Cyprus-Forum.com

[kimon07]

There is an old saying which goes "If you've nothing worthwhile to say don't say it".

Shouldn't you follow it?

[GreekIslandGirl]

After the defeat of the communist threats in Greece (1949) all pretense at any reasons for hanging on to Cyprus to "protect" it (issued from the USA) were invalidated. Instead Britain refused further discussions on 'evacuating' Cyprus from colonial rule.

They could no longer justify colonial rule and in the case of Cyprus resorted to dumb silence as far as the Greek community went and brought in Turkey as an ally (by USA's now continuing European presence and influence).

This was expressly forbidden by Article 16 of the Treaty of Lausanne (1923).

By February 1955 (Mallinson p.18) Turkey's machinery was already in full swing distributing leaflets in London stating: "Cyprus is Turkish."

[GreekIslandGirl]

Cont.

(The Turks couldn't wait to join in.)

By February 1955 the many measures were being drawn up among the Colonial offices of how to hang on to Cyprus. This drive confirmed Britain's (with now continuing US influence) active progressive participation in bringing about situations (via Turkey - illegally, as of Treaty of Lausanne) to fully and finally hold on to Cyprus and deny the Greeks their rights. (Leaving the GCs with no choice but resort to the unwanted active protests later that year - 1st April.)

Turkish collusion - snippets from the letter (15th February 1955) of The British Ambassador to Turkey, James Bowker, to Deputy Under Secretary of State at the Foreign Office, William Young:

(to follow)

[GreekIslandGirl]

My dear Young,

I have been considering whether there is any action on Cyprus which at this stage, we might usefully initiate or suggest from here. This falls under three heads:

a) proper understanding of the Turkish point of view;
b) consideration for opinion in Turkey;
c) use of Turkish influence with the Greeks in our favour.

2. Under (a), I have the following suggestions to offer. First, Turkish representatives abroad, particularly in London and Washington, might be more active in their activity about the Turkish attitude in Cyprus. In the UK their efforts might be directed (in this order) to : (a) MPs, (b) the weekly press (e.g. The ECONOMIST, the SPECTATOR etc), (c) the daily press (they have already been helped by the journalists' visit last year). The same appears to be true in the USA and other countries. For example, the Turkish Press in London has done no good by distributing leaflets of the "Cyprus is Turkish" Association).

[... some further meetings and press suggestions for the activities the Turks should be doing to promote Turkey's interests.]

5. As regards (b), I am inclined to think that the Cyprus Government may not fully realize how much interested Turkish public opinion is in an early and reasonable settlement of the Evkaf question. This is of course primarily a matter of internal administration in Cyprus and I know that it bristles with difficulties, is much misrepresented by the Turks and that the Government of Cyprus have given it a good deal of study. But the subject is closely followed in Turkey; and there is a danger that if it remains in dispute much longer it may well adversely affect the whole Turkish attitude towards the British position in the island. I hesitate to make any suggestions about this difficult matter, but as seen from here, there would be great advantage in getting it dealt with and allowing the dust to settle before embarking on detailed discussion about constitutional advance.

6. As for (c), I have considered the possibility of asking the Turks again to bring pressure on the Greeks to drop their claims. But from what the Head of the responsible Dept. of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (M. Kura) told the Head of Chancery, it is not likely the Turks would want to do this during the meeting of the Balkans Alliance Foreign Ministers in Ankara. Moreover, I assume that the department would wish any action of this kind to be coordinated with similar British and, if possible, American actions in Athens. The counselor has also been told by his Greek colleague that the Greek Government would object if there were any suggestion that Cyprus might be discussed during the meeting of the Foreign Ministers.

7. Nevertheless the Turks will no doubt be glad to know in due course what policy HMG propose to follow between now and the next meeting of the UNGA and Turkey's policy is likely to be influenced by British views. As I said in my letter of February 1 to jack Ward about the Secretary of State's visit to Turkey, the PM may well want to discuss Cyprus policy in a general way during he visit.

[Don Kelley]

This topic is titled The Ugly Legacy of the Empire
Which empire? it's been owned by just about anyone who chose to at the time along with even been give away.
Cyprus is a beautiful place with too many plonkers, even the expats can't re-balance the utter stupidity of people like Wymoaning Clown Boy and Ice(this weeks offer is?)land Girl.

[Don Kelley]

There aren't any Greeks Cypriots, it's just the same as some Tshombe in Africa who's called Charlie Smith claiming to be British.

[GreekIslandGirl]

Here we go.

During these British-Turkish-USA shenanigans (1955) Greece asked for a minimum of "self-determination for Cyprus".

Mallinson (20-21) presents various memoranda which were being exchanged in the Foreign Office (June 1955) demonstrating the methodologies being discussed at the time on how to retain Cyprus. They were increasingly worried that Greece was being active in UN circles and Washington in promoting Cyprus' freedom from the colonialists.

Mr W.H. Young, on June 27, 1955, is moaning:

" No doubt the purpose of the Greek Government, in allowing their intentions to become known in Washington, has been to urge the US Government to put pressure on H.M. Government."

They discuss how to put down or use "repressive action" against the signs of "terrorism" and in seeking authority to declare a state of emergency (paraphrased from J.G. Ward 27/VI)

In a letter to the Permanent Under Secretary, Mr. I. Kirkpatrick wrote:

"I have always been attracted by the idea of a 3 Power conference, simply because I believe that it would seriously embarrass the Greek Government. [...] But I see the objections to going ahead with any project under the duress of terrorism. So I would suggest telling both Greek and Turkish Govts. that we had intended to propose a conference, that we could not do so whilst the terrorists were active, but that we would revert to the idea if/when peace is restored to the island.

I prefer the above to the idea of making a statement because:

1. The statement will not really embarrass the Greeks. They will pull it to pieces and repeat parrot-wise that "self-determination for Cyprus" now is a minimum demand.

2. It does rope the Turks in on our side.

3. ... a conference can be spun out for some time ...."


Kirkpatrick goes on to explain the plan he likes least which was that offered by the Foreign Secretary (Selwyn Lloyd) to ask for the necessary military facilities (Bases?) from either Greece or Turkey if they gave Cyprus to one of them. Kirkpatrick states that he does not like this idea because, "This seems to imply that we are reconciled to handing over the island to one of them - and that it is up to them to decide the future of the island."

He continued by saying that there would be no release of a British policy on Cyprus "until the Greek-Turkish difference has been exposed."

So there we have it; stalling tactics, lies, game-palying and posturings; whilst all the while having no intention to "evacuate" Cyprus of colonial rule!

[wyoming cowboy]

The Americans had a direct interest in these installations,in cyprus, because all the information gleaned was shared with Washington under the terms of a secret intelligence pact drawn up in 1947, called the UKUSA agreement. They also benefited from the use of the strategic air base to supply western forces in conflicts in the Middle East -- for instance Akrotiri is now used to resupply forces operating the no-fly zone in Iraq and monitor the Camp David Peace agreements between the Arabs and Israelis. Most importantly of all, at the time of the Cyprus crisis the British spying stations were being used to monitor Soviet nuclear missile tests in central Asia. Therefore all of a sudden the Americans had an interest in Cyprus, as the timeline corelates to when the Americans began to intervene.

[GreekIslandGirl]

The aim was to hold a conference to work out how Britain could hang on to Cyprus, how to involve Turkey and how to prevent "internationalisation" of the Cyprus problem for as long as possible.

June/July 1955 - To the General Headquarters of the Middle East Forces, a letter labelled "Top Secret":

"In discussion, they agreed that British influence and prestige in the Middle East as a whole could not be maintained without the retention of our present military position in Cyprus which was therefore strategically essential. The denial of our present facilities in Cyprus would mean the complete breakdown of all plans for the development of any Middle East defence organisation and would prevent us fulfilling our Treaty obligations to Iraq and Jordan."

17th July 1955 - The Prime Minister:

"Turks are behaving well. If we keep friendly with them, the Greeks will have to come along in the end. Therefore we must not be parted from Turks, though we need not be ostentatious about this."

23rd July 1955 - Foreign Secretary:

"Throughout the negotiations, our aim would be to bring the Greeks up against the Turkish refusal to accept enosis and so condition them to accept a solution, which would leave sovereignty in our hands."

The aim of the conference was for 'failure' ....

[GreekIslandGirl]

The Americans had a direct interest in these installations,in cyprus, because all the information gleaned was shared with Washington under the terms of a secret intelligence pact drawn up in 1947, called the UKUSA agreement. They also benefited from the use of the strategic air base to supply western forces in conflicts in the Middle East -- for instance Akrotiri is now used to resupply forces operating the no-fly zone in Iraq and monitor the Camp David Peace agreements between the Arabs and Israelis. Most importantly of all, at the time of the Cyprus crisis the British spying stations were being used to monitor Soviet nuclear missile tests in central Asia. Therefore all of a sudden the Americans had an interest in Cyprus, as the timeline corelates to when the Americans began to intervene.

That's right. Just when the British were acknowledging Cyprus should be ceded to Greece - the USA took over and instead re-directed the British to holding on to Cyprus. This involved backtracking and undoing all the 'harm' the British did when they treated Cyprus as part of the Greek nation in readiness for handing over Cyprus to Greece. It was obvious that they were going to use Turkey as the undoing tool despite the illegality of doing so because of the Treaty of Lausanne.