be so different today.

None of the TCs denied Turkey and TCs have always had common interets(national, economical, security) in Cyprus.

However most of the GCs deny that Greece and GCs have common interests(national, economical, security)in Cyprus.

The only policy we have in common with Greece at the moment is that both our borders are under threat from a common enemy. Remove this risk and there will be no differences between bilateral relations with Greece and bilateral relations with Italy.

In her important interview, the Foreign Minister also refers to media reports about disagreements between Athens and Nicosia, and clarifies that “There is no conflict of interests between Greece and Cyprus, and that is why we have a common strategic objective.” She adds, however, that there may be a difference in tactical approach between the two governments. This, however, in no way means that there is a lack of communication or a lack of cooperation or coordination.

---------------------000000000000000000000-----------------------


Sounds lot like Akritas plan, eh?

Create impressions as if there r interest conflicts between Cyprus and Greece, impress the world how independent u r from Greece and accuse TCs having strong multi-lateral relations with Turkey.


------------------000000000000000000-------------------------------------

Journalist: Why do Greek and Cypriot interests conflict regarding Turkey’s accession course?



Ms. Bakoyannis: I’m taken aback by the reasoning behind that approach, which, allow me to say, in no way contributes to the effective protection of our common interests. There is certainly no conflict of Greek and Cypriot interests, and that is why we have a common strategic objective. And Athens and Nicosia are working together along this course.



Journalist: Do you consider the occasional media reports about a crisis in Athens-Nicosia relations to be groundless?



Ms. Bakoyannis: You give me another opportunity to make it clear that relations between Athens and Nicosia are very good and very close. We have common objectives – Greece and Cyprus – and it is inconceivable that we should take different paths. Beyond that, I have also said many times that there may be differences in the tactical approaches of the two governments. But this in no way means that there is a lack of communication or a lack of cooperation or coordination. Regarding the media reports, perhaps you should pose this question to your colleagues.

http://www.greekembassy.org/Embassy/con ... icle=18870

--------------------------------00000000000000000--------------------------

As if we r all too naive not to understand what goes behind-the-scenes...

[wyoming cowboy]

The problem with resolving the Cyprus situation, has nothing to do with the plight of the Turkish Cypriots, As Denktash stated, even if we wereent here Turkey would never allow Cyprus to fall into Greek hands. The problem with Cyprus is directly connected with the Aegean problem. In the event of war between Greece and Turkey, the only way Turkey could survive is to be able to keep its sea lanes open and its Anatolian east safe from Greek bombardmennts. Obviously in the Aegean the only two ports are in Smyrni and one north close to Constantinople, the other one is just north of cyprus Mersini. The ones in the Aegean (Constantinople,Smyrni) will be quickly destroyed and put out of commission, Since Turkey controls north Cyprus, it protects its southern port Mersini, and also protects its anatolian east from Greek bombardment through Greek bases on Cyprus. Therefore to get Turkey to comply to any peace solution will be very messy, because they wont for their ass is on theline.

[Nikitas]

Wyoming Cowboy,

The military considerations you mention might have been valid in the 50s and up to the early 70s. Since the advent of cruise missiles, both air and shipborne, they are no longer valid. Any medium sized country has these weapons and can turn any souther port of Turkey to glass in a few minutes. Turkey also has these weapons, so the probability that a medium power like Greece could use Cyprus against Turkey is also invalid.

As for major powers, well they have the means to turn the whole of Turkey and all other nations in the area to garbage very quickly. Again, such power makes Cyprus irrelevant as a base etc. The 6th Fleet is more powerful than all eastern Mediterranean navies put together and it seems to be doing just fine without Cyprus.