Cyprus-Forum.com

[CBBB]

by Ahmet Nuri Yurdusev

The Cyprus issue was opened up to debate again after Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan lashed out at the offensive anti-Turkey posters that were carried during a protest organized by certain groups in the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (KKTC) against the economic package under consideration.


It is a good thing that happened. It has given us the opportunity to point out several incorrect and defective aspects of Turkey’s policy on Cyprus. For example, everyone has learned this truth: Right now the KKTC is a rent-seeking “state” and the protests in question are organized by people who want the current system to remain and, contrary to claims, these people are not a marginal group. People who earn a high income without really producing anything or working very hard are extremely frustrated with efforts that seek to reduce their gains, so they organized the second biggest demonstration of the last decade. Of course, it’s likely that among those involved in the protests are truly marginal groups. In addition, we discovered that not only is there no country other than Turkey that recognizes the KKTC as a “sovereign” country, but even Turkey doesn’t exactly recognize it either because it hasn’t fulfilled the requirements for recognition (e.g., obtaining a letter of credence before appointing an ambassador). Thirdly, we also know that as long as the current deadlock continues in Cyprus (whether the solution involves uniting Cyprus or partition) the two conditions mentioned above will continue as they are as well. In other words, neither will the KKTC cease to be a rent-seeking state that is dependent on Turkey, nor will Turkey fulfill the requirements for recognizing the KKTC as a sovereign state. The Cyprus issue has a long history. In a sense it is the last case of the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire -- which was abolished at the beginning of the 20th century -- that is still lingering in the early 21st century. The history of this old and lengthy case and Turkey’s policies during this period are known by everyone.

Strategic involvement

Several researchers and writers, including many of my colleagues, have written a collection of works on this issue. I would like to draw attention to a basic mistake in Turkey’s policy on Cyprus. This mistake is somewhat apparent in the statements Erdoğan uttered in response to the banners that demanded Turkey leave the island. Erdoğan had said Turkey is strategically related to Cyprus because of all the Turkish soldiers that have fought and died for Cyprus. He said Turkey was involved in Cyprus for the same strategic reason that Greece was involved.

There are three parameters that determine Turkey’s policy on Cyprus. In order of precedence, they are:

1) Cyprus’ geographic position is very important for Turkey. This is what is meant by Turkey’s “strategic” interest in Cyprus. Cyprus is essential for the protection of Anatolia. Cyprus is like a “fixed base or an aircraft carrier.” Almost all of the islands near Turkey in the Aegean and the Mediterranean Sea belong to Greece, which makes Cyprus even more valuable. A new element that supports this argument has emerged in recent years. It is said that there are vast gas resources under the sea around Cyprus.

2) Turkey is one of the guarantor powers that were created with the 1960 London and Zurich agreements, which served as the basis of Cyprus’ establishment. The other guarantor powers are Greece and the UK. At this point, there is no need to debate the scope of the Treaty of Guarantee and whether Turkey’s intervention in 1974 falls under it. The main issue is that a legal bond formed between Turkey and Cyprus with the Treaty of Guarantee. In other words, Turkey has legal authority over Cyprus.

3) There are Turks in Cyprus and they are consanguineous with us. The laws and rights of our kin and their prosperity and wellbeing is of concern to us.

To summarize, Turkey bases its interest in Cyprus primarily on geographic and strategic reasons, then on legal reasons and thirdly on humanitarian reasons.

I think the main mistake in Turkey’s policy on Cyprus is the order of these reasons. Turkey needs to reverse this list and then prepare its Cyprus policy. Humanitarian factors, in other words the security of life and property of Turks in Cyprus and basic human rights, should be the first determining factor (of course, the security of life and property of other people in Cyprus, especially Greeks, should also be stressed). The next consideration should be legal authorities and lastly Turkey should consider geographic and strategic factors.

I would like to share a memory. While I was a doctoral student in England in 1990, my British housemate and I had a conversation about a demonstration we saw on the news one night. According to the report, several Greek Cypriot women who had been searching for their missing sons for 16 years since 1974 were organizing a demonstration in London. When my housemate asked me to provide an explanation, I explained Turkey’s policy on Cyprus using an order similar to the one mentioned above. His response was, “Nuri these poor women haven’t heard from their sons in 16 years and you’re talking about strategy and laws.” This is one of the reasons why world public opinion viewed Turkey as an unjust occupier in Cyprus for many years. While Turkey talked about legal rights and geography, the Greek Cypriots showed photos of mothers waiting to hear from their missing sons. Another reason why Turkey has been seen as an unjust occupier is the “best solution is no solution” policy that Turkey and the KKTC observed until 2003 and 2004, which gave birth to the perception that Turkey is the “side that does not want a solution.” When Turkey observed a pro-solution and humanitarian stance within the framework of the Annan plan, it gained moral superiority.

If Turkey develops a Cyprus policy that relies first on humanitarian, then on legal and lastly strategic factors, it will have two practical benefits. The first one will be breaking the global perception that Turkey is an “occupier” and an “expansionist.” If Turkey bases the justification of its intervention in Cyprus strictly and solely on the protection of Cypriot Turks (in other words Cypriots), develops its policy on the basis of providing and protecting the basic rights of everyone in Cyprus and voices these arguments loud and clear without giving up, it will be impossible to continue perceiving Turkey as an occupier and expansionist. Secondly, a more humanitarian policy will destroy the negative perceptions about Turkey that prevail in certain Turkish Cypriot communities.

Geographical and strategic importance?

The geographical and strategic importance of Cyprus for Turkey as mentioned above is not actually a given fact. This significance is a bit inflated and a consequence of assessing society and the world within the scope of a certain ideology. If you view yourself and the world through the prism of the 19th and 20th centuries’ inhumane nation-state system and its ideology, which is nationalism, then you will attribute special importance to Cyprus. If an argument starts off with “If Greece, which owns all of the islands in the Aegean and Mediterranean, obtains ownership of Cyprus…” it means it takes as a given that Turkey and Greece are rivals and enemies. If Turkey and Greece becomes friends and develop a framework for cooperation, then this argument will become meaningless. As for the proposition that Cyprus is essential for the protection of Anatolia, it does not hold true for today. First of all, Cyprus is not the closest Greek island to Anatolia. Additionally, today’s transportation, communications and weapons technologies minimize the importance of the region’s role in defense. The bases from which fighter jets can reach Cyprus in the shortest time are located in Konya. In response to the new argument about Cyprus being important because of the alleged rich natural gas resources it has, let me point out that prosperity and development are not strictly dependent on natural resources and that they are affected by several other factors and that many countries with rich oil reserves in fact have low welfare.

I think if Turkey, which has adopted a very humanitarian policy like the zero problems with neighbors policy and is trying to end the inhumane visa practices of the traditional nation-state system, takes action on the Cyprus issue first according to humanitarian and then according to legal principles and pays no regard to outdated 19th century strategic theories, it will be more befitting of its position as a “model” country.

*Professor Ahmet Nuri Yurdusev is an international relations
instructor at Middle East Technical University (ODTÜ).

http://www.todayszaman.com/news-236331- ... usev*.html

You will need to add the *.html to the link to get it to work.

[boulio]

Lets see:

1)humanitarian-cant ethnic cleanse 180,000 people from the north and kill thousands and claim humanitarian cause

2)legal-cant go the legal route when your in violation of mulitple article of the treaty of gueranteeor and establismnet ie:troops levels(600 vs 40,000)
partition,establisment of a illegal entitiy and not reestablishing order and the 1960 constition.

3)strategic-one out of three aint bad.

[Piratis]

If Turkey develops a Cyprus policy that relies first on humanitarian, then on legal and lastly strategic factors, it will have two practical benefits. The first one will be breaking the global perception that Turkey is an “occupier” and an “expansionist.” If Turkey bases the justification of its intervention in Cyprus strictly and solely on the protection of Cypriot Turks (in other words Cypriots), develops its policy on the basis of providing and protecting the basic rights of everyone in Cyprus and voices these arguments loud and clear without giving up, it will be impossible to continue perceiving Turkey as an occupier and expansionist. Secondly, a more humanitarian policy will destroy the negative perceptions about Turkey that prevail in certain Turkish Cypriot communities.

Isn't this what Turkish propaganda is trying to do since 1974. They even called their invasion which murdered 1000s and ethnically cleansed 100s of thousands a "peace operation". The truth, that Turkey is in Cyprus to serve her own interests, is something that is extremely rarely said by Turkish politicians.

Turkey will stop to be perceived as an occupier when it actually stops being an occupier by removing her troops from our island and allows Republic of Cyprus to exercise its sovereignty over the whole island (and there are UN resolutions calling Turkey to do just that). Until then no amount of propaganda and policies will be able to hide the fact that Turkey is an illegal occupier.

It is obvious that the author is more concerned with the failure of Turkey to create false perceptions, rather than with the actual criminal and illegal practices of his country.

[Kikapu]

Ahmet Nuri Yurdusev is not really finding moral faults with what Turkey is doing in Cyprus, but rather he is trying to rearrange the reasons for Turkey's reasons of being in Cyprus, just to make Turkey look better in the eyes of the world.

Somehow I don't think that will help Turkey at all. It will be like trying to re-arrange the deck chairs on the Titanic, specially in today's media sources and the RoC being in the EU. Turkey is doomed to fail which ever way she makes her list of order as to why she is in Cyprus. Time is not on Turkey's side.

For example, everyone has learned this truth: Right now the KKTC is a rent-seeking “state”

Is that not a nice way of saying that the "trnc" is being a WHORE.?

The geographical and strategic importance of Cyprus for Turkey as mentioned above is not actually a given fact. This significance is a bit inflated and a consequence of assessing society and the world within the scope of a certain ideology.

It is actually grossly inflated for the reasons of the "strategic importance" of Cyprus to Turkey, which in fact, that there are no reasons for Turkey to occupy any part of Cyprus what so ever, due to the proximity of Cyprus to Turkey.

” When Turkey observed a pro-solution and humanitarian stance within the framework of the Annan plan, it gained moral superiority.

Too bad Turkey did not mean it, for Cyprus to have a real solution, but was just going through the motions. As a result, the RoC got into the EU and now has a huge political stick to hit Turkey over the head with it. Talk about Turkey getting it wrong....again. So much for Turkey's brief basking in her "moral superiority" sun.!

[denizaksulu]

Interesting article but from where I stand I agree with (God forgive me) Piratis when he says:

'It is obvious that the author is more concerned with the failure of Turkey to create false perceptions, rather than with the actual criminal and illegal practices of his country.

[Get Real!]

"I think if Turkey, which has adopted a very humanitarian policy like the zero problems with neighbors policy and is trying to end the inhumane visa practices of the traditional nation-state system, takes action on the Cyprus issue first according to humanitarian and then according to legal principles and pays no regard to outdated 19th century strategic theories, it will be more befitting of its position as a “model” country."

*Professor Ahmet Nuri Yurdusev is an international relations
instructor at Middle East Technical University (ODTÜ).

If this guy is a professor I must be astronaut!

[Filitsa]

Ahmet Nuri Yurdusev is not really finding moral faults with what Turkey is doing in Cyprus, but rather he is trying to rearrange the reasons for Turkey's reasons of being in Cyprus, just to make Turkey look better in the eyes of the world.

Somehow I don't think that will help Turkey at all. It will be like trying to re-arrange the deck chairs on the Titanic, specially in today's media sources and the RoC being in the EU. Turkey is doomed to fail which ever way she makes her list of order as to why she is in Cyprus. Time is not on Turkey's side.

For example, everyone has learned this truth: Right now the KKTC is a rent-seeking “state”

Is that not a nice way of saying that the "trnc" is being a WHORE.?

The geographical and strategic importance of Cyprus for Turkey as mentioned above is not actually a given fact. This significance is a bit inflated and a consequence of assessing society and the world within the scope of a certain ideology.

It is actually grossly inflated for the reasons of the "strategic importance" of Cyprus to Turkey, which in fact, that there are no reasons for Turkey to occupy any part of Cyprus what so ever, due to the proximity of Cyprus to Turkey.

” When Turkey observed a pro-solution and humanitarian stance within the framework of the Annan plan, it gained moral superiority.

Too bad Turkey did not mean it, for Cyprus to have a real solution, but was just going through the motions. As a result, the RoC got into the EU and now has a huge political stick to hit Turkey over the head with it. Talk about Turkey getting it wrong....again. So much for Turkey's brief basking in her "moral superiority" sun.!

More like the pimp.

[Hermes]

It is obvious that the author is more concerned with the failure of Turkey to create false perceptions, rather than with the actual criminal and illegal practices of his country.

This is the most sad and disturbing aspect of this article. It believes the Cyprus "problem" is one of perception. The rest of the world perceives Turkey to be an illegal occupier of Cyprus. Turkish propaganda would have you believe its troops are in Cyprus for humanitarian reasons. All we have to do, this author claims, is to convince the rest of the world to see things our way.

It's a blatant example of Turkish moral corruption in which there is no such thing as truth, justice, or right. It asks us to interpret an act of ethnic cleansing from the point of view not of the victims but of the aggressor. It's like a Nazi pleading with us to see things from his point of view during the Second World War.

This is where we are with Turkey still. It is the same with Turkish denial of the Armenian genocide. It is hard to comprehend how a state which shows such utter contempt for the truth and which refuses to atone for its crimes, is being considered by the European Union as a prospective member. Turkey, on all current evidence, is simply not fit to be a member of the civilized world never mind the EU.

[Get Real!]

It is obvious that the author is more concerned with the failure of Turkey to create false perceptions, rather than with the actual criminal and illegal practices of his country.

This is the most sad and disturbing aspect of this article. It believes the Cyprus "problem" is one of perception.

I’m pretty sure you’ll find that to be the general consensus from the TC community.