Cyprus-Forum.com

[insan]

However; according to GC leadership and Hellenic ultra nationalists, "the invader Ottoman remnants" would either have to accept minority status or be harrased, killed, forced to leave "The Greek island" Cyprus...

Are you saying that the majorities of all countries which have ethnic/religious/linguistic minorities (practically all), and which are not based on the so called "consociational democracy" (practically none is) are "ultra nationalists"?

Not all but some deserve to demand a democratic structure based on consociationalism...

The analysis identified five types of ethnic transformation in the successor states. In the Baltics the attempts of titular ethnic groups to secure predominance over ethnic Russians and radically transform institutions of the Soviet state resulted in the creation of exclusive ethnic democracies. In Central Asia an elite-negotiated transformation led to the emergence of ethnocracies in Turkmenistan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, while the regimes formed in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan were characterized by a mixture of ethnocratic and consociationalist features. In Moldova a failed attempt at unification with Romania eventuated in policies directed towards the creation of a Moldovan ethno-territorial federation. Finally, in Ukraine gradual reforms and attempts to abolish any ethnic hierarchy have led to the creation of consociationalism, in which ethnic Russians and Ukrainians, Russophones and Ukrainophones share power over the state.

http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/conten ... a713766326

There are too many succesful examples of application of consociational democracy each unique to those countries historical, political and ethnical circumstances...

[Piratis]

As it is until the 1955 struggle, which on the part of some was not for independance but IMHO to hand Cyprus on to another foreign ruler, Greece, the two groups lived very well together, but it was the dream of Enosis (which became Cyprus ' nightmare) and the couter demand for Takism that split them.

1955? What about this then:

During the Greek War of Independence in 1821, the Ottoman authorities feared that Greek Cypriots would rebel again. Archbishop Kyprianos, a powerful leader who worked to improve the education of Greek Cypriot children, was accused of plotting against the government. Kyprianos, his bishops, and hundreds of priests and important laymen were arrested and summarily hanged or decapitated on July 9, 1821.

The fact is that the Muslim/Turkish population in Cyprus has always been separate. During Ottoman rule the population was divided into Christians (GCs) and Muslims (TCs) with the Christians been given far less rights.

What Turkey did was simply to use the Turkish minority on the island as an excuse to yet again deny to the Cypriot people their freedom and self-determination. There was absolutely nothing new in the criminal actions of the Turks against Cyprus.

Piratis; Where you quote inside a quote and refer to the execution of the bishops and others in 1821, are you categorically denying any aid to the insurgents - during the 1821 rebellion - whether financial, food or men at arms? What happened to those excuted by the Ottomans cannot be condoned by todays standards but then ALL rebellions were crushed and the ring-leaders excuted; ALL traitors met the same fate then. That was exactly the same sort of justice the colonial powers used aginst the Cypriots as well as what EOKA used against GCs and TCs.

I hope you are not blaming the then Moslem population for these terrible executions. The blame lies elsewhere me thinks.

That was not my point Deniz. My points were:

1) The struggle of the Cypriot people to be liberated and be part of a free Greek state did not start in 1955, but more than a century earlier, even before the first Greek state was formed.

2) The Cypriot population had been divided since the time of the Ottomans. This is not something that happened as a result of the events of the 50s.

[insan]

As it is until the 1955 struggle, which on the part of some was not for independance but IMHO to hand Cyprus on to another foreign ruler, Greece, the two groups lived very well together, but it was the dream of Enosis (which became Cyprus ' nightmare) and the couter demand for Takism that split them.

1955? What about this then:

During the Greek War of Independence in 1821, the Ottoman authorities feared that Greek Cypriots would rebel again. Archbishop Kyprianos, a powerful leader who worked to improve the education of Greek Cypriot children, was accused of plotting against the government. Kyprianos, his bishops, and hundreds of priests and important laymen were arrested and summarily hanged or decapitated on July 9, 1821.

The fact is that the Muslim/Turkish population in Cyprus has always been separate. During Ottoman rule the population was divided into Christians (GCs) and Muslims (TCs) with the Christians been given far less rights.

What Turkey did was simply to use the Turkish minority on the island as an excuse to yet again deny to the Cypriot people their freedom and self-determination. There was absolutely nothing new in the criminal actions of the Turks against Cyprus.

Piratis; Where you quote inside a quote and refer to the execution of the bishops and others in 1821, are you categorically denying any aid to the insurgents - during the 1821 rebellion - whether financial, food or men at arms? What happened to those excuted by the Ottomans cannot be condoned by todays standards but then ALL rebellions were crushed and the ring-leaders excuted; ALL traitors met the same fate then. That was exactly the same sort of justice the colonial powers used aginst the Cypriots as well as what EOKA used against GCs and TCs.

I hope you are not blaming the then Moslem population for these terrible executions. The blame lies elsewhere me thinks.

That was not my point Deniz. My points were:

1) The struggle of the Cypriot people to be liberated and be part of a free Greek state did not start in 1955, but more than a century earlier, even before the first Greek state was formed.

2) The Cypriot population had been divided since the time of the Ottomans. This is not something that happened as a result of the events of the 50s.

As if the "Cypriot" population was not divided before... How was the relations of Catholic Cypriots(maronites) and Orthodox "Cypriots"(Choirokittians)?

[Pyrpolizer]

However; according to GC leadership and Hellenic ultra nationalists, "the invader Ottoman remnants" would either have to accept minority status or be harrased, killed, forced to leave "The Greek island" Cyprus...

And why should the TCs, who are less than a 5th of the population, have even more than minority rights? I remind you that minority rights are rights which are over and above the individual human rights that all citizens have.

Are you saying that the majorities of all countries which have ethnic/religious/linguistic minorities (practically all), and which are not based on the so called "consociational democracy" (practically none is) are "ultra nationalists"?

At least you admit that the TC would not have accepted a normal democracy in Cyprus and that they would seek to maintain the racist divisions imposed since Ottoman rule, regardless if our aim was enosis or an independent Cyprus with a real, one person one vote, democracy.

are you talking for what the situation should have been in the 50s or today?

[Piratis]

However; according to GC leadership and Hellenic ultra nationalists, "the invader Ottoman remnants" would either have to accept minority status or be harrased, killed, forced to leave "The Greek island" Cyprus...

Are you saying that the majorities of all countries which have ethnic/religious/linguistic minorities (practically all), and which are not based on the so called "consociational democracy" (practically none is) are "ultra nationalists"?

Not all but some deserve to demand a democratic structure based on consociationalism...

The analysis identified five types of ethnic transformation in the successor states. In the Baltics the attempts of titular ethnic groups to secure predominance over ethnic Russians and radically transform institutions of the Soviet state resulted in the creation of exclusive ethnic democracies. In Central Asia an elite-negotiated transformation led to the emergence of ethnocracies in Turkmenistan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, while the regimes formed in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan were characterized by a mixture of ethnocratic and consociationalist features. In Moldova a failed attempt at unification with Romania eventuated in policies directed towards the creation of a Moldovan ethno-territorial federation. Finally, in Ukraine gradual reforms and attempts to abolish any ethnic hierarchy have led to the creation of consociationalism, in which ethnic Russians and Ukrainians, Russophones and Ukrainophones share power over the state.

http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/conten ... a713766326

There are too many succesful examples of application of consociational democracy each unique to those countries historical, political and ethnical circumstances...

What you demand for Cyprus, which goes against the most basic human and democratic rights of the Cypriot people, exists nowhere else, definitely not in a successful democracy.

And what in the "historical, political and ethnical circumstances" of Cyprus gives you the right to demand more rights than the Native Americans, the Aboriginals of Australia or the Greeks of Asia Minor? There is nothing particularly unique about your minority in Cyprus. It was created in the same way that other Muslim minorities were created in Christian territories, and in fact the Turks came to Cyprus much later than mainland Greece, Bulgaria etc. So what are the "circumstances" that gave to your minority the right to demand more than all of the above?

The fact is that it is you who are the ultra nationalists with the extremist demands, while what we want is nothing more than the norm.

[Piratis]

However; according to GC leadership and Hellenic ultra nationalists, "the invader Ottoman remnants" would either have to accept minority status or be harrased, killed, forced to leave "The Greek island" Cyprus...

And why should the TCs, who are less than a 5th of the population, have even more than minority rights? I remind you that minority rights are rights which are over and above the individual human rights that all citizens have.

Are you saying that the majorities of all countries which have ethnic/religious/linguistic minorities (practically all), and which are not based on the so called "consociational democracy" (practically none is) are "ultra nationalists"?

At least you admit that the TC would not have accepted a normal democracy in Cyprus and that they would seek to maintain the racist divisions imposed since Ottoman rule, regardless if our aim was enosis or an independent Cyprus with a real, one person one vote, democracy.

are you talking for what the situation should have been in the 50s or today?

I am talking about how the situation was in the 50s, but the same is true for today.

[denizaksulu]

As it is until the 1955 struggle, which on the part of some was not for independance but IMHO to hand Cyprus on to another foreign ruler, Greece, the two groups lived very well together, but it was the dream of Enosis (which became Cyprus ' nightmare) and the couter demand for Takism that split them.

1955? What about this then:

During the Greek War of Independence in 1821, the Ottoman authorities feared that Greek Cypriots would rebel again. Archbishop Kyprianos, a powerful leader who worked to improve the education of Greek Cypriot children, was accused of plotting against the government. Kyprianos, his bishops, and hundreds of priests and important laymen were arrested and summarily hanged or decapitated on July 9, 1821.

The fact is that the Muslim/Turkish population in Cyprus has always been separate. During Ottoman rule the population was divided into Christians (GCs) and Muslims (TCs) with the Christians been given far less rights.

What Turkey did was simply to use the Turkish minority on the island as an excuse to yet again deny to the Cypriot people their freedom and self-determination. There was absolutely nothing new in the criminal actions of the Turks against Cyprus.

Piratis; Where you quote inside a quote and refer to the execution of the bishops and others in 1821, are you categorically denying any aid to the insurgents - during the 1821 rebellion - whether financial, food or men at arms? What happened to those excuted by the Ottomans cannot be condoned by todays standards but then ALL rebellions were crushed and the ring-leaders excuted; ALL traitors met the same fate then. That was exactly the same sort of justice the colonial powers used aginst the Cypriots as well as what EOKA used against GCs and TCs.

I hope you are not blaming the then Moslem population for these terrible executions. The blame lies elsewhere me thinks.

That was not my point Deniz. My points were:

1) The struggle of the Cypriot people to be liberated and be part of a free Greek state did not start in 1955, but more than a century earlier, even before the first Greek state was formed.

2) The Cypriot population had been divided since the time of the Ottomans. This is not something that happened as a result of the events of the 50s.

Yes, but it is you that brought up the demise of Kiprianos and his followers.

On your point two, they may have been divided by language and religion but they were both oppressed by the Porte and remember that Moslems were also hanged for rebelling against Istanbul.

[Piratis]

As it is until the 1955 struggle, which on the part of some was not for independance but IMHO to hand Cyprus on to another foreign ruler, Greece, the two groups lived very well together, but it was the dream of Enosis (which became Cyprus ' nightmare) and the couter demand for Takism that split them.

1955? What about this then:

During the Greek War of Independence in 1821, the Ottoman authorities feared that Greek Cypriots would rebel again. Archbishop Kyprianos, a powerful leader who worked to improve the education of Greek Cypriot children, was accused of plotting against the government. Kyprianos, his bishops, and hundreds of priests and important laymen were arrested and summarily hanged or decapitated on July 9, 1821.

The fact is that the Muslim/Turkish population in Cyprus has always been separate. During Ottoman rule the population was divided into Christians (GCs) and Muslims (TCs) with the Christians been given far less rights.

What Turkey did was simply to use the Turkish minority on the island as an excuse to yet again deny to the Cypriot people their freedom and self-determination. There was absolutely nothing new in the criminal actions of the Turks against Cyprus.

Piratis; Where you quote inside a quote and refer to the execution of the bishops and others in 1821, are you categorically denying any aid to the insurgents - during the 1821 rebellion - whether financial, food or men at arms? What happened to those excuted by the Ottomans cannot be condoned by todays standards but then ALL rebellions were crushed and the ring-leaders excuted; ALL traitors met the same fate then. That was exactly the same sort of justice the colonial powers used aginst the Cypriots as well as what EOKA used against GCs and TCs.

I hope you are not blaming the then Moslem population for these terrible executions. The blame lies elsewhere me thinks.

That was not my point Deniz. My points were:

1) The struggle of the Cypriot people to be liberated and be part of a free Greek state did not start in 1955, but more than a century earlier, even before the first Greek state was formed.

2) The Cypriot population had been divided since the time of the Ottomans. This is not something that happened as a result of the events of the 50s.

As if the "Cypriot" population was not divided before... How was the relations of Catholic Cypriots(maronites) and Orthodox "Cypriots"(Choirokittians)?

The Catholics you are referring to (the ones who ruled Cyprus before the Ottomans) are what today would be the Latins, not the maronites.

I doubt they called themselves Cypriots at that time, but sure, the population was divided back then as well.

During the long Lusignan period and the eighty-two years of Venetian control, foreign rulers unquestionably changed the Cypriot way of life, but it was the Cypriot peasant with his Greek religion and Greek culture who withstood all adversity. Throughout the period, almost three centuries, there were two distinct societies, one foreign and one native. The first society consisted primarily of Frankish nobles with their retinues and Italian merchants with their families and followers. The second society, the majority of the population, consisted of Greek Cypriot serfs and laborers. Each of these societies had its own culture, language, and religion. Although a decided effort was made to supplant native customs and beliefs, the effort failed.

Please note how we left all that behind and today we live together with the Latins (and Maronites) as equal Cypriots without any problems.

Unfortunately you are not willing to allow the problems between us to become part of history as well, and you want to maintain racist divisions in the 21st century!

[Piratis]

As it is until the 1955 struggle, which on the part of some was not for independance but IMHO to hand Cyprus on to another foreign ruler, Greece, the two groups lived very well together, but it was the dream of Enosis (which became Cyprus ' nightmare) and the couter demand for Takism that split them.

1955? What about this then:

During the Greek War of Independence in 1821, the Ottoman authorities feared that Greek Cypriots would rebel again. Archbishop Kyprianos, a powerful leader who worked to improve the education of Greek Cypriot children, was accused of plotting against the government. Kyprianos, his bishops, and hundreds of priests and important laymen were arrested and summarily hanged or decapitated on July 9, 1821.

The fact is that the Muslim/Turkish population in Cyprus has always been separate. During Ottoman rule the population was divided into Christians (GCs) and Muslims (TCs) with the Christians been given far less rights.

What Turkey did was simply to use the Turkish minority on the island as an excuse to yet again deny to the Cypriot people their freedom and self-determination. There was absolutely nothing new in the criminal actions of the Turks against Cyprus.

Piratis; Where you quote inside a quote and refer to the execution of the bishops and others in 1821, are you categorically denying any aid to the insurgents - during the 1821 rebellion - whether financial, food or men at arms? What happened to those excuted by the Ottomans cannot be condoned by todays standards but then ALL rebellions were crushed and the ring-leaders excuted; ALL traitors met the same fate then. That was exactly the same sort of justice the colonial powers used aginst the Cypriots as well as what EOKA used against GCs and TCs.

I hope you are not blaming the then Moslem population for these terrible executions. The blame lies elsewhere me thinks.

That was not my point Deniz. My points were:

1) The struggle of the Cypriot people to be liberated and be part of a free Greek state did not start in 1955, but more than a century earlier, even before the first Greek state was formed.

2) The Cypriot population had been divided since the time of the Ottomans. This is not something that happened as a result of the events of the 50s.

Yes, but it is you that brought up the demise of Kiprianos and his followers.

On your point two, they may have been divided by language and religion but they were both oppressed by the Porte and remember that Moslems were also hanged for rebelling against Istanbul.

The point is that we wanted our freedom from those times. Being part of a free Greek state was not something that was invented in 1955.

Regarding the division, I am talking about how the authorities (Ottomans in this case) discriminated between Christians and Muslims. People from the two groups were treated differently, and the TCs never accepted that all Cypriot people should be equal, but on the contrary they were always happy to accept the benefits and gains offered to them on our expense by foreign Imperialists.

[Pyrpolizer]

TCs are descendants of both the pre 1571 Cypriots and those 30.000 Anatolian settlers. As a matter of a fact; during the conquest of Cyprus many thousands of GC males died... with whom the GC widows and adult females "got married" do u think? Of course the muslim Anatolians who then were allowed up to 6,7,8 even 10 and rarely 15 wives depending on their economic capability...

As for the Enosis and Taksim issues which u claim this caused the division of Cyprus; even had the GCs never demanded Enosis but only the "majority rule", there would still have been a problem between the two major communities of Cyprus. TC would ask a(infact they had asked since the begining of Britis rule) political structure based on consociational democracy to ensure primarily their rights and freedoms in Cyprus and of course taking into consideration the strategic importance of Cyprus; secondarily, the security of their Turkish or if u like say Turkic brothers living in Turkey...

However; according to GC leadership and Hellenic ultra nationalists, "the invader Ottoman remnants" would either have to accept minority status or be harrased, killed, forced to leave "The Greek island" Cyprus...

My friend I will reply in line with the hypothetical scenario that you put above i.e in case Enosis was not an issue. It may sound provoking to you but yes the logical thing would be for the TCs to accept minority status. They had no "ottoman power" anymore, they couldn't have gone against the will of the majority, they were too weak for anything. It's called survival. Otherwise the majority would have forced them out, harass them, kill them etc, exactly as you said.

This is how minorities survive everywhere in the world.

Of course as you know Enosis WAS an issue, and Taksim WAS also an issue, and because of those the very existence of the TCs in Cyprus was threatened, and for the GCs the very integrity of their country was also threatened.

Today's situation in Cyprus is just a version of the the 3 possible outcomes from the above.