"VIENNA III AGREEMENT– 2 AUGUST 1975 (UN DOCUMENT S/11789)
This Agreement stipulated that Turkish Cypriots then residing in the south (some 10,700 in number) were free to move to the north, if they wished to do so, with the assistance of UNFICYP; and Greek Cypriots then remaining in the north (about 10,000 in number) were free to stay there and were to be provided with access to the facilities they needed to lead a normal life. The Greek Cypriots in the north would also be permitted to move to the south ‘at their own request and without having been subjected to any kind of pressure’. In addition, it was agreed that ‘priority would be given to reunification of families, which may also involve the transfer of a number of Cypriots at present in the south to the north’.
The results of the Agreement are well known. Within the space of a few months, the number of Turkish Cypriots remaining in the south was reduced to 130. The Greek Cypriot population in the north also shrank, but more gradually, such that it was only around 500 by the early 1990s.
Given the two sides’ very different experiences of the context and their more or less conflicting concerns, it is perhaps not surprising that their interpretations of the Vienna Agreement have always diverged. The Turkish Cypriot side refers to the Agreement as the ‘1975 Vienna Population Exchange Agreement’ or the ‘Voluntary Re-grouping of Population Agreement’, and has come to see it as simply meaning that ‘the Turkish Cypriots living in the south would be allowed to move to the north, if they wished to do so, and the Greek Cypriots living in the north would be allowed to move to the south, if they desired so’. The Greek Cypriots, in contrast, talk about it as the ‘Vienna III (Humanitarian) Agreement’, which, if implemented properly, ‘would have allowed 20,000 Greek Cypriots and Maronites to stay and live a normal life in the occupied Karpasia Peninsula and the Maronite villages’.
It is important to emphasize that the Greek Cypriots accepted this agreement under the pressure of circumstances and despite their general unease at the time that it might help the Turkish Cypriot aim of ‘partition’. They agreed because they decided it was the only way to stop the Turks from ‘expelling’ the remaining 10,000 Greek Cypriots in the north. They also wanted to ensure that the Turkish Cypriots trying to cross to the Turkish-controlled north would not be attacked by Greek Cypriot paramilitaries, as they feared such attacks might trigger further southward incursion by the Turkish army.
One Greek Cypriot leader who opposed the Agreement was Dr Vassos Lyssarides, then leader of the Greek Cypriot political party EDEK (United Central Democratic Union). According to Clerides, his objection was that ‘by allowing the Turkish Cypriots to go north we impliedly accepted that the solution would be based on a bizonal federation, and that it would constitute an impediment to the return of all refugees to their homes’.
In fact, as it turned out, this is exactly how the Turkish Cypriots have come to interpret the Agreement. The following statement (co-authored by a prominent Turkish law professor and a Turkish Cypriot former Supreme Court judge) sums up the Turkish Cypriot side’s attitude on this matter:
This Agreement, reached under the auspices of the UN Secretary-General and implemented in September 1975 under UN supervision, consolidated the peace reached as the result of the Turkish Peace Operation. The voluntary regrouping of populations made it feasible for the two peoples of Cyprus to live in complete security in their respective zones. No intercommunal fighting or acts of violence took place in Cyprus since the implementation of the Agreement.... The peace achieved by the Turkish Peace Operation became a permanent feature in the island.
The suggestion made here – in a way that can only be perceived as offensive by Greek Cypriots – is that not only had peace been achieved through the Turkish military operation, but the division of the island itself was voluntarily ‘finalised’ with the approval of the UN.
According to this view of things, the Agreement ‘was reached for an exchange of populations as a first step towards the establishment of a bi-zonal federal Republic.’31 ‘The juridical and bi-zonal status of the two communities was established’ by this Agreement whereby ‘the freedom of movement to the North of the Turks enclaved in the South and freedom of movement of Greeks living in the North to the South was accepted by the intercommunal negotiators’.32 Therefore, it ‘is the very foundation of a bi-zonal solution for the two communities accepted both by Clerides [in 1975] and Makarios [in 1977]’ and later in 1979 by Kyprianou [...]"
Population exchange under the Vienna III Agreement
• As a result of a 1975 agreement between Greek and Turkish Cypriots some 140,000 Greek Cypriots moved from the north to the south and 60,000 Turkish Cypriots moved from the south to the north
• The agreement also stipulated that Greek Cypriots who wanted to remain in the north would receive assistance to lead a normal life there
• The northern part of the island became mainly Turkish Cypriot, while the southern part of the island became mainly Greek Cypriot
• Turkey has since encouraged migration to northern Cyprus from Turkey proper, though there is no consensus on the number of such immigrants.................
sorce:internal displacement monitor center.