Cyprus-Forum.com

[Oracle]

Much is made of Enosis as the reason for Turkey's occupation of Cyprus.

Here is an article from Feb. 1964 which proves Makarios was asking for assurances to Independence and Territorial Integrity for Cyprus -- as he saw it slipping away at the hands of Turkey, Britain and the USA.


"The sources said he would be forced to resort to such an unusual step if Britain, Turkey and America continued to oppose the adoption of a resolution which would guarantee the island's independence and territorial integrity."


http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1 ... 26,4231312

N.B. Neither Greece nor Makarios sought Enosis.

Indeed, it was the three belligerent and absolute foreigners, Britain, Turkey and USA, which contrived to deny a guarantee to respect Cyprus' Independence and Integrity!

How can you be demanding territorial integrity when the Turks could just excuse their behavior as Apartheid for security and control?

Silly woman!

"Independence and Territorial Integrity" for the whole island. This article is from 1964 not 1974!

Paphitis, will you stop highlighting your ignorance on every issue!

You stopped making sense a long time ago

[erolz3]

Please do keep this up Oracle.

Why should what YOU say have overriding authority over what Makarios actually stated. He did not have the benefit of hindsight as you possess, so what he said was how things stood.

This has nothing to do with what I say overriding what makarios said or anything to do with hindsight.

YOUR assertion (not Makrios' but YOURS) is that because Markios sought to abbrogate the treaties of guarantee by seeking a UN resolution which would guarantee the island's independence and territorial integrity is proof that he did not seek enosis.

My assertion , opposed to YOURS, is this is sheer nonsense. The REASON why it is nonsense is that such an action is exactly what would be needed in order to achieve enosis.

So Makarios seeking this action is not proof that he did seek enosis but neither is it proof that he did not.

It is a FACT that your cited newpaper report details Makarios' attempts to have the treaty of gurantee abbrogated via a UN resolution which would guarantee the island's independence and territorial integrity. It is a FACT that such an action is detailed in the Akrtias plan ans an essential step necessary in order to achieve enosis.

What is not fact, but conclusion on your part, and the most absurd conslusion at that, is that Makarios acting in ways that the Akritas plan says are essential to achieve enosis is proof that he did not seek enosis.

This is a conclusion that I call nonsense and absurd, because it is nonsense and absurd.

The insurmountable thing that could prevent enosis would be Turkish military invasions.

That's presuming Enosis was alive and kicking. Which this article proves was not the case.

Firstly the article you cite as proof is no such thing and putting the word proof in bold does not change that. Do you even understand what proof is ?

What the Akritas plan clearly states is that if you want to achieve enosis, you have to first remove the treaty of gurantee and that its best ot talk of indpendance and not enosis. It is a fact that the akritas plan says this.

So whether enosis is alive or kicking or not, and whether Makarios supports it or not, seeking to abbrogate the treaty of gurantee via a UN resolution which would guarantee the island's independence and territorial integrity is absolutely 100% consistent with what the authors of the Akritas plan saw as necessary to achieve enosis.

Yet this action that is totaly consistent with what the authors of the Akritas plan saw as necessary to achieve enosis, is YOUR 'proof' that Makarios did not seek enosis. Can you not see how absurd that is ?

He was purusing this as a removel of the biggest obstacle to achieving enosis.

That's your presumption, again, and does not relate to facts as they unfolded.

No it is not my presumption. It what the authors of the Akritas plan clearly state is necessary in order to achieve enosis. Not me saying this but the authors of the Akritas plan saying it.

Regardless of if Makarios did seek enosis or did not, the attempt to abbrogate the treaty of guarantee via a UN resolution which would guarantee the island's independence and territorial integrity is what the authors of the Akritas plan said was a necessary step to achieve enosis.

That is all fact.

You then claim this action by Makarios, as reported in the newspaper article you cite, that is totaly consistent with what the akritas plan says is necessary to achieve enosis is 'proof' that Makarios did not seek enosis.

Can you not see how absurd such a claim is ?

Your 'argument' is , because Makarios in 64 followed a strategy of trying to negate the treaty of guarantee in the UN, the most important necessity if the only insurmountable danger to achieving enosis was to be removed, and said the word Independant whilst attemptiong to do this, this proves that he did not want enosis.

Tosh and rubbish What Independent country needs "Treaties of Guarantees"? It was precisely the wish to gain full Independence from these Guarantees which made Turkey's blood boil.

Indpendance, that is the 'extra' indpendance of after 1960 having the treaties of gurantee abbrogagted and the consitutional rights of the TC community abbrogated could be an end in itself or it could be a means to the end of enosis.

Support for one is not proof of support for the other and NEITHER is it proof of no support for the other.

It is prefectly possible that someone who supported 'independance' at that time (abbrogation of treaty of guarantee and TC rights) did so because they sought indpendance and ONLY independance just as it is perfectly possible that someone supported that kind of indpendance because it was an essential stage necessary to achieve enosis.

An expression of support for 'indpendance' neither proves or disproves a desire for enosis, for if you desire enosis then 'independance' is a necessary prerequist.

What your article confirms is that Makarions was following the same steps laid out in the Akritas plan as necessary in order to achieve enosis.

Rubbish. Show how. Merely stating does not make it so.

I have already shown that this is the case but I will do it once more for you.

The Akritas plan lays a sequence of steps necessary to achieve enosis ans well as tatics to be used.

From the 'tactics'

Further, it is estimated that we have better chances of succeeding in our efforts to influence international public opinion in our favour if we present our demand, as we did during the struggle, as a demand to exercise the right of self-determination, rather than as a demand for union with Greece (Enosis)

From the 'actions to be taken'

a) Amendment of the negative elements of the agreements and parallel abandonment of the Treaties of Guarantee and Alliance. This step is necessary because the need for amendments of the negative aspects of the treaties is generally accepted internationally and is considered justified (we can even justify unilateral action), while at the same time intervention from outside to prevent us amending them is unjustified and inapplicable;

From your newspaper article

The talks have been bogged down on Cyprus's demand for Security Council guarantees of her territorial integrity. Britain, the U.S. and Turkey are unwilling to accept any formula which would seem to invalidate the 1960 treaty by which Britain, Greece and Turkey are guarantors.
President Makarios, of Cyprus, has said he wants the treaty abrogated.

Clearly this is exactly what the Akritas plan says is necessary in order to achieve enosis.

There can be no doubt in any sane persons mind that what Makarios was attempting to achieve in the UN as detailed by your article is what is detailed in the Akritas plan as necessary to achieve enosis.

Now this is NOT proof that Makrios DID seek ensosis but is is also sure as eggs is eggs not proof that he did NOT support enosis, which is YOUR absurd contention.

If he asking for Independence and Territorial Integrity only a fool could decide he knows better and attempt to put words in his mouth.

A fool would be someone that claims that Makarios persuing the very objectives the Akritas plan say are esssential to achieve in order to secure enosis is proof that Makarios did not seek enosis. Do you know anyone like this Oracle ?

I am about removing the Turkish influence. No more, no less.

And clearly for you these ends justify any means, including the total perversion of historical reality fact and truth. The sad part is that your 'means' of systematicaly trying to distort historical reality only takes you further from achieving your desired ends not closer and you are to obstiante to see this.

You can either believe an unbiased article, written AT the time, ....

I believe the article Oracle, what I do not believe is YOUR assertion that it consistutes proof that Makarios (at this specific point in time) did not seek enosis because such an assertion is nonsense.

[Murataga]

Much is made of Enosis as the reason for Turkey's occupation of Cyprus.

Here is an article from Feb. 1964 which proves Makarios was asking for assurances to Independence and Territorial Integrity for Cyprus -- as he saw it slipping away at the hands of Turkey, Britain and the USA.


"The sources said he would be forced to resort to such an unusual step if Britain, Turkey and America continued to oppose the adoption of a resolution which would guarantee the island's independence and territorial integrity."


http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1 ... 26,4231312

N.B. Neither Greece nor Makarios sought Enosis.

Indeed, it was the three belligerent and absolute foreigners, Britain, Turkey and USA, which contrived to deny a guarantee to respect Cyprus' Independence and Integrity!

Bullshit.

From "My Deposition" by Glafcos Clerides
(Alithia Publishing, 1990, Volume III, p. 270)

"I returned to Cyprus and reported to Makarios on my talks in Athens. I asked if, after assurances given by Papadhopoulos, he would agree for article 185 of the 1960 Constitution, which prohibited both ENOSIS and partition, to be incorporated in the new constitution. He raised his arms, which were resting on his desk and said: "You see, Glafcos, these hands, they can cut them off, but I will NOT sign again any Constitution excluding ENOSIS."

[Piratis]

YOUR assertion (not Makrios' but YOURS) is that because Markios sought to abbrogate the treaties of guarantee by seeking a UN resolution which would guarantee the island's independence and territorial integrity is proof that he did not seek enosis.

My assertion , opposed to YOURS, is this is sheer nonsense. The REASON why it is nonsense is that such an action is exactly what would be needed in order to achieve enosis.

Exactly. If Cyprus was independent then she would have the right to unite with whomever she wanted, with Greece, Russia or China. It doesn't mean that Cyprus would use this right though.

The fact is that the Turks do not want Cyprus to be independent as they want Cyprus to be isolated and under their control.

This is why they didn't want Cyprus to join the EU either. Cyprus joining the EU is something that serves the interests of Cypriots but not the interests of Turkey. The Turks do not want Cypriots to be independent and free to make such democratic decisions. They instead want to control Cyprus thought their minority on the island and in this way serve their own interests on the expense of the Cypriot people. Not very different from what they did during Ottoman rule.

[erolz3]

Exactly. If Cyprus was independent then she would have the right to unite with whomever she wanted, with Greece, Russia or China. It doesn't mean that Cyprus would use this right though.

If you really think the INTENT of the UN charters on the rights to self determination of peoples (not countries, not states, not nations but peoples) is that when there is a situation of an island where a numerical larger group on the Island define themselves as a different people to the smaller group , they should have the right to impose their will on the smaller group with no regards for that groups wishes, then there can be no hope.

If a majority of cypriots representing members from both communites wanted to unite with Russia then it would be a legitimate expresion of the will of a unitary Cypriot people. However when a majority of GC and only GC express a desire to unite with Greece it is just manipulation of the spirit and intent of the rights to self determination to say this is the vaild will of a unitary Cypriot people. It just is not.

The consequence of saying ANY restriction on the will of GC to do whatever they want in Cyprus, even when what they want is solely the desire of GC and because they are GC and defines them as a different people to non greek Cypriots, is that the only way of achieving this WITHOUT denying a right to self determination to those who they define as a different people is via partition. It is your insistance that GC have a RIGHT to impose something like enosis on TC against their will using the ridiculous claim that this is simply the will of a unitary Cypriot people that forces TC to see no other way of resisting this imposition of will by a people that define themselves as 'different' from them other than partition.

The prohibition on enosis in the 1960s agreements was a recognition that there was no way enosis could be achieved without depriving the TC of their valid rights other than with partition and no way of achieving parition without forced movement of people.

If you still insist today that there can be no limit on the expression of the will of a 'unitary' cypriot people that is in reality only supported by GC alone and universaly rejected by TC, not only do you seek to pervert the intention and spirit of the rights of people to self determination but you leave TC no other option than to abandon their rights to determine their own future or seek partition.

[Paphitis]

Much is made of Enosis as the reason for Turkey's occupation of Cyprus.

Here is an article from Feb. 1964 which proves Makarios was asking for assurances to Independence and Territorial Integrity for Cyprus -- as he saw it slipping away at the hands of Turkey, Britain and the USA.


"The sources said he would be forced to resort to such an unusual step if Britain, Turkey and America continued to oppose the adoption of a resolution which would guarantee the island's independence and territorial integrity."


http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1 ... 26,4231312

N.B. Neither Greece nor Makarios sought Enosis.

Indeed, it was the three belligerent and absolute foreigners, Britain, Turkey and USA, which contrived to deny a guarantee to respect Cyprus' Independence and Integrity!

How can you be demanding territorial integrity when the Turks could just excuse their behavior as Apartheid for security and control?

Silly woman!

"Independence and Territorial Integrity" for the whole island. This article is from 1964 not 1974!

Paphitis, will you stop highlighting your ignorance on every issue!

You stopped making sense a long time ago

Yes! And you still insist on using your false slogans in 2010, whilst half the island has been ethnically cleansed and is under occupation!

Do you enjoy being made a fool of by Erolz, and Marataga? Stop all this nonsense at once, and I will help dig you out of the hole that you have dug for yourself!

If you don't have the capability to debate using internationally recognised definitions pertaining to the Cyprus problem, in compliance with official RoC policy, and UN resolutions, then leave Cyprus problem with dignity and stick to your gossip threads in General Section, like the good gossip queen we all know and enjoy!

[wallace]

N.B. Neither Greece nor Makarios sought Enosis.

The only thing you prove Oracle is how divorced you are from truth or reality.

From UN document S/6253 26 March 1965

REPORT OF THE UNITED NATIONS MEDIATOR ON CYPRUS
TO THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

Archbishop Makarios and members of the Government acknowledged that Enosis had been the original aim of the uprising against British rule and that it remained a strong aspiration among the Greek-Cypriot community.

from the same document.

My predecessor observed - and from my own knowledge I can confirm - that there could be no concealing the fact that the formal "prohibition" of the Enosis idea did not suppress it in Cyprus. It continued to be discussed and advocated (as well as opposed), in and out of the institutions of government, long after the date of independence. It was and remains impossible to escape the impression that for a large body of the Greek-Cypriot leaders ' following, and for many of the
leaders themselves, the official demand for "full independence and selfdetermination" had no other meaning than this: that Cyprus should be released from the treaty and constitutional obligations which limited her freedom of choice, whereupon she would opt by some acceptable democratic procedure for union with Greece, this union to take place by agreement exclusively between Cyprus and Greece.

From the Akritas plan

Further, it is estimated that we have better chances of succeeding in our efforts to influence international public opinion in our favour if we present our demand, as we did during the struggle, as a demand to exercise the right of self-determination, rather than as a demand for union with Greece (Enosis). In order, however, to secure the exercise of
complete and free self-determination, we must get free of all those provisions of the constitution and of the agreements (Treaty of Guarantee, Treaty of Alliance) which prevent the free and unfettered expression and implementation of the wishes of our people and which create dangers of external intervention. It is for this reason that the
first target of attack has been the Treaty of Guarantee, which was the first that was stated to be no longer recognised by the Greek Cypriots.
When this is achieved no legal or moral power can prevent us from deciding our future alone and freely and exercising the right of self-determination by a plebiscite.

Please do contiunue to insist that Makarios never sought enosis, for such ridiculous attempts to deny and pervert reality show cleary what you are really about and highlight your credibility.

Well said. Let's see how long it takes the bash patriots to say Akritas plan did not exist?

Hello Y-Fuck. The Akritas plan did not and does not exist!!!!

[Oracle]

Much is made of Enosis as the reason for Turkey's occupation of Cyprus.

Here is an article from Feb. 1964 which proves Makarios was asking for assurances to Independence and Territorial Integrity for Cyprus -- as he saw it slipping away at the hands of Turkey, Britain and the USA.


"The sources said he would be forced to resort to such an unusual step if Britain, Turkey and America continued to oppose the adoption of a resolution which would guarantee the island's independence and territorial integrity."


http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1 ... 26,4231312

N.B. Neither Greece nor Makarios sought Enosis.

Indeed, it was the three belligerent and absolute foreigners, Britain, Turkey and USA, which contrived to deny a guarantee to respect Cyprus' Independence and Integrity!

Bullshit.

From "My Deposition" by Glafcos Clerides
(Alithia Publishing, 1990, Volume III, p. 270)

"I returned to Cyprus and reported to Makarios on my talks in Athens. I asked if, after assurances given by Papadhopoulos, he would agree for article 185 of the 1960 Constitution, which prohibited both ENOSIS and partition, to be incorporated in the new constitution. He raised his arms, which were resting on his desk and said: "You see, Glafcos, these hands, they can cut them off, but I will NOT sign again any Constitution excluding ENOSIS."

The article regarding Makarios' request was from the time, 1964.

That is more relevant than opinions from every Tom Dick and Harry who came up with some version of the truth as they saw it, subsequently.

There is pure evidence (such as the 1964 Makarios proposal above) .... and then there are adulterated, merged memories and failed agendas to satisfy, in the many comments we have seen since, such as your example.

[Oracle]

YOUR assertion (not Makrios' but YOURS) is that because Markios sought to abbrogate the treaties of guarantee by seeking a UN resolution which would guarantee the island's independence and territorial integrity is proof that he did not seek enosis.

No, it was not my assertion. It was actually yours:

As your own source clearly points out what Makarios was trying to achieve in these UN meetings was the 'abrogation of the Treaty of Guarantee'. A essential part of achieving enosis.

Makarios was seeking extra guarantees from the Security Council towards Cyprus' "territorial integrity" ... so he was clearly fearful Cyprus' independence was in jeopardy. You cannot then conclude he was aiming for Enosis.

"The talks have been bogged down on Cyprus' demands for Security Council guarantees of her territorial integrity."

Makarios demanding extra assurances from the SC, towards independence and territorial integrity, contradicts your claim that he was seeking Enosis.

The subsequent Invasion attempt by Turkey, a few months later (and under preparation at the time of this article), proves he was correct in his fears for Cyprus.

[Get Real!]

From "My Deposition" by Glafcos Clerides

"My dodgy juxtaposition" would’ve been a better title…