Cyprus-Forum.com

[Alexios]

People somehow avoid to respond to my original plea for a clear apology to each other, chosing instead an easier round about way of saying yes, but,however etc.Its a first very welcomed step, however we need to surpass ourselves and find the necessary bravery to say yes , I apologise for any atrocity committed under any circumstances.After all we did not commit them.Very few of those who actually did(although there are exceptions) will ever do. So we must do it on their behalf, if only to pass a message to the guilty (especially those who gave the orders) that we know what went on....

Mr Blackley
The book "The First Division" by Makarios Drousiotis is also a good source if you not already read it.

[insan]

Mr Clackley

I am half learned on the issue and thats worse than been completely ignorant..So i can neither agree or disagree on Makarios stance on armed struggle, atleast during its set up.
I would be grateful if you provide me with any facts on how many T/Cs were executed during the EOKA struggle? I mean ofcourse by the original EOKA in the period 1955-1959.Historians in Cyprus argue that these were a minute number both in absolute terms but especially as a percentage compared to the number of leftists and other anti EOKA G/Cs.

Turkish Cypriots, as such, were never the target of Eoka in the 50's. Perhaps some TC members of the colonial police might have been affected, but this was not because of the person behind the uniform but what the Uniform represented. Such was the extend of non-targeting that the Turkish Cypriot TMT that was established around 1957-58, engineered ways to provoke such attacks. The first worth mentioning bi-communal attacks were noticed and marked in 1958 when TCs, acting under TMT orders, attacked many GC shops situated inside or adjacent to the TC quarters of Nicosia, burning and destroying many shops and forcing the owners to close them down permanently and move to other locations. A Similar action like the pogrom against Greeks in Istanbul in 1955, but in a smaller case. Then the next massive attack was the ambushing and slaughtering in the Ayios Vasilios /Skylloura fields of 8 GCs by TC extremists from the nearby Cionelly village, again in 1958. All these actions were aiming at provoking the EOKA to turn against the TC community, with the sole aim to justify and legitimise Turkey's political involvement in the Cyprus issue. Yet, even after such actions, any EOKA retaliation against TCs remained to a very minimum level, at least during the years before “independence” in 1960.

Kifeas,

In the 50's, before the EOKA struggle was started by the fascist Grivas and his well trained GC sabotage team, there already was a cold war between GC elite and TC elite because of the ENOSIS dream of GC-Greek dream. The seeds of Enosis were sown in late 1800s in Cyprus. Then in the 50s it was evolved into ENOSIS with Greece.

You say TCs weren't target of EOKA in the 50's. Are you sure? It is better to say TCs weren't the primary target of EOKA because it would be stupid to try eliminating TCs while Cyprus was under British rule.

Did you expect TCs to help Grivas for annexing Cyprus to Greece? Of course TCs would have taken side with the Brits under the then circumstances.

There was no need for Brits to divide and rule the two communities. The Hellenic elite(especially the priests) had already divided the two communities.

What did you expect from the TC nationalists, extremists and even the ordinary TCs to do under the then circumstances while GC nationalists and extremists was struggling to annex Cyprus with Greece? What did you expect TCs to do when they heard that in the church %96 of GC community gave support to union with Greece in 1950?


Now put yourself into the place of any type of TC and tell me what would have you done under the then circumstances?

a) I would have given support or watched GC terrorists annexing Cyprus to Greece.

b) I would have initiated a counter movement to annex a part of Cyprus to Turkey.

c) I would have taken side with Brits in order to stop GC terrorists annexing Cyprus with Greece.

d) None of the above.

[Alexios]

I am still waiting for your response...

[andytandreou]

People somehow avoid to respond to my original plea for a clear apology to each other, choosing instead an easier round about way of saying yes, but,however etc.I

I am still waiting for your response...

Alexios please stop what you're doing... This is not your thread and it's DEFINITELY NOT entitled "Apology time"... You have hijacked this thread from Tony and from all of us... Nobody is interested in apologizing becaus my friend it's the state who needs to apologize not it's people (I know you might argue this but don't I'm not interested). We are all trying to make a conversation about a film made by Tony A. and each time we post something you pop up like a jack-in-the-box saying that we are avoiding your issue. Please stop and go make another thread instead of overpowering your way into this popular discussion.

[Alexios]

Alexios please stop what you're doing... This is not your thread and it's DEFINITELY NOT entitled "Apology time"... You have hijacked this thread from Tony and from all of us... Nobody is interested in apologizing becaus my friend it's the state who needs to apologize not it's people (I know you might argue this but don't I'm not interested). We are all trying to make a conversation about a film made by Tony A. and each time we post something you pop up like a jack-in-the-box saying that we are avoiding your issue. Please stop and go make another thread instead of overpowering your way into this popular discussion.[/quote]

Had a made another threat, would you apologise?? Besides the State may never apologise or atleast it will not apologise unless they feel popular pressure.People need to apologise even though they are not directly responsible sinece in many cases they knew what was going on and simply stood idle..

[Kifeas]

Kifeas,

In the 50's, before the EOKA struggle was started by the fascist Grivas and his well trained GC sabotage team, there already was a cold war between GC elite and TC elite because of the ENOSIS dream of GC-Greek dream. The seeds of Enosis were sown in late 1800s in Cyprus. Then in the 50s it was evolved into ENOSIS with Greece.

You say TCs weren't target of EOKA in the 50's. Are you sure? It is better to say TCs weren't the primary target of EOKA because it would be stupid to try eliminating TCs while Cyprus was under British rule.

Did you expect TCs to help Grivas for annexing Cyprus to Greece? Of course TCs would have taken side with the Brits under the then circumstances.

There was no need for Brits to divide and rule the two communities. The Hellenic elite(especially the priests) had already divided the two communities.

What did you expect from the TC nationalists, extremists and even the ordinary TCs to do under the then circumstances while GC nationalists and extremists was struggling to annex Cyprus with Greece? What did you expect TCs to do when they heard that in the church %96 of GC community gave support to union with Greece in 1950?


Now put yourself into the place of any type of TC and tell me what would have you done under the then circumstances?

a) I would have given support or watched GC terrorists annexing Cyprus to Greece.

b) I would have initiated a counter movement to annex a part of Cyprus to Turkey.

c) I would have taken side with Brits in order to stop GC terrorists annexing Cyprus with Greece.

d) None of the above.

Insan,

What I said in relation to the pre-1960 period was basically of a descriptive nature. It was not my intention to make a moral judgment of the events and actions, nor to make a moral judgment of the assumptions and hypothesis behind these events.

Your question pertain to a moral evaluation of each side’s plans, assumptions and actions. If you want a straight answer to your question, I would vote for (d) which is "none of the above."

It is a well-known fact that almost the entire of the GC community wanted to bring an end the colonial ruling in Cyprus and Unite the island with Greece. Was this desire, which became a target and aim, a morally correct one? I believe it was. Why? Because the British on the one hand ware a colonial (an occupying) power in Cyprus, without the approval of the Cypriot people, while Union with Greece was a political desire that was shared by the 82% of the Cypriots, i.e. the vast majority of the indigenous people of the island. This is not the first case in world history in which the people of a small territory or an island with a very small population and size aspire to join (unite) with a larger country with which they feel they have common bonds, instead of striving for a complete independence, all within the scope of exercising their self-determination rights. This is something that occurred with practically every large nation in the world. Turkey and Greece are no exception to this rule as they acquired many territories on this basis, i.e. of having majority populations from their “own” stock and culture.

You will ask me of course, what about the TCs? Weren’t the TCs also morally correct not to want the British to live Cyprus or to want Partition of the island between Greece and Turkey? I believe they were not! Why? Because they were a minority (18%: 82%) but equally important, they were virtually scattered around the island and almost totally mixed up with the GCs. In order to partition the island between Turkey and Greece, it would have required the violation of many people’s basic human rights. It would have required the “uprooting” of people from one location and “planting” them into another, from both sides, causing numerous grieve, misfortunate and loss of livelihoods and properties. Something similar to what eventually happened in 1974. The mere Union of the entire island with another country is a political act, which wouldn’t necessarily affect the basic (fundamental) human rights of the people. Partition of the island was a political act that would have affected these fundamental human rights, i.e., the rights of people to continue to remain to attached to their ancestral lands, homes, village societies and properties, irrespective of the overall changes in the political framework of a country. Union of the entire island with another country would have changed the way people’s political rights are exercised and observed but it wouldn’t necessarily affect their fundamental human rights. Partition of the island in the way the TC community envisioned it, it would have affected those rights because it would have required the displacement of people. Whenever a political aspiration, goal, or act (like Union and Partition,) is in direct conflict and collision with the enjoyment of people’s fundamental human rights, what pertains in hierarchical terms (in terms of priority,) is the protection and /or respect and /or observation of people’s human rights.

Had the TCs been traditionally living in a separate unified area of Cyprus by themselves or in an area in which they would traditionally have had a substantial majority, and the GCs (the overall majority of the island,) still wanted to unite the entire island with Greece, then Yes, the TCs would have perfectly been morally justified to want to partition this area and unite it with Turkey or whatever else they would like to do with it. However, as we know, this was not the case.

Had the GCs, or Greece itself, within the scope of a Union of the island with Greece, envisioned a subsequent elimination of the TCs from Cyprus or had envisioned the political, social and cultural suppression or assimilation of the TCs after a Union was achieved, then Yes, the TCs had every moral right to obstruct the Union but not to set up partition as a counter goal, for the reasons I explained above. This issue can only be dealt on the basis of assumptions and hypothesis. The GCs and Greece claim they never envisioned and they never expressed such a thing to be in their intentions. The TCs claim they were more than certain that this would have been the case. In fact they base this claim on the example of the island of Crete, in which the Turkish speaking population was “exchanged” together with the Greeks of Asia Minor in the 20’s. However, these things (population exchanges and /or forceful expulsions,) were phenomena that took place almost everywhere in the Balkans and Europe, prior to World War II. This era (1950’s) was an era in which the UN organization together with the Chart of the UN came into existence, together with various other treaties and the set up of international courts, which all together envisioned the protection of minorities and all people’s in general, fundamental human, political and cultural rights.
We do not know and obviously we will never know what would have been the case in Cyprus, simply because Union with Greece did not happen. I tent to personally believe that the fears of the TC community for suppression, assimilation and /or expulsion from Cyprus were over-exaggerated, due to the reasons I explained above, although they constituted perfectly legitimate concerns.

This is my evaluation as far as the moral of the story is concerned. Going to the political sphere of the whole issue, I would say that the GCs, although it is my firm believe that they were morality justified in their desire for Enosis (Union,) they were definately politically wrong. This claim is proved and solidified by the events of the aftermath, up to this day. The goal of Enosis was wrong from a political perspective and instead there should have been a goal for complete independence in its place. This goal should have remained a civil one (not an armed one,) for at least as long as it would have been proved beyond doubt that Britain had no intention to concede to the granting of independence. Furthermore, this pro-independence, non-violent (at least at the beginning,) political goal should have been defined in such a way as to embraced and incorporate the TC community as well. Unfortunately this had not been the case.

You asked me what the TCs should have done under these circumstances. As I said before, I firmly believe that the TCs were not morally justified to set up Partition as a counter reactionary goal. The fact that they were a minority scattered around the island and mixed up with the GCs, did not justify morally such a goal, in the same way that it morally justified Union for the GCs. From the moment a goal is not morally justified, then it cannot be politically justified as well.

I believe the TC leadership of the time, should have first approached at least the moderate part of the GC leadership and express their concerns, fears and reservations towards the goal of Enosis. They should have explained the consequences that this might have had both in terms of their fate as a community, the possible reaction and involvement of Turkey and the reaction of the nationalists both within their community and in Turkey. They should have tried as much as possible to convince the GC leadership, at least the moderate one, that the goal should be changed to that of independence through the use of civil methods and that in such a case the TC community will also be willing to co-operate and /or participate into this venture. This would have been a politically correct approach in behalf of the TCs. If this had failed to produce any results, then they should have approached the British and make it clear that should the GCs prove successful in their Enosis adventure and Britain is forced to concede to Enosis, then Britain owes to take all measures and arrangements so that their social and cultural autonomy and communal identity is protect to the maximum and one way to achieve this would be to grand to the TC community a substantial degree of regional autonomy in as many as possible areas in which there were larger concentrations of TC populations, in addition to -and on top of the full enjoyment of all their political rights as individuals, within the context of a Cyprus that might have been united with Greece. They should have also made this Clear to the GCs, Greece and they should have also asked for this the help of Turkey and the rest of the international community. They should have never set up partition as a counter goal, nor should have sided with the British in their fighting to suppress the GC’s desire and actions for Enosis. This in my opinion would have been the most appropriate approach and stance from a moral and a political correctness perspective.

The roots of all the problems we faced in Cyprus, although the ordinary people of the two communities had the best of relationships in their everyday lives, stem from the fact that our community leaderships almost never had any good relations with each other and there was always mistrust and resentment of the one towards the other. They never bothered to talk to each other sincerely and they were always taking partisan approaches without taking into consideration the concerns of the individual people of the other community. What are to be blamed for this reality, in my opinion, are the lack of political maturity (being a colony how would this could have been developed anyway?) and the lack of broadmindedness and vision on behalf of the leaderships of the two communities but also the way by which this was manipulated by the British for their own purpose and benefit.

My two cents Insan!

[BirKibrisli]

People somehow avoid to respond to my original plea for a clear apology to each other, chosing instead an easier round about way of saying yes, but,however etc.Its a first very welcomed step, however we need to surpass ourselves and find the necessary bravery to say yes , I apologise for any atrocity committed under any circumstances.After all we did not commit them.Very few of those who actually did(although there are exceptions) will ever do. So we must do it on their behalf, if only to pass a message to the guilty (especially those who gave the orders) that we know what went on....

Mr Blackley
The book "The First Division" by Makarios Drousiotis is also a good source if you not already read it.

Alexios,I agree with you.Governments will never apologise for their atrocities unless they are forced to do so.
I want to apologise for all the atrocities committed by Turkish Cypriots against their Greek Cypriot brothers and sisters. This apology is coming from a Turkish Cypriot whose great Uncle was killed by one fanatical Greek Cypriot at age 86 while he lay in his sickbed.Because Alexios has apologised on his behalf I hereby accept the apology and forgive that person for his sin.May God forgive him as well.

[Alexios]

Alexios,I agree with you.Governments will never apologise for their atrocities unless they are forced to do so.
I want to apologise for all the atrocities committed by Turkish Cypriots against their Greek Cypriot brothers and sisters. This apology is coming from a Turkish Cypriot whose great Uncle was killed by one fanatical Greek Cypriot at age 86 while he lay in his sickbed.Because Alexios has apologised on his behalf I hereby accept the apology and forgive that person for his sin.May God forgive him as well.[/quote]

This is the type of courageous response we need.Enough hiding behind our fingers .