Cyprus-Forum.com

[Sotos]

What is so bad with making a proposal cypezokyli? Why making a proposal should have consequences? Like we didn't even have the right to say anything! WTF?

[cypezokyli]

it depends on the proposal soto.
it depends on what you propose. at the time a number of gc officials were still referring to enosis and at the same time "proposed" that the tc give willingly their veto away. great strategy. full of success prospect.
makarios overestimated the support of the international comunity (mainly due to an english diplomat) and underestimeted the reaction of tc and turkey. the question is : what did he expect the tc to do?

[Eric dayi]

John Reddaway commented: "The record of the Greek Cypriot leaders' statements
[after independence] can not but raise serious doubts about the sincerity of their wish
to see the constitution succeed. From the outset they continued to proclaim publicly
their undiminished devotion to the cause of Enosis and their conviction that this was
still attainable if independence was treated not as an end itself but simply as a stage on
the road to union with Greece." Reddaway op. cit. p.132


Even Greek Cypriot authors and historians have admitted that the Greek Cypriot leaders
were consciously and deliberately trying to create the impression that constitution was
not workable in order to justify the overthrow of the bi-communal settlement and reopen
the way to Enosis or total Greek domination. Zenon Stavrinides concluded that
"the constitution represented a set of arrangements which fell short of Enosis , and
short of a Greek-dominated independent state. This fact alone was sufficient to make
nationalist Greek leaders, and their obedient community unwilling to make the
constitution work" Z. Stavrinides, Op. Cit, p.55
13 POINTS OF AMENDMENT
Makarios submitted his 13 points aiming to reduce or completely remove the
constitutional rights of the Turkish Cypriots, both to Dr. Kücük, the vice president, and
to Ankara towards the end of November, at a time when intercommunal tension was
high. The Turkish side rightly rejected them, with justified explanation that this
attempt to change the basic articles of the constitution would create a dangerous
precedent. The effect of the Archbishop's 13 points would have been to abolish many of
the provisions for separate Communal institutions or rights and to create a unitary state
dominated by the Greeks with some guarantees for the Turkish Community, the model
of which was one that had already devastated and disintegrated the Turks left under
the Greek administration in the Aegean islands and Western Thrace.


ARMING PARAMILITARY GROUPS
This move of the Greek Cypriot leadership increased the tension between the two
communities. Clerides admits that "The Turkish Cypriots had more reasons to fear" and
in fact on the Greek Cypriot side there were both the forces which intended to change
the constitution and the forces which opposed independence.

[Eric dayi]

THE LONDON CONFERENCE

On January 1st 1964, Makarios declared that the treaties of Guarantee and Alliance were abrogated unilaterally. However, Duncan Sandys, the British Minister for Commonwealth Affairs who was in Cyprus for cease-fire talks had strongly protested this move by visiting Makarios and warning him about the serious consequences of this folly. Eventually Makarios had to alter his decision stating that it was the Greeks' desire
to secure the termination of the two treaties by appropriate means. Sands also convinced both Cypriot sides to participate in a meeting to be held in London in order to find a solution to the problem. Turkey and Greece were invited also as guarantors and interested parties. The London Conference failed to achieve any result, because the Greek side insisted on a revision of the constitution in accordance with the 13 points submitted earlier by Makarios.


The British suggestion to send Cyprus a NATO force to replace the British truce force was rejected by Makarios who insisted on having a UN peacekeeping force instead under the control of the UN Security Council, where Soviet Russia was a permanent member and the non-aligned states could also be influential. Both the Soviets and non-aligned countries were openly supporting Makarios.

[Eric dayi]

THE AKRITAS PLAN
Clerides revealed in his memoirs that the Greek Cypriots, immediately after the Cyprus
Republic was established, had decided to draw up a plan, "by virtue of which stage, by
stage, by unilateral actions they would abolish the `excessive rights' granted the
`Turkish minority', beginning with those amendments that were easier to make
unilaterally and leaving the most difficult ones after our right for unilateral
amendments was established by a de facto process". (Clerides op. cit, p. 207)


Prof. FORSTHOFF RESIGNED: The neutral West German judge Professor Dr. Ernst
Forsthoff of Heidelberg University who presided over the supreme constitutional Court
of Cyprus had to resign in 1963 in protest at Makarios's insistence not to implement the
vital provisions of the constitution, particularly those concerning the separate
municipalities in 5 towns. When in 1963 the rulings of the Court were rejected and
flouted by Makarios and his ministers the neutral judge had no other alternative but to
resign.


On 5 January 1964 Prof. Forsthoff, in an interview with Associated press said: "From the
moment I commenced my duties I noticed that there were allegations to the effect that
the constitution was not capable of being implemented, that revision was necessary and
the like. I faced these allegations with the following thought: Every constitution can
have its peculiar problems. There is no constitution in the world which has not got its
particular difficulties and problems. This is primarily a question of goodwill. If there is
goodwill a constitution can be implemented and this constitution is capable of being
implemented."

[Eric dayi]

The 13 points that Makarios demanded to be chandged were ruled as unconstitunal and illegal by the Cyprus High Court but Makarios disregarded the courts ruling and locked out the Turkish Politicians and other civil servants.

Proposals my foot!

[Viewpoint]

the fact that turkey rejected them before the tc...is a fact.
besides being a fact, i dont see its importance. if turkey wouldnt reject them first, would the tc accept them?
how clever did someone need to be to realise that the tc wouldnt accept the removal of the veto ?
it was a proposal affecting the core of the agreement signed just 3 years before.
it lead with mathematical accuracy to clashes and the collapse of the agreements
and it was exactly what was needed to strengthen the tc nationalism.

if you dont want to call it unilateral act, then call it one of the biggest stupidit acts of makarios whose concequence we still pay today

Well said cypezokyli, although we do not see eye to eye on many things I applaud your methodical and unbiased evaluation, well done, if only there were more GC like yourself who stand up and admitt they were wrong and do not continue to support the same ideologies that divided Cyprus, we would have resolved our issues a long time ago. It was the same blindness and inflexibility of people like Piratis and Kifeas on boths sides back then which has not changed and is displayed very much today even on this forum. Do we really want to go back to those dark days knowing that the mindset has not really changed and that although many Cypriots pay lip service to wanting unification they have hidden agendas just like in the past, so whats changed? have we learned from our mistakes? from what I read on this forum I doubt this very much and rather not enter to an agreement and put people on both sides into an explosive situation.

[Alexios]

At some point Makarios got 97% of the G/Cs vote..what does that make us..???

[Kifeas]

Dayi, all the things that you claimed above are indeed very impressive. It is not the first time I read or hear them. They come straight from the TC /Turkish propaganda archives.
Assuming that everything you claimed above is correct and it is not one-sided (I know they are one-sided,) can you tell me just one international organization (such as the UN,) or just one international court (such as the Hague,) in which the TC community or the Turkish government took refuge and /or action against the RoC, either during the time that all those things that you mentioned were happening, or even after them? If not the TCs alone, the Turkish government as a co-founder of the RoC and as a guarantor of its constitutional order and functionality, had a perfectly legitimate right to bring up any or all of the above issues that you described to the UN security council and /or the international Court of Hague which trials and rules upon disputes between countries. Where and what action did the Turkish government take then? You want the answer? None! Absolutely none! Do you know why? Because it is not in its nature and /or philosophy as a state to respect and abide by international law and proper civilized nation contact. To the contrary, it is part of its nature and philosophy as a state (Kemalist state) to always assume the right and also try and self-administer justice.

Do you know what happens when someone attempts to self-administer justice? The end result is to loose the righteousness of his own case, assuming that he had one in the first place. This is exactly what happened with Turkey and the TCs.

[Alexios]

Why do you insist taking mr Dayi so seriously??!!!!:)))