Cyprus-Forum.com

[Hatter]

But I do believe that an independent united Cyprus is better than a partitioned one with british military bases. So it's normal that I don't agree with the EOKA struggle, which resulted to the second.

It is not normal to display such profound ignorance and stupidity.
EOKA's aim was not a partitioned Cyprus with british military bases.

"normal" indeed! Idiot!

It was not its official aim, but its result. Something that should be obvious even in that times to anyone who had studied the geopolitical realities and the history of our region.

It was not its aim, official or unofficial.

So you regard it as "normal" to disagree with anti-colonial struggles?

[YFred]

But I do believe that an independent united Cyprus is better than a partitioned one with british military bases. So it's normal that I don't agree with the EOKA struggle, which resulted to the second.

It is not normal to display such profound ignorance and stupidity.
EOKA's aim was not a partitioned Cyprus with british military bases.

"normal" indeed! Idiot!

It was not its official aim, but its result. Something that should be obvious even in that times to anyone who had studied the geopolitical realities and the history of our region.

It was not its aim, official or unofficial.

So you regard it as "normal" to disagree with anti-colonial struggles?

Hatter, are you mad as?

No body disagrees with anti-colonial strugle but to gift it to another country?
I think not. You will find us in front of you every time.

[Hatter]

But I do believe that an independent united Cyprus is better than a partitioned one with british military bases. So it's normal that I don't agree with the EOKA struggle, which resulted to the second.

It is not normal to display such profound ignorance and stupidity.
EOKA's aim was not a partitioned Cyprus with british military bases.

"normal" indeed! Idiot!

It was not its official aim, but its result. Something that should be obvious even in that times to anyone who had studied the geopolitical realities and the history of our region.

It was not its aim, official or unofficial.

So you regard it as "normal" to disagree with anti-colonial struggles?

Hatter, are you mad as?

No body disagrees with anti-colonial strugle but to gift it to another country?
I think not. You will find us in front of you every time.

Are you sure? Afroasiatis said as much. Why don't we let him/her answer for himelf/herself?

[EPSILON]

But I do believe that an independent united Cyprus is better than a partitioned one with british military bases. So it's normal that I don't agree with the EOKA struggle, which resulted to the second.

It is not normal to display such profound ignorance and stupidity.
EOKA's aim was not a partitioned Cyprus with british military bases.

"normal" indeed! Idiot!

It was not its official aim, but its result. Something that should be obvious even in that times to anyone who had studied the geopolitical realities and the history of our region.

It's all very well to have such high expectations, but I wonder if anybody carried out any risk assessment as to how likely it was to be achieved, considering the size of the TC population.

What did they imagine the Turks and TCs will do, play tiddlywinks?

What a shame, to be given a chance for independence and all they wanted to do was gift it to another country.

Excuse me for my ingnorance but there was any Turkish or T/Cs policy or interest in Cyprus faith before 1955? I heard that this island was under occupation of BRIISH AN ITS POPULATION WAS FIGHTING for freedom-did Turks o T/cs did something bout it? did they asked something?May be then the majority on the island decided to fight for its freedom and future and when this,some how succeeded, then Turks appeared to ask a piece of the cake-cooperating with British, killing EOKA Fighters and then declare hemelves (the cooperators of the occupator) as victims with rights.GLASIC Turkish stragety- even statums in Effesos presented to tourists as Turks ancenors muments.. funny things but with ..results.atleast on shorterm basis

[Afroasiatis]

Grivas, like any soldier, upheld his oath to the Greek State and performed his duties as a high ranking senior Officer of the Greek Army!

Grivas in Greece was the leader of Organosi X, which had as main purpose killing communists, in order to support the british-american rule there. The fact that he would become later the leader of the struggle against Brits, is an irony of history.

Even by only choosing such a politically painted person like Grivas as leader of EOKA, its ideological tendency became clear. The hate of leftists towards Grivas was the reason he had failed in his political career in Greece as potential leader of the Centre - which (unfortunately for Cypriots) meant that he would come back to Cyprus.

If I remember well, there was an EOKA-text calling leftists and TCs to not take active part in the struggle, and in the case they agreed with the goal of Enosi, stay inactive and not cooperate with the enemy. We also know that the vast majority of politicians with an EOKA-past belong today to rightist parties.

There was no such text.

I remember reading it, but I can't find it now. If I ever find it, I'll post it here.

There was the initial "call to arms" towards all Greek Cypriots shortly after the first attacks on 01 Apr 55. There was also a warning to people that any treason will be dealt with by any means.

Even the initial call to arms is full with references to Greeks and Hellenism. Not something that would encourage any TC to join the fight. And the fact that the aim of the struggle was Enosi, practically made it impossible for TCs to join anyway.

I also know that the majority of GC victims of EOKA may have not been leftist, but EOKA-members themselves, who were killed due to internal fights. However, there were also communists who were specifically targeted.

I don't know about that. But there was some friction between Grivas and Afxentiou. I am not aware of any EOKA members who were killed by EOKA. Some GCs were killed because they allegedly collaborated with the Colonial Forces, and some were killed for voicing objections to the struggle for self determination. Some EOKA members took advantage of the situation and settled some petty family vendettas.

Implying that the majority of EOKA-victims were EOKA-members was my mistake. I only know of one case, Yiannakis Stefanidis.

No, it was never wrong. It may have been a mistake, but no one was to know that back then. It was never wrong.

It was only natural, and it was the democratic will of the overwhelming majority.

What's the difference between "wrong" and "mistake"? In my vocabulary it's exactly the same (my english is not so good though).

It was natural, since nationalism became the dominant ideology. And it led to the result that in Cyprus happened the same thing to what had happened between Greece and Turkey.

Many Cypriots disrespect the EOKA struggle and the fallen. Basically, you are saying that all EOKA members in the 50s were stupid.

I'm saying that they made a wrong choice. It doesn't necessarily mean they were all stupid. We all make mistakes in our life.

The TCs made their decision and collaborated with the British. If that was not the case, then they could have made their objections known to the EOKA hierarchy.

The EOKA leaders knew that TCs didn't want Enosi. It was not anything new. They decided to make an armed struggle despite that.

They all earned their respect and immortality, and the younger generation needs to respect the values they tried to uphold by laying down their lives. All were men of arms willing to sacrifice their very lives so that Cyprus can be free from subjugation and tyranny.

If with this you mean that we shouldn't be allowed to criticize their actions or their goals, then it's a big mistake. A country which doesn't allow its citizens to be critical of its past has no good future. Freedom of opinion in such matters is basic.

[Afroasiatis]

It's all very well to have such high expectations, but I wonder if anybody carried out any risk assessment as to how likely it was to be achieved, considering the size of the TC population.

I guess they didn't. They were so convinced that they were fighting for what is rightful, and so much blinded by nationalist myths, that they thought that nobody had the power to stop them.

[Afroasiatis]

So you regard it as "normal" to disagree with anti-colonial struggles?

I regard it as normal to disagree with struggles which serve british colonial interests and local expansionisms (like the greek and turkish ones).

An anti-colonial struggle was definitely needed in Cyprus. But one which could unite the whole Cypriot people behind it.

[Hatter]

Excuse me for my ingnorance but there was any Turkish or T/Cs policy or interest in Cyprus faith before 1955?

Of course not. The colonial power manipulate the TCs in order to turn them into an instument of colonial policy in counteracting the anti-colonial movement of the rest of the population. And it was the colonial power that involved Turkey. It was much easier to continue to rule the colony if the dispute was a more complicated one than "simply" a dispute between the colonial masters and their subjects (don't forget, there was a wave of anti-colonial struggles around the world in the fifities, leading to many former colonies acquiring their freedom and independence). TMT was the outcome of the collaboration of Turkey and the colonial power (the leadership consisted of army officers from Turkey) and was used as an instrument to frustrate the wishes of the majority of the population, by means of creating a rift between the two communities on the island. TMT's agent provocateur tactics and false-flag activities are undeniable and well documented.

Of course, Afroasiatis finds it "normal" to diasgree with EOKA that was an anti-colonial struggle, but says nothing about TMT that was an instrument of colonial policy.

[Afroasiatis]

Of course, Afroasiatis finds it "normal" to diasgree with EOKA that was an anti-colonial struggle, but says nothing about TMT that was an instrument of colonial policy.

We all (GCs at least) know it that TMT was (among others) an instrument of colonial policy. I don't see why it was necessary to say it.

[Hatter]

Of course, Afroasiatis finds it "normal" to diasgree with EOKA that was an anti-colonial struggle, but says nothing about TMT that was an instrument of colonial policy.

We all (GCs at least) know it that TMT was (among others) an instrument of colonial policy. I don't see why it was necessary to say it.

Somebody had to say it, if only to highlight the stark contrast between your utterances about EOKA and your silence about TMT. Lest we forget. After all, the topic of this thread is "Who started the inter-communal conflict".