Cyprus-Forum.com

[bg_turk]

I am sorry to interrupt you both,

but I find it funny that you keep on arguing over why TC fled their homes. You can do this forever and I am afraid that you will come to no conclusion.

And in fact there is a very easy way to find out the reasons. Most of those who fled their homes are still alive, so they can clearly tell you why they fled. Why don't you just ask these TC refugees the reasons why they fled?

Is there any TC refugee who fled his home in this forum? If so what was the main reason for that?

[erolz]

And in fact there is a very easy way to find out the reasons. Most of those who fled their homes are still alive, so they can clearly tell you why they fled. Why don't you just ask these TC refugees the reasons why they fled?

Is there any TC refugee who fled his home in this forum? If so what was the main reason for that?

I have done this to some degree. I have spoken to my relatives, aunts and uncles and others that lived through this period - though mainly they remain reluctant to discuss and relive these things. None of these have ever talked to me of fear of disobeying TMT orders, though they have talked of fear of GC violence and GC. Does this prove anything? Certainly it shapes my views and opinions but does it have any impact on those GC that believe a different 'reality'? I doubt it does. Maybe if they were to come and speak to them (my relatives) and if my relatives were willing it might have some impact but I suspect that for those that want and need too they will still believe that this is not a 'typical' TC experience or that it is as much subject to TC propaganda as second hand accounts

[magikthrill]

So main source will you now accept the basic assertion that the main reason most TC fled their homes in this period was in fact GC violence against them and fear of that violence? Will those GC who have so consistently argued against this assertion do the same - so we can finaly put this issue to bed and move on? Or will you and they continue to assert that the main reason most TC fled their homes in this period was in fact the persuit of the political goal of partition and not GC violence and the fear of such?

using your arguments your correctly explain the the main reason why TCs left was local violence.

the same argument shows the the main reason why TCs did not return is because they were not allowed to.

exercised substantial coercion to prevent returning in most cases to government-controlled areas.

can you accept this erol?

[bg_turk]

magikthril

the same argument shows the the main reason why TCs did not return is because they were not allowed to

You accept that the main reason for TC to leave was GC violance, but then you proceed to say that they were not allowed to return. But how many of them wanted to return in the first place? Did the original motive of GC violance suddenly disapear, that TC would have been willing to return, and then actually be prevented from doing so? The majority of TC never wished to return to a place where they were massacred, they never even looked back.

Even today, if a TC wants to return who will stop him? Will it be TRNC or those people who illegally occupy the TC ancestral homes controlled by the greek government? Can those turkish cypriots who wish to live in the so-called "ROC" return to their homes now?

[magikthrill]

You accept that the main reason for TC to leave was GC violance, but then you proceed to say that they were not allowed to return. But how many of them wanted to return in the first place? Did the original motive of GC violance suddenly disapear, that TC would have been willing to return, and then actually be prevented from doing so? The majority of TC never wished to return to a place where they were massacred, they never even looked back.

Even today, if a TC wants to return who will stop him? Will it be TRNC or those people who illegally occupy the TC ancestral homes controlled by the greek government? Can those turkish cypriots who wish to live in the so-called "ROC" return to their homes now?

bg,

the arguements showed that many TCs left due to local violence which dies out eventually. my point is that even those that wanted to return were not allowed to. tey were prevented ebcause the turkish army had greater plans in mind.

what i am trying to get at with this again is why is it ok for TCs to have achieved taksim but everytime TCs talk about enosis all they do is complain about how horrible it is. again this is a double standard where only one side of the coin is viewed.

[bg_turk]

Magikthrill,

Thank you for your explanation, and I do understand your genuine concerns about taksim, and the partition of your country, but I find your claim that the violance subsided strange.

Didn't the threat of violance actually intensify after the turkish intervention/occupation? Did TC actually want to return after so much blood has been spilt on both sides? Weren't there revenge kililngs against TC villages when the turkish army was progressing?

To me it is clear GC left their homes because of the threats of violance and actual violance by the turkish army, and it should be equally clear why TC left - in fact TC should know this best. I find it weird that GC are trying to pursuade TC what the actual motives behind abandoning or not returning to their homes were.

[fi]

I think you should read "CIA in Cyp prob - split from where did TC live pre 74"

(link added by moderator erolz)
http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.php?t=3053

If the TC were starting to arm themselves since 1958 and if there was a larger plan for the island etc. then there is a valid argument that TMT and Turkish officers may have forced the TC to move into enclaves. I haven't seen anyone reply to that threat. It seems whenever the TC don't like somethings in the forum they just ignore it and don't reply.

Let's not forget that once Turkey proposed to move 200,000 people in order to put in effect one of their plans for solution before 74 which was of course rejected as being unreasonable.

[erolz]

the same argument shows the the main reason why TCs did not return is because they were not allowed to.

exercised substantial coercion to prevent returning in most cases to government-controlled areas.

can you accept this erol?

This is going to disapoint you no doubt - but no I do not accept this - not in the way I consider the first assertion to be 'beyond any reasonable doubt'. I think it _might_ be the main reason (or the reason most) TC did not return but I do not carry the same conviction or lack of soubt that this is the case for the second assertion than I do for the first.

Let me explain why.

Firstly my sense of conviction (for the first assertion) does not come from the one reference alone but from a range of such. It is also I bleieve consitent with plain common sense (what is more likely to cause some to flee their homes, leaving suddenly and leaving behind posessions - fear of violence or persuit of politcal aims?). Even for the sake of 'briefness' necessary in a forum like this, if you take the two parts of the Cyprus Conflict website reffered to in this thread (the overview and the detailed study of this issue by My Patrick) they both concurr with the first assertion but they differ on the second (re the issue of why most TC did not return) to some degree. In general terms I place more reliance on the detailed study by Mr Patrick because it is a specific detailed study of the issue vs the more genral and generalised 'overview' section. What Mr Patrick has to say about this is as follows.

http://www.cyprus-conflict.net/patrick% ... pt%202.htm

Although it appears unlikely that there was any centralized co-ordination of the Turk-Cypriot refugee exodus, there is ample proof that Turk-Cypriot political and military leaders controlled the return of refugees to their former homes. It is known that in late 1964 some local Fighter commanders resorted to armed threats and even murder to prevent some refugees from moving into government controlled areas,[69] but it is not known to what extent such actions were directed or condoned by leaders in Nicosia. However, such coercion should be put in perspective. The government was prepared to encourage the return of Turk-Cypriot refugees provided that they accepted government authority and that they did not return to 'sensitive' areas. Such areas included locations adjacent to Turkish-Cypriot enclaves or National Guard positions, and also mixed villages in which returned Turk-Cypriots would outnumber Greek-Cypriots. In addition, known Fighter leaders were specifically prohibited from returning. The acceptance of such pre-conditions would have won for the government the victory that it had failed to achieve by its armed offensive. In addition, the hostility of many local Greek-Cypriots was such that Turk-Cypriots did not believe that the government could fulfill its guarantees that returning refugees would not be molested. In any case, by August 1964, the abandoned homes were looted and often burned-out ruins. Neither community had the resources to rebuild the houses, to purchase new farming equipment or to provide resettlement grants. The side that undertook such indemnities would also be tacitly admitting to a degree of responsibility in the creation of the refugee problem, and that neither community was prepared to do.

For some TC I have no doubt that they wished to return to their homes they had fled by were prevented from doing so because of orders from their leadership not to do so (and in a smaller set of cases because of violence by TC against them or the fear of it). For others I also have no doubt that the reason they did not return was the continuation of the fear they held that led them to flee in the first place and for others they were prepared to accept the risk of returning but had nothing to return to.

To recap then I accept that your assertion re the return of TC may well be correct but it might also not be correct (re wheter it was the main reason - I do not dispute whether it happened - it did). I am not sure we can ever know which to the same degree of certainty that I feel we can re the first assertion.

I would also add that if this was a 'negotiation' and the offer of a 'trade' was being offered along the lines of 'we will accept that the main reason TC fled their homes was GC violence and fear of it as long as you also accept the main reason TC did not return to their homes was orders and pressure and use of violence by TC against TC' - then I would 'take' such a deal. Pretty much as I would accept that we use the cyprus conflict website as the 'accepted shared hsitory' even though it does contains one sided versions in it and conflicting versions of events as well - on the simple basis that it is still better (more objective and more balanced) than either sides 'offical versions' of what happened.

So in summary - in terms of my actual personal beleifs I do not have the same level of conviction that the second assertion is 'betyond resoanble doubt' as the first, but would accept the 'trade' that you accept the first and we accept the second on the basis that this is an improvement on 'we refute the first and we assert the second' which seems to be the current position of some GC posters here.



[/quote]

[erolz]

If the TC were starting to arm themselves since 1958 and if there was a larger plan for the island etc. then there is a valid argument that TMT and Turkish officers may have forced the TC to move into enclaves. I haven't seen anyone reply to that threat. It seems whenever the TC don't like somethings in the forum they just ignore it and don't reply.

There is an argument that they (TMT/ T) may have done this (based on your two prior IF's) but there is no evidence that I know of TMT using force against TC with the specific aim or result of them fleeing their homes and going to enclaves. Possibly if the GC had not resorted to using violence against the numericaly smaller and weaker TC community and thus no TC were fleeing to enclaves then TMT/T elements that wanted this to happen would themselves have started to use violence against TC directly to achieve this aim - but this is not what happened.

Let's not forget that once Turkey proposed to move 200,000 people in order to put in effect one of their plans for solution before 74 which was of course rejected as being unreasonable.

Many proposed solutions were put on the table both before 60 and after 64 by both sides and many of them rejected. This includes TC/T proposals for agreed enforced seperation (rejected) and GC/G proposals for agreed enforced ENOSIS (also rejected) and for a untiary GC dominated state with TC a minority (also rejected).

[fi]

TMT actions:
PEO member Fazil Onder, killed in 1958
reporters Hikmet and Gurkan, publishers of Cumhuriyet, killed in 1962
member of AKEL Dervis Ali Kavazoglu, killed in 1966