Tony,
I do accept that we (GC's) did terrible things. I don't pretent otherwise. However, I find a great reluctance by many TC's in this forum to accept the terrible things that the Turks have done to us. Mass killings occurred on both sides and the truth needs to be exposed for both GC's and TC's because many on both sides are still in denial about much of what has happened. The truth cuts both ways Tony. As an ex EOKAB supporter I'm sure you very well know that.
In any case, it is very admirable what you are doing and wish you every success in trying to expose the truth about Cyprus. My biggest issue with all of this is the excuses that are extracted from projects such as this by people that wish to perpertrate the division of our island rather than solving. Only by all sides accepting their wrongs can we move forward together.
Tony Angastiniotis answers to Cyprus Forum
by Kifeas » Tue Jul 19, 2005 3:50 pm
angastiniotis wrote:What most people don’t know is that I was a Greek nationalist that supported EOK B and I hated the Turks.
You mentioned that you were an ex-Eoka B supporter.
In view of the fact that only a small percentage of GCs were Eoka B supporters in those days and even fewer were actual participants in it, what made you side with such an extremist, criminal and fascist organisation in the first place, whose main activity before the 1974 coup was to bomb and kill other GCs?
Is it possible that since you admit you were conceptually on the wrong side then, to also be conceptually on the wrong side now? What I mean is, could you possibly have a tendency to just move from one extreme concept to another?
I haven't seen your documentary my self, can you direct me to where I could possibly find it? I am in Pafos now. Is it available on the Internet?
-
Kifeas - Main Contributor
- Posts: 4927
- Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 10:19 am
- Location: Lapithos, Kyrenia, now Pafos; Cyprus.
by angastiniotis » Tue Jul 19, 2005 3:57 pm
For the film see previous messages because time is short I must go.
My EOKA B believes came from my environment.
I have no side now.
Sorry I must go but I will come back Thursday
Thanks
My EOKA B believes came from my environment.
I have no side now.
Sorry I must go but I will come back Thursday
Thanks
- angastiniotis
- New Member
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 10:28 am
by gabaston » Tue Jul 19, 2005 4:55 pm
Tony
Ok you are after the hidden truth. Let me give you my understanding of it.
On the one hand you have gc who have been on Cyprus for 3000 years. They have been subjected to various rulers, and never ruled. They have been there in the majority. In the 1950’s they saw an opportunity to at last free themselves of foreign oppression and pursued such. A cause which I can sympathise with. Problem here was that although they suffered under ottoman rule, the 1950 tc’s were not rulers. Had there been no tc’s, then enosis would have been achieved. The problem from gc perspective boils down to Enosis as opposed to independence. Independence and not Enosis was granted.
From the other angle turkey had leased out cyprus to Britain in the same manner as china leased hong kong. As part of the surrender terms of ww1 britain annexed cyprus. The following revolution in turkey led by Mustafa kemal then ended the ottoman and sultan reign in turkey, seizing back lands which the last sultan bartered away for peace. The mood in turkey was that allowing cyprus to be given to Britain was wrong, but could do nothing about it.
So with gc fighting the british backed by Greece and turkish opinion being that the sultan gave away cyprus to the british wrongly, resentment grew in turkey that cyprus was now going to become part of Greece.
Whatever way you look it, I think it is down to Enosis. Turkey prepared itself for resisting cypriot union with Greece. Gc prepared itself for enosis. After independence had both tc and gc seen the sense of respecting each other as cypriots and not greeks or turks none of this would have happened. Greeks still called for enosis and turks said ok if you want enosis you can have it, but give us a bit too coz we don’t want that. Greeks refused, and then it kicked off………….Makarios claimed that he rejected Enosis.
Was that because he became leader of an independent state and as such he then changed his mind, or was it just to appease world opinion whilst carrying out a less visual form of ethnic cleansing on tcs with enosis still in mind -.this bit I’m not sure of. Tc opinion was he was trying to kill them and naturally resisted him, and did not trust him at all. The average gc was lead to believe that they now had the power and backing to revenge the ottoman times and at last justly rule all of cyprus. Turkey agreed to independence o the back of guarantor power. In the center of all this Makarios could not have kept everyone happy. Although he condemned attacks on tc’s his motive for such could have been that reasons for turkey implementing guarantor rights must at all times be avoided. There were other means he could and were being used to get rid of tc’s after all. Tc and turkey both realised this and the cia/turkey conspiracy idea of provoking the athens greek coup does make sense. If gc doctrine of gentle ethnic cleansing continued the tc gc ratio might well have be 1 to 6 maybe more by now. In another 50 years maybe 1 to 10. The coup and the invasion could have been hatched to prevent that.
In a nutshell that’s how I see it, everything else that happened was just detail that doesn’t really matter any more – the world is not really interested in who did what to who or why. Only a very few outsiders have ever known what really happened.
Turkey accepts that they will never rule in cyprus – they accepted that 50 years ago. Greece and now gc realize that enosis will never happen. Gc’s now realise they will never rule all of cyprus, but some still wish to – that is our present day problem. Despite what some think, tc can carry on for another thousand years being unrecognized, property stays cheap, tourists get value for money, the casinos bring in those who cant gamble in their own countries, and the place has a unique unspoilt flavour about it guaranteeing even more tourists.
Ok you are after the hidden truth. Let me give you my understanding of it.
On the one hand you have gc who have been on Cyprus for 3000 years. They have been subjected to various rulers, and never ruled. They have been there in the majority. In the 1950’s they saw an opportunity to at last free themselves of foreign oppression and pursued such. A cause which I can sympathise with. Problem here was that although they suffered under ottoman rule, the 1950 tc’s were not rulers. Had there been no tc’s, then enosis would have been achieved. The problem from gc perspective boils down to Enosis as opposed to independence. Independence and not Enosis was granted.
From the other angle turkey had leased out cyprus to Britain in the same manner as china leased hong kong. As part of the surrender terms of ww1 britain annexed cyprus. The following revolution in turkey led by Mustafa kemal then ended the ottoman and sultan reign in turkey, seizing back lands which the last sultan bartered away for peace. The mood in turkey was that allowing cyprus to be given to Britain was wrong, but could do nothing about it.
So with gc fighting the british backed by Greece and turkish opinion being that the sultan gave away cyprus to the british wrongly, resentment grew in turkey that cyprus was now going to become part of Greece.
Whatever way you look it, I think it is down to Enosis. Turkey prepared itself for resisting cypriot union with Greece. Gc prepared itself for enosis. After independence had both tc and gc seen the sense of respecting each other as cypriots and not greeks or turks none of this would have happened. Greeks still called for enosis and turks said ok if you want enosis you can have it, but give us a bit too coz we don’t want that. Greeks refused, and then it kicked off………….Makarios claimed that he rejected Enosis.
Was that because he became leader of an independent state and as such he then changed his mind, or was it just to appease world opinion whilst carrying out a less visual form of ethnic cleansing on tcs with enosis still in mind -.this bit I’m not sure of. Tc opinion was he was trying to kill them and naturally resisted him, and did not trust him at all. The average gc was lead to believe that they now had the power and backing to revenge the ottoman times and at last justly rule all of cyprus. Turkey agreed to independence o the back of guarantor power. In the center of all this Makarios could not have kept everyone happy. Although he condemned attacks on tc’s his motive for such could have been that reasons for turkey implementing guarantor rights must at all times be avoided. There were other means he could and were being used to get rid of tc’s after all. Tc and turkey both realised this and the cia/turkey conspiracy idea of provoking the athens greek coup does make sense. If gc doctrine of gentle ethnic cleansing continued the tc gc ratio might well have be 1 to 6 maybe more by now. In another 50 years maybe 1 to 10. The coup and the invasion could have been hatched to prevent that.
In a nutshell that’s how I see it, everything else that happened was just detail that doesn’t really matter any more – the world is not really interested in who did what to who or why. Only a very few outsiders have ever known what really happened.
Turkey accepts that they will never rule in cyprus – they accepted that 50 years ago. Greece and now gc realize that enosis will never happen. Gc’s now realise they will never rule all of cyprus, but some still wish to – that is our present day problem. Despite what some think, tc can carry on for another thousand years being unrecognized, property stays cheap, tourists get value for money, the casinos bring in those who cant gamble in their own countries, and the place has a unique unspoilt flavour about it guaranteeing even more tourists.
-
gabaston - Contributor
- Posts: 845
- Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 2:11 pm
by Alexis » Tue Jul 19, 2005 6:48 pm
Hi Gabaston, some comments on your views:
Agreed here, the average GCs aim in the 1950s was Enosis. This is undeniable, but should not be equated with elimination of TCs on the island (for the average GC that is).
At this point, the Greek-Turkish war broke out leading to the population exchanges of 1923. If Britain had not annexed Cyprus, she too would have been embroiled in this war. What no one can know is the result. The two extremes are:
1) Turkish forces take good command of Cyprus, and by the time population exchanges are being negotiated, many GCs have been deported from Cyprus or killed. In this event, any remaining GCs will probably end up as refugees in Greece, and Cyprus will become part of Turkey.
2) GCs wage an effective guerilla war against Turkish forces in Cyprus backed up by forces from Greece, preventing any mass deportations of
GCs from taking place and leading to deporations and killings of TCs. During negotiations for population exchanges, Cyprus is treated very much like Crete and the few TCs that remain are deported to Turkey. Cyprus becomes part of Greece.
Of course, this is all speculation. We can never know exactly what would have happened had Britain not annexed Cyprus.
In some respects yes, that's how it happened. But don't discount the impact Taksim had in all of this. Fine, GCs call for Enosis (with hindsight a very bad move), and TCs also say fine as long as they partition the island, but remember what this would have meant for Cyprus at the time. There was no one way to partition the island without creating major upheaval of the population and I'm sure you can understand why many GCs would not want this (think about the upheaval that eventual partition had on the island), the same way I can understand why TCs were against Enosis.
Exactly what Makarios' motives were I am not sure. I do believe many GCs had Enosis in mind (certainly in the early to mid sixties), and of course as a politician Makarios had to play to this. But let me re-iterate my previous point, whilst the average GC of the time was all for Enosis that does not mean they wanted to rid the island of Turkish Cypriots.
This whole business of 'revenging the Ottoman times', was not at the forefront of GCs mind in my opinion. It's already been pointed out that Ottoman rule could have been far worse. Whether through GC propaganda or the actions of the TC leadership (probably both in combination) most GCs were convinced that the TC aim was partition of the island and this is what fuelled (in my opinion) the hatred for TCs at the time. It's no coincidence that most speculators were expecting a Turkish invasion at any point from 1963 onwards, and this was always at the back of GCs minds at this time. Many cypriots from both communities had lived together in peace for many years, and whilst they didn't tend to mix (mainly due to religious differences), they did run businesses together and generally got on.
There are some GCs that hold on to Enosis, and some hold onto the wish to dominate Cyprus. Greek nationalism has had a lot to answer for here. Equally so, I think some TCs think they can still have their own state at the expense of some GC refugees. Have a look at the Zurich Agreements one more time, if anything seems to jump out it is the lengths to which the provisions go to preventing both union with Greece and Partition of the island. Both these options would have been to the detriment of one side or the other.
Our present day problem is not down to one side or the other, the stalemate we find ourselves in is caused by both sides.
On the one hand you have gc who have been on Cyprus for 3000 years. They have been subjected to various rulers, and never ruled. They have been there in the majority. In the 1950’s they saw an opportunity to at last free themselves of foreign oppression and pursued such. A cause which I can sympathise with. Problem here was that although they suffered under ottoman rule, the 1950 tc’s were not rulers. Had there been no tc’s, then enosis would have been achieved. The problem from gc perspective boils down to Enosis as opposed to independence. Independence and not Enosis was granted.
Agreed here, the average GCs aim in the 1950s was Enosis. This is undeniable, but should not be equated with elimination of TCs on the island (for the average GC that is).
From the other angle turkey had leased out cyprus to Britain in the same manner as china leased hong kong. As part of the surrender terms of ww1 britain annexed cyprus. The following revolution in turkey led by Mustafa kemal then ended the ottoman and sultan reign in turkey, seizing back lands which the last sultan bartered away for peace. The mood in turkey was that allowing cyprus to be given to Britain was wrong, but could do nothing about it.
At this point, the Greek-Turkish war broke out leading to the population exchanges of 1923. If Britain had not annexed Cyprus, she too would have been embroiled in this war. What no one can know is the result. The two extremes are:
1) Turkish forces take good command of Cyprus, and by the time population exchanges are being negotiated, many GCs have been deported from Cyprus or killed. In this event, any remaining GCs will probably end up as refugees in Greece, and Cyprus will become part of Turkey.
2) GCs wage an effective guerilla war against Turkish forces in Cyprus backed up by forces from Greece, preventing any mass deportations of
GCs from taking place and leading to deporations and killings of TCs. During negotiations for population exchanges, Cyprus is treated very much like Crete and the few TCs that remain are deported to Turkey. Cyprus becomes part of Greece.
Of course, this is all speculation. We can never know exactly what would have happened had Britain not annexed Cyprus.
Whatever way you look it, I think it is down to Enosis. Turkey prepared itself for resisting cypriot union with Greece. Gc prepared itself for enosis. After independence had both tc and gc seen the sense of respecting each other as cypriots and not greeks or turks none of this would have happened. Greeks still called for enosis and turks said ok if you want enosis you can have it, but give us a bit too coz we don’t want that. Greeks refused, and then it kicked off………….Makarios claimed that he rejected Enosis.
In some respects yes, that's how it happened. But don't discount the impact Taksim had in all of this. Fine, GCs call for Enosis (with hindsight a very bad move), and TCs also say fine as long as they partition the island, but remember what this would have meant for Cyprus at the time. There was no one way to partition the island without creating major upheaval of the population and I'm sure you can understand why many GCs would not want this (think about the upheaval that eventual partition had on the island), the same way I can understand why TCs were against Enosis.
Was that because he became leader of an independent state and as such he then changed his mind, or was it just to appease world opinion whilst carrying out a less visual form of ethnic cleansing on tcs with enosis still in mind -.this bit I’m not sure of. Tc opinion was he was trying to kill them and naturally resisted him, and did not trust him at all. The average gc was lead to believe that they now had the power and backing to revenge the ottoman times and at last justly rule all of cyprus. Turkey agreed to independence o the back of guarantor power. In the center of all this Makarios could not have kept everyone happy. Although he condemned attacks on tc’s his motive for such could have been that reasons for turkey implementing guarantor rights must at all times be avoided. There were other means he could and were being used to get rid of tc’s after all. Tc and turkey both realised this and the cia/turkey conspiracy idea of provoking the athens greek coup does make sense. If gc doctrine of gentle ethnic cleansing continued the tc gc ratio might well have be 1 to 6 maybe more by now. In another 50 years maybe 1 to 10. The coup and the invasion could have been hatched to prevent that.
Exactly what Makarios' motives were I am not sure. I do believe many GCs had Enosis in mind (certainly in the early to mid sixties), and of course as a politician Makarios had to play to this. But let me re-iterate my previous point, whilst the average GC of the time was all for Enosis that does not mean they wanted to rid the island of Turkish Cypriots.
This whole business of 'revenging the Ottoman times', was not at the forefront of GCs mind in my opinion. It's already been pointed out that Ottoman rule could have been far worse. Whether through GC propaganda or the actions of the TC leadership (probably both in combination) most GCs were convinced that the TC aim was partition of the island and this is what fuelled (in my opinion) the hatred for TCs at the time. It's no coincidence that most speculators were expecting a Turkish invasion at any point from 1963 onwards, and this was always at the back of GCs minds at this time. Many cypriots from both communities had lived together in peace for many years, and whilst they didn't tend to mix (mainly due to religious differences), they did run businesses together and generally got on.
In a nutshell that’s how I see it, everything else that happened was just detail that doesn’t really matter any more – the world is not really interested in who did what to who or why. Only a very few outsiders have ever known what really happened.
Turkey accepts that they will never rule in cyprus – they accepted that 50 years ago. Greece and now gc realize that enosis will never happen. Gc’s now realise they will never rule all of cyprus, but some still wish to – that is our present day problem.
There are some GCs that hold on to Enosis, and some hold onto the wish to dominate Cyprus. Greek nationalism has had a lot to answer for here. Equally so, I think some TCs think they can still have their own state at the expense of some GC refugees. Have a look at the Zurich Agreements one more time, if anything seems to jump out it is the lengths to which the provisions go to preventing both union with Greece and Partition of the island. Both these options would have been to the detriment of one side or the other.
Our present day problem is not down to one side or the other, the stalemate we find ourselves in is caused by both sides.
- Alexis
- Contributor
- Posts: 405
- Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2005 3:36 pm
- Location: UK
by gabaston » Tue Jul 19, 2005 8:09 pm
Alexis
Thanks for your reasoned response,. much of which I can agree with.
Like you I cant put my finger on the Makarios motives. Having become president he may have acquired a liking to being a national leader and buddying up with other leaders etc..Maybe he thought cypriots would be better off under their own rule as opposed to Athens. With so many differing factions to appease it is quite possible that his reaction to the constitution in 63 was out no pure frustration at trying to please everyone (an impossible task).
Re the turkish greek wars of 23 I admit to knowing very little about this. My understanding is that Turkish military resources were at full stretch. Especially regarding naval power, hence all the islands off the west coast of turkey are greek.
I also believe that enosis did not equate with killing tc. However thinking that tc would have happily accepted being under greek control, seems a bit idealistic. It should have been understood that tc’s would never have wanted such a thing, much in the same way that tc accepts gc could not possibly live under Turkish rule. .
Yes there would have been upheaval for taksim, but without enosis there would have been no need for taksim, and if you want something you have to pay its price. The price was upheaval. The other two alternatives were tc accepts enosis (impossible), or war.
Anyway today we are faced with this situation. I think we’ll still be in exactly the same position in thirty years time. Where do you see us?
Thanks for your reasoned response,. much of which I can agree with.
Like you I cant put my finger on the Makarios motives. Having become president he may have acquired a liking to being a national leader and buddying up with other leaders etc..Maybe he thought cypriots would be better off under their own rule as opposed to Athens. With so many differing factions to appease it is quite possible that his reaction to the constitution in 63 was out no pure frustration at trying to please everyone (an impossible task).
Re the turkish greek wars of 23 I admit to knowing very little about this. My understanding is that Turkish military resources were at full stretch. Especially regarding naval power, hence all the islands off the west coast of turkey are greek.
I also believe that enosis did not equate with killing tc. However thinking that tc would have happily accepted being under greek control, seems a bit idealistic. It should have been understood that tc’s would never have wanted such a thing, much in the same way that tc accepts gc could not possibly live under Turkish rule. .
Yes there would have been upheaval for taksim, but without enosis there would have been no need for taksim, and if you want something you have to pay its price. The price was upheaval. The other two alternatives were tc accepts enosis (impossible), or war.
Anyway today we are faced with this situation. I think we’ll still be in exactly the same position in thirty years time. Where do you see us?
-
gabaston - Contributor
- Posts: 845
- Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 2:11 pm
by Michael Coumas » Tue Jul 19, 2005 11:06 pm
Tony - well done, you have eloquently put what many of us wish. A Cyprus for Cypriots with each side accepting its wrong doing then moving forward to peace, trust and harmonious living. I hope I live long enough to see it happen, then, as a Greek speaking Cypriot I can die with a smile of contentment.
Keep up the good work.
Keep up the good work.
- Michael Coumas
- Member
- Posts: 149
- Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 12:56 am
- Location: Limassol
by detailer » Wed Jul 20, 2005 12:05 am
I haven't seen your documentary my self, can you direct me to where I could possibly find it? I am in Pafos now. Is it available on the Internet?
Kifeas, look at the atca website...
http://www.atcanews.org/movies/atrocities.rm
-
detailer - Contributor
- Posts: 454
- Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 7:09 pm
by gabaston » Wed Jul 20, 2005 3:34 am
alexis
further to previous post.
regarding the invasion and observers expecting it. i remember it well and the years before that. the actual invasion came as a complete shock to most tcc especially me. i remember the diplomatic tooing and froing of a few days and did not expect any military action. it seemed that turkey acted so straight out of the book, consulting first with Greece and Ecevits trip to consult with Britain, that the whole thing was pre-planned.
Britain was a guarantor power, but did nothing to stop the coup. It all seems too neat and tidy to have been spontaneous. these are just my thoughts though. still many questions to be asked, like if states and britain did start the coup why did they not recognise tc..................international politics is a weird place huh?
further to previous post.
regarding the invasion and observers expecting it. i remember it well and the years before that. the actual invasion came as a complete shock to most tcc especially me. i remember the diplomatic tooing and froing of a few days and did not expect any military action. it seemed that turkey acted so straight out of the book, consulting first with Greece and Ecevits trip to consult with Britain, that the whole thing was pre-planned.
Britain was a guarantor power, but did nothing to stop the coup. It all seems too neat and tidy to have been spontaneous. these are just my thoughts though. still many questions to be asked, like if states and britain did start the coup why did they not recognise tc..................international politics is a weird place huh?
-
gabaston - Contributor
- Posts: 845
- Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 2:11 pm
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests
© 2002 - 2015 Cyprus-Forum.com
