Cyprus-Forum.com

[Hermes]

Taksim and enosis, Hermes. Two nationalisms fighting it out to the bitter end. Ours ended up on the receiving end. As simple as that. In this bitter fight there was no room for sane, balanced people who could see beyond their nose. They had to be eliminated.

You cannot blame the outcomes solely on a simple battle between rival nationalisms. The flawed constitution of 1960 and the Turkish refusal to accept any proposals that would allow Cyprus to function as a proper democracy, condemned the new state to failure. The cold fact was that Zurich had inflated the Turkish position in the state far beyond what a minority of its size could in normal circumstances have claimed. No matter what incentives Makarios might have offered, any constitutional alterations were, virtually by definition, bound to reduce this, and so long as the Turkish community had Ankara at its back, there was no chance of their being accepted.

After independence, however, there were TCs who were agitating for Cypriot co-existence, in support of independence and who didn't share the TMT's extremist agenda of self-segregation and partition. These were the TCs murdered by the TMT. The Turkish/TMT strategy was clear. To create a self-fulfilling prophecy in which the TMT fomented civil war and distrust, forcing TCs out of their homes and into enclaves which they then could claim proved that communal existence is impossible and that only partition would save them! Thus the TC leadership strategy was civil strife, insurrection and the refusal to contemplate, at the behest of Turkey, any possibility of a fair and democratic Cyprus. Facing an insurgency in their midst the GCs became sucked into Ankara's game.

The killing of innocent TCs by TMT terrorists however shows that the TMT agenda was never simply about a "freedom" struggle against enosis. Why kill TCs who were not advocating enosis? It was really a terror strategy of self-segregation, imposed as a deliberate policy, to undermine the possibility of peace and co-existence on the island. As the Secretary General of the time claimed. Civil strife and segregation was their means to achieve partition. That is why these TC activists were killed. There is no other explanation.

It is a pattern we still see today. The TC leadership is still sacrificing its own people to Ankara. Still insisting on anti-democratic "solutions" and still advocating that Cyprus is a state where peaceful co-existence is not possible. We are suffering the consequences not of rival nationalisms but of deeper issues: foreign intervention, violently enforced self-segregation and what happens when democratic norms are by-passed to suit outside parties.

[Kikapu]

Taksim and enosis, Hermes. Two nationalisms fighting it out to the bitter end. Ours ended up on the receiving end. As simple as that. In this bitter fight there was no room for sane, balanced people who could see beyond their nose. They had to be eliminated. The executors are now the heroes of their communities. No prison for them. No punishment, and as we speak, the son of one of our "heroes" will probably become the next Mayor of Nicosia. We still reward them. We will never learn even when the end is on sight.

I agree with Bananiot's above statements.

These TC and GC activists were murdered not because they supported Taksim or Enosis, but rather they did not support either, but wanted Cyprus to remain as one. So when VP states that the TCs who were murdered by the TMT were traitors, she is full of shit. For the Talkim fascist everyone was a traitor if they did not support their Taksim ideology and dream, and today, VP is no different. I have lost count the number of times she has called me a traitor ( and Bir) for supporting one Cyprus for all Cypriots. For facists like VP, that's all they need to label any TC a traitor, so it is proven, that the murdered TCs by the TMT were not for Enosis, but rather against Enosis and Taksim. It is also not surprising the number of times the Africa newspaper and it's editors in the north are under constant threat by VP's fascists "TMT" friends. Africa is not supporting Enosis either in 2011, but they are "traitors" to the Fascists, because they do not support Taksim, and neither do I.

[Bananiot]

Your account is terribly one sided Hermes. This kind of interpretation of the events of 1963 only serves to lay the blame solely on the TC side and Turkey. This may wash well with the blind nationalists of our side but it cannot convince any serious person. Here are some reasons for this:

1. Inonu pleaded with Makarios when the latter went to Ankara on a state visit in 1962, to drop the demands for the changing of the constitution. Turkey showed that it did not favour changes in the status of Cyprus.
2. The constitution, despite its problems, worked and this was realised even by Papadopoulos, who admitted publicly in 2005 that it was "a blessing in disguise".
3. Even after the TCs withdrew to the enclaves, Turkey tried to get them to return to the RoC. The letter addressed to F. Kucuk has been made public.
4. Makarios admitted that he wanted the TCs to remain in the enclaves until their will to resist was frustrated and eventually broken.
5. Our side rejected the agreement reached between Klerides and Denktash in 1973 exactly because Makarios sensed that the TCs in the enclaves were about to break. The agreements practically meant that the TCs (and Turkey) accepted the changes asked for my Makarios to the constitution. Yet we rejected this agreement, because now we wanted something more. You can all sense what that was.

Now Hermes, can we really convince people that all along Turkey wanted the partition of Cyprus? Please tell me, are we legitimised to burden Turkey with all our short comings in the international arena?

[Kikapu]

Your account is terribly one sided Hermes. This kind of interpretation of the events of 1963 only serves to lay the blame solely on the TC side and Turkey. This may wash well with the blind nationalists of our side but it cannot convince any serious person. Here are some reasons for this:

1. Inonu pleaded with Makarios when the latter went to Ankara on a state visit in 1962, to drop the demands for the changing of the constitution. Turkey showed that it did not favour changes in the status of Cyprus.
2. The constitution, despite its problems, worked and this was realised even by Papadopoulos, who admitted publicly in 2005 that it was "a blessing in disguise".
3. Even after the TCs withdrew to the enclaves, Turkey tried to get them to return to the RoC. The letter addressed to F. Kucuk has been made public.
4. Makarios admitted that he wanted the TCs to remain in the enclaves until their will to resist was frustrated and eventually broken.
5. Our side rejected the agreement reached between Klerides and Denktash in 1973 exactly because Makarios sensed that the TCs in the enclaves were about to break. The agreements practically meant that the TCs (and Turkey) accepted the changes asked for my Makarios to the constitution. Yet we rejected this agreement, because now we wanted something more. You can all sense what that was.

Now Hermes, can we really convince people that all along Turkey wanted the partition of Cyprus? Please tell me, are we legitimised to burden Turkey with all our short comings in the international arena?

Please, do tell, Bananiot!

[Bananiot]

We had you on the run Kikapu. We wanted more than an Independent Cyprus. The improvement of the Constitution was no longer an issue. Remember, Makarios took an oath for enosis, not to rest and spill his last drop of blood for enosis. Makarios and the rest of the GC nationalist scum.

[Kikapu]

We had you on the run Kikapu. We wanted more than an Independent Cyprus. The improvement of the Constitution was no longer an issue. Remember, Makarios took an oath for enosis, not to rest and spill his last drop of blood for enosis. Makarios and the rest of the GC nationalist scum.

But did you not tell us before that by 1967, Makarios was no longer supporting Enosis. To support your statement Bananiot, didn't Makarios in 1974 almost pay with his life for walking away from Enosis?

[Hermes]

We had you on the run Kikapu. We wanted more than an Independent Cyprus. The improvement of the Constitution was no longer an issue. Remember, Makarios took an oath for enosis, not to rest and spill his last drop of blood for enosis. Makarios and the rest of the GC nationalist scum.

Now who is being terribly one-sided! The early stages of the Cyprus conflict, in the mid-1950's, were mainly a struggle between the Greek Cypriots and the British Colonial power, with the Turks at that time hardly interested in the island. There is strong evidence that the British Government of the day deliberately encouraged an indifferent Turkey to take more active interest, as a useful counterweight in the struggle against the Cypriots.

The TMT was the outcome of Turkey's cooperation with the colonial power, and was the means of frustrating the wishes of the majority of the population of Cyprus,
 dividing Greek and Turkish Cypriot and beginning the long path towards partition. After the signing of the Zurich and London Agreements in 1959, which led to the independence of Cyprus, the TMT continued its clandestine activities in the cause of dividing Cyprus.

The TMT incited anti-Greek riots and tried to force Turkish Cypriot workers to establish separate trade unions. 

Murder, arson and intimidation were the means that the TMT insurgents used in order to prove that Greek and Turkish Cypriots could not live together. The victims were trade unionists, journalists and ordinary Turkish Cypriots who resisted TMT's call. That is why the TMT murdered ordinary TCs.

Your bizarre attempts to reverse history and to place the blame for the rise of the TMT and all civil disturbances on the Greek-Cypriot leadership, who faced a foreign-sponsored insurrection in their midst, is frankly laughable.

[Sotos]

Our side rejected the agreement reached between Klerides and Denktash in 1973 exactly because Makarios sensed that the TCs in the enclaves were about to break. The agreements practically meant that the TCs (and Turkey) accepted the changes asked for my Makarios to the constitution. Yet we rejected this agreement, because now we wanted something more. You can all sense what that was.

Can you show any evidence that TCs accepted the 13 points? I think you are lying.

[Viewpoint]

We had you on the run Kikapu. We wanted more than an Independent Cyprus. The improvement of the Constitution was no longer an issue. Remember, Makarios took an oath for enosis, not to rest and spill his last drop of blood for enosis. Makarios and the rest of the GC nationalist scum.

Now who is being terribly one-sided! The early stages of the Cyprus conflict, in the mid-1950's, were mainly a struggle between the Greek Cypriots and the British Colonial power, with the Turks at that time hardly interested in the island. There is strong evidence that the British Government of the day deliberately encouraged an indifferent Turkey to take more active interest, as a useful counterweight in the struggle against the Cypriots. T

he TMT was the outcome of Turkey's cooperation with the colonial power, and was the means of frustrating the wishes of the majority of the population of Cyprus,
 dividing Greek and Turkish Cypriot and beginning the long path towards partition. After the signing of the Zurich and London Agreements in 1959, which led to the independence of Cyprus, the TMT continued its clandestine activities in the cause of dividing Cyprus.

The TMT incited anti-Greek riots and tried to force Turkish Cypriot workers to establish separate trade unions. 

Murder, arson and intimidation were the means that the TMT insurgents used in order to prove that Greek and Turkish Cypriots could not live together. The victims were trade unionists, journalists and ordinary Turkish Cypriots who resisted TMT's call. That is why the TMT murdered ordinary TCs.

Your bizarre attempts to reverse history and to place the blame for the rise of the TMT and all civil disturbances on the Greek-Cypriot leadership, who faced a foreign-sponsored insurrection in their midst, is frankly laughable.

You are one arrogant son of a gun, own up the enosis fight was not over even after 1960 but you still want to ignore this fact, taksim was a counter movement time you realized this and owned up to your share of the blame. Your eoka terrorists killed innocent GCs for wanting democracy and co existence what have you to say about that?

[Hermes]

You are one arrogant son of a gun, own up the enosis fight was not over even after 1960 but you still want to ignore this fact, taksim was a counter movement time you realized this and owned up to your share of the blame. Your eoka terrorists killed innocent GCs for wanting democracy and co existence what have you to say about that?

Yes, taksim was a counter-movement! That is why they killed TC activists who dared to resist their segregationist agenda. It was counter to Cypriot independence and co-existence. I'm glad you finally accept it. Now will you take back what you said that these TC activists were "traitors" and "dupes" who probably deserved what happened to them?