Cyprus-Forum.com

[Lordo]

if the ethnic cleansing was not started in 1963 i suspect we would not be having this conversation, unfortunately you will pay for what you ancestor committed.

You are lying again. The aim of the TC leadership and Turkey was partition. Resettling TCs and then ethnically cleansing everybody else was part of the Turkish partition plan, something that your leader Denktash has admitted. It just didn't work as you hoped in the 60s, and most of the TCs returned to their own homes by 1968. In the 60s the TCs even forced the Armenians out of the Armenian sector of Nicosia.

The conflict in the 60s was a continuation of the inter-communal conflict that TCs started against us in the 50s, with the aim to help UK and Turkey to refuse to the Cypriot people their freedom and self-determination so that they (UK, Turkey, Turkish minority in Cyprus) would have gains on the expense of the majority of the Cypriot population. Yet you selectively choose a tiny section of our history out of context, you distort it, and then you tell us: "you will pay for what you ancestor committed".

Really? So we have to be punished because our ancestors for a mere decade responded in kind to your crimes against us? What about your punishment for the crimes of your own ancestors and your own crimes which you continue to commit now? All the problems between us started when your ancestors, without any provocation from our, invaded our island, butchered 10s of thousands of Cypriots, and then went on to oppress the Cypriot people for over 3 centuries. Then just 80 years after the end of Ottoman rule you again collaborated with foreign imperialists, attacked us starting a conflict, and imposed on us by force and blackmail an undemocratic and racist system. And now and for the last 38 years you illegally occupy our lands, keeping 200.000 Cypriots out of their own homes.

And then you tell us that we have to be punished because of what our ancestors did and you should be rewarded on our expense, when your own ancestors and yourselves now are the ones who for the 99% of our common history on this island were the ones who were committing the crimes?

As long as you are looking for lame excuses to cause yet more harm to the Cypriot people there will be no peace in Cyprus.

After the end of Ottoman rule we forgave you of 100s of years of oppression against us, and until 1958 when you started the conflict we lived together with relatively few problems between us. And we are now willing to forgive you again for almost 4 decades of illegal occupation. On the other hand you are selectively choosing and distorting a tiny part of our common history, trying to use that as an excuse to demand that we should be punished and you should be rewarded on our expense. Is this your idea of how to achieve peace?

An acceptable peace proposal is one that does not compromise universally accepted principles such as freedom, democracy, human rights and equality of all citizens without racist discriminations. Such issues shouldn't even be negotiated but should be taken as a given for any kind of real solution. Unfortunately you keep 1/3rd of our island as hostage and use it to blackmail us and force us to agree on a "solution" that doesn't include any of the above. So even if one day your blackmail works (as it did in 1960) and we are forced to agree on some undemocratic and racist "agreement", that will not be the solution of the Cyprus Problem, nor it will bring peace.

Piratis a single proposal in 1973 makes all your arguments trash.

Let me remind you what clerides and dengtash agreed.

1. all thirteen amendments accepted.
2. unified local authorities.
3. no enosis ot taksim ever.

as makarios was the only person to refuse this agreement who is it that did not want peace. you really need to study your history with a little more accuracy then waht is taught at school or a church.

begs the question if turkey and dengtash accepted the above agreement then how could they also harbour thoughts of taksim.

however there is a remote possibility that you are right and they banking on the greek cypriot leadership being stupid enough to reject the proposal. but i am inclined to believe that they realised that taksim was never gona happen and thet greek cypriot leadership would never be so stupid as to reject it.

[Piratis]

Denktash was hardliner partitionist from the 50s until the day he died. The thirteen amendments were proposed by Makarios and they were rejected by Turkey and TCs and at no point did they accept them, certainly not in writing officially. (what you are talking about are at most rumors)

But for the sake of argument lets say that Denktash put his signature on the thirteen amendments (something which never happened) and Makarios had gone crazy and rejected his own proposals. That would be one mistake by Makarios. How would that erase the whole history until that point and excuse further crimes such as the ethnic cleansing of 100s of thousands of innocent civilians?

In general, I never claimed that GCs never committed crimes or never made mistakes. What I say is that the Turks/TCs have committed far more crimes for far longer periods against us. Therefore the TCs are not justified to demand our punishment and their reward based on what happened in the past. If we have to be punished once for past mistakes then the TCs/Turks would have to be punished 10 times more, not rewarded.

If we are going to achieve peace then the way to do it is by forgiving each other for the past mistakes and crimes, and create in Cyprus a modern democratic state with respect to human rights where all citizens are equal without any racist discriminations or segregation, so that what happened in the past will not happen again.

If you selectively choose tiny parts of history out of context in an attempt to falsely present our side as the "bad" ones and your side as the "innocent" ones in order to excuse yet more crimes against us then no peace will ever be found.

[Lordo]

Here it is.

http://www.cyprus-conflict.net/Clerides ... %2771.html

and here.

http://www.cyprus-conflict.net/clerides ... t%202.html

here is the sentence.

Clerides, in his memoirs, acknowledges that “a major mistake was committed by Makarios” and the Government in not accepting the advice the letter contained.

[kurupetos]

Here it is.

http://www.cyprus-conflict.net/Clerides ... %2771.html

and here.

http://www.cyprus-conflict.net/clerides ... t%202.html

here is the sentence.

Clerides, in his memoirs, acknowledges that “a major mistake was committed by Makarios” and the Government in not accepting the advice the letter contained.

Who gives a f*ck? Clerides is a traitor like Bananiot.

[Piratis]

Here it is.

http://www.cyprus-conflict.net/Clerides ... %2771.html

and here.

http://www.cyprus-conflict.net/clerides ... t%202.html

here is the sentence.

Clerides, in his memoirs, acknowledges that “a major mistake was committed by Makarios” and the Government in not accepting the advice the letter contained.

I didn't read the whole documents yet, but from a quick look I had it seems that this is just letters exchanged during negotiations, not an acceptance of the 13 points. Denktash also says that the letters express just his "personal views" and that " there was no binding agreement on any specific matter". Also, while Denktash seems to compromise (in a non binding way) on certain things he also has demands for a "local self-government" which might have been seen as a stepping stone to partition (which is what Denktash wanted from the 50s until the day he died).

So your position that the Turkish side accepted the 13 points is false. Denktash just expressed his personal and non-binding views about making certain compromises, if our side had also accepted his demands as a package deal. Beyond that maybe Makarios could have handled the negotiations better at that point and maybe an agreement could be possible. I will repeat that I never claimed that our side never made anything wrong. What I am saying is that your side did far more wrongs for far longer periods of time and therefore you are in no way excused to demand that we should be punished and you should be rewarded on our expense.

[supporttheunderdog]

Denktash admitted on at least two occasions the infamous bombing outside the Turkish Embassy, which was followed by attacks on Greek Cypriots, their homes and properties was carried out on his orders, for the express purpose of promoting intercomunal violence.

One then has the widely reported comments of Ambassador Dirvana (first made in Millyet on 15th may 1964) who openly accused Denktash of doing everything to sabotage independance in the early 1960' leading up to events in 1963/4.

within that one has some indications that the 1962 bombings of the Bayraktar and Ömeriye mosques were organised by a Special War Department of the Turkish Government, with the intent of causng ferment.

therefore to blame the Greek Speaking Cypriots is at best one sided. However playing blame game about the is not going to solve the problems of now.

[Lordo]

Here it is.

http://www.cyprus-conflict.net/Clerides ... %2771.html

and here.

http://www.cyprus-conflict.net/clerides ... t%202.html

here is the sentence.

Clerides, in his memoirs, acknowledges that “a major mistake was committed by Makarios” and the Government in not accepting the advice the letter contained.

I didn't read the whole documents yet, but from a quick look I had it seems that this is just letters exchanged during negotiations, not an acceptance of the 13 points. Denktash also says that the letters express just his "personal views" and that " there was no binding agreement on any specific matter". Also, while Denktash seems to compromise (in a non binding way) on certain things he also has demands for a "local self-government" which might have been seen as a stepping stone to partition (which is what Denktash wanted from the 50s until the day he died).

So your position that the Turkish side accepted the 13 points is false. Denktash just expressed his personal and non-binding views about making certain compromises, if our side had also accepted his demands as a package deal. Beyond that maybe Makarios could have handled the negotiations better at that point and maybe an agreement could be possible. I will repeat that I never claimed that our side never made anything wrong. What I am saying is that your side did far more wrongs for far longer periods of time and therefore you are in no way excused to demand that we should be punished and you should be rewarded on our expense.

piratis you have not understood my argument at all. here you are claiming that turkey and dengtash wanted taksim since the 50s and 60s and yet here we have evidence that not only turkey did not believe it at this time but managed to get dengtash to accept a settlement excluding taksim.

there was a meeting between kucuk and inonu in the 60s where kucuk begged him to come and save the turkish cypriots. his reply was certainly we will come and save you from the greek cypriots but then who will save you from us go back and make peace.

the fact that clerides recommended it to makarios and instead of putting it to a vote he dismissed it goes to show what makarios was about. nothing less than enosis would do for him even at this stage when the greek generals were attempting to kill him.

[Piratis]

The argument you are trying to make is false. Turkey tried to invade in 1964 but she was stopped by the Americans. Denktash was negotiating something different than partition, not because he didn't want partition but because at the time he couldn't find a way of achieving it. Even then, he was still trying to achieve a form of division - a possible stepping stone for partition - by demanding "local self-government".

But the most obvious fact that shows clearly what Turkey wanted was what happened in 1974. Turkey took advantage of the first excuse that she found to invade and partition Cyprus. Her first invasion was followed by a second one, even when Junta fell and your friend Cleredes was in power. And they continue occupying the north part of Cyprus decades after their lame excuse expired. What more evidence do you need?

So don't tell me that in 1971 Turkey and Denktash didn't want partition and then all of a sudden they wanted partition in 1974. What changed is not what they wanted - that was always the same. What changed is that in 1971 they didn't have an excuse to impose partition, but in 1974 they found one.

On the other hand Makarios was the last one who would truly want enosis, especially after the Junta took over in Athens. Sure, he was sometimes paying lip-service to collect votes from some of the voters who felt the injustice of Cyprus not being given its self-determination, but why would he want to downgrade himself from a Country Leader (something he had secured for life with the kind of support that he had) to a mere archbishop with no direct power?

That said, I don't know if some Turkish leaders (e.g. Inonou) where not proponents of partition. If that is a case they are certainly a minority. The evidence we have from 1958, 1964, 1974-2012 is that the objective of the Turkish side is to achieve the highest degree of partition possible.

[B25]

Cleredes was in power. And they continue occupying the north part of Cyprus decades after their lame excuse expired. What more evidence do you need?

So don't tell me that in 1971 Turkey and Denktash didn't want partition and then all of a sudden they wanted partition in 1974. What changed is not what they wanted - that was always the same. What changed is that in 1971 they didn't have an excuse to impose partition, but in 1974 they found one.

No Piratis, they didn't find it, it was engineered by the CIA/UK and presented to Turkey on a silver platter. Unfortunately for us, some of our own were blinded by the money and aided and abbetted this scheme and thats why Turkey came. Turkey would always have been looking for some excuse and if it wasn't in '74 with the Junta, it would have been something else, another false flag operation to get a reason to come in.

[umit07]

The problem is each side knows exactly what the latter wants, we're just disillusioned with what can be deemed acceptable to both parties.

GC's want TC's to integrate themselves back into the RoC and are willing to provide provisional measures to accommodate. Whilst TC's want a confederation (although we call it a federation) and will offer to hand back territory to reduce the size of the TC statelet. Neither is acceptable hence the situation we are in. TC's continue to live off handouts from Turkey whilst the GC's wait for a shift in regional dynamics so they can crush the rodent Turkish remnants for once and for good.