Cyprus-Forum.com

[Sotos]

INTRODUCTION

The Cyprus problem, simple in its essence, has been complicated through foreign intervention and has grown into a major dispute endangering peace in the sensitive Middle East region with its repercussions felt almost all over the world. The Cyprus problem has been in the international foreground for a long time, occupying the United Nations and other international fora almost without pause for the last thirty years. During this period the world organisation has been actively involved in peace operations and mediation efforts. Regretfully, existing procedures have proved insufficient to tackle the dispute effectively and restore peace and order in this small but sorely tried island whose only concern is the welfare and progress of its people - a failure due to the inability to impress on Turkey, the main party responsible for the continuous aggravation of the dispute, the need to comply with U.N. resolutions. On the other hand the great powers have not pressed Turkey hard enough to put an end to its aggressive policy against a small state.
The Turkish invasion of July and August 1974 - following the ill-conceived abortive antiMakarios coup and the subsequent occupation of about 37 per cent of the island's territory, resulting in the displacement of some 200.000 Greek Cypriots and the destruction of the country's prosperity and development prospects - dictate that humanity cannot afford to let the Cyprus problem drag on unresolved for much longer. Most countries, through the United Nations, have taken a stand demanding implementation of the U.N. resolutions and have agreed at the Security Council and General Assembly debates, that foreign intervention and foreign military presence must cease and Cyprus must be left alone to settle its own problems. But Turkey has been turning a deaf ear to all these calls, ignoring both resolutions and principles.
Moreover, in defiance of all internationally accepted principles and in violation of all concepts about human rights, the Turkish authorities have been systematically expelling the remaining Greek Cypriot population from the occupied area, while Turks from the mainland are imported to settle in homes forcibly left behind in the occupied area, thus seeking to change the demographic structure of the island, as a first step to partition and eventual annexation.

Historical Background

Cyprus is the third largest island in the Mediterranean with an area of 9.251 square kilometers. It lies in the north-eastern corner of the East Mediterranean basin, at the meeting point of three continents - Europe, Asia and Africa - a fact which has added considerably to the island's importance and development. Cyprus' population at the end of 1992 was 718.000. Population distribution by ethnic group is 81,7% Greek Cypriots including Maronites, Armenians, Latins and others and 18,3% Turkish Cypriots.
Since early times Cyprus has had an eventful history, mostly the result of its geographical position. It appeared for the first time in the history of civilisation in the 7th millennium B.C. during the Neolithic period. This period, which lasted three millennia, was followed by the Chalcolithic period. The Bronze Age followed which lasted until 1100 B.C. During the last phase of this period, in the 13th century B.C., the Mycenean Greeks came for this first time to Cyprus as merchants and immigrants. They settled and they introduced the Greek language and culture both of which have been preserved to this day. At the end of the 4th century B.C. Cyprus became part of the Kingdom of Alexander the Great. During the first century B.C. it became a province of the Great Roman Empire and remained as such until the 4th century A.D. when it was included in the eastern part of the Roman Empire. This marks the beginning of the Byzantine period, which lasted until the 12th century A.D. when, during the Crusades, King Richard Coeur de Lion, conquered the island. Very soon, however, Cyprus came under the rule of the Lusignan family, which remained and ruled Cyprus until the 15th century. In 1489 Cyprus became part of the Republic of Venice and in 1571 it was conquered by the Ottomans. Cyprus remained under Ottoman rule together with the Greek mainland and the other Greek islands for centuries. However, after the 1821 Greek uprising and the liberation struggle, the various parts of Greece gradually attained independence. Cyprus also participated in the Greek War of Independence and a large number of Cypriots fought and fell during this war, particularly in the battle of Athens in 1828. (At the beginning of Greece's War of Independence a number of Bishops in Cyprus were hanged by the Turkish occupation authorities, having been accused of supporting the revolution). The question of the incorporation of Cyprus in the Greek state was raised soon after 1830, but it did not become possible and Cyprus remained under Ottoman rule until 1878. In that year the expansionist policy of Tsarist Russia caused the Turks to cede Cyprus to Britain which promised to help Turkey in the event of an attack by Russia on certain bordering provinces. The Turco-British agreement was concluded in complete disregard of the wishes and interests of the Cypriot people, who demanded incorporation of their island as part of Greece.
At the outbreak of the First World War, Cyprus was annexed to the British Empire, and in 1925 it was formally declared a British Crown Colony. By that time Turkey had, under the Treaty of Lausanne of 1923, Article 16, renounced all claim to Cyprus and by Article 27 of the same Treaty divested itself of the exercise of any power or jurisdiction in political, legislative, or administrative matters over the nationals of Cyprus. When Cyprus was declared a British Crown Colony, the Turkish population of the island - descendants of members of the Turkish occupation force and expatriates from Turkey - were invited to choose between repatriation to Turkey or permanent settlement in Cyprus, and a number of them chose to remain in Cyprus. At that time it had never been intended or expected, that the Turkish minority would become the arbiters of the country's destiny. From 1878 when Cyprus was handed over to Britain, until April 1955, when the struggle for liberation from British rule was started by the Greek Cypriots, the Turks in Cyprus intermingled with the Greek people and lived in peace and harmony with them.

Anti-Colonial Struggle

In 1955, after a long but unsuccessful struggle to attain their freedom by peaceful means, the people of Cyprus took up arms against the colonial power. The British Government, in its attempt to thwart the Cyprus people's aspirations for self-determination, exploited the presence in Cyprus of the Turkish Cypriot minority, and sought assistance from Turkey in obstructing the natural trend of events in Cyprus. After some hesitation the Turkish Government accepted the invitation to intervene in Cyprus, in defiance of its solemn undertaking under the Treaty of Lausanne, and a section of the Turkish Cypriot minority in Cyprus became the instrument both of British colonialism and of a new expansionist tendency in Turkey. The British Government, moreover threatened that if selfdetermination were ever to be achieved in Cyprus the result would be the partition of the island since the Turkish Cypriot minority would be offered the right to self-determination separately. That threat might have been intended to discourage the Cypriot people's struggle for freedom, but its consequences were quite different. Instead, the partition of Cyprus became an objective of Turkish foreign policy and a number of Turkish Cypriots took up arms against the Cypriot freedom fighters while the Turkish Cypriot leadership advocated either partition or the continuation of British colonial rule.

Zurich and London Agreements - The Constitution - The Treaties

At the conclusion of a conference in Zurich on 11 February 1959, agreement was reached between Greece and Turkey on a plan for a settlement. On 19 February, following a conference in London, attended by the representatives of Greece, Turkey, Britain and the two Cypriot communities, an agreement was signed for the final settlement of the Cyprus dispute.

On the basis of the Zurich and London Agreements, which were in fact imposed on the people of Cyprus, a constitution was drafted and Cyprus was proclaimed an independent state on 16 August 1960. It has often been asserted that the Zurich and London Agreements were freely signed by the representatives of the Cypriot people; but the only reason the Cypriot people's representatives signed them was because the sole alternative would have been the continued denial of independence and freedom, continued bloodshed and, possibly, the forced partition of Cyprus.

The Constitution provided for, under the Agreements, divided the people into two communities on the basis of ethnic origin and the Turkish Cypriot minority was given rights disproportionate to its size. The President had to be a Greek Cypriot elected by the Greek Cypriots, and the Vice-President a Turkish Cypriot elected by the Turkish Cypriots. The Vice-President was granted the right of a final veto on fundamental laws passed by the House of Representatives and on decisions of the Council of Ministers which was composed of ten ministers, three of whom had to be Turkish Cypriots (although only 18 per cent of the population) and be nominated for appointment by the Vice-President. In the House of Representatives, the Turkish Cypriots were elected separately by their own community. The House had no power to modify the Constitution in any respect in so far as it concerned its basic articles and any other modification required a majority of twothirds of both the Greek Cypriot and the Turkish Cypriot members. Any modification of the Electoral Law and the adoption of any law relating to municipalities or any fiscal laws required separate simple majorities of the Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot members of the House. Thus 8 Turkish Cypriot members of the House could defeat a bill voted for by 35 Greek Cypriot members and 7 Turkish Cypriot members. In fact in 1963, when the fiscal laws according to Article 78 of the Constitution expired, the 15 Turkish Cypriot members defeated an income tax bill voted by the 35 Greek members, thus depriving the state of one of its main sources of income.

The highest judicial organs, the Supreme Constitutional Court and the High Court of Justice, had to be presided over by neutral presidents - neither Greek Cypriot nor Turkish Cypriot - who by virtue of their casting votes were supposed to maintain the balance between the Greek and Turkish members of the Courts. Whereas under the colonial regime Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot judges tried all cases irrespective of the origin of the litigants without any complaint ever having been made, the above Agreements provided that disputes among Turkish Cypriots be tried by Turkish Cypriot judges only, disputes among Greek Cypriots by Greek Cypriot judges only, and disputes between Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots by mixed courts composed of both Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot judges. Thus for a petty offence which involved a Greek Cypriot and a Turkish Cypriot, two judges had to sit and try the case. The procedure, apart from being unnecessarily expensive, was conducive to creating a biased judiciary.

In addition to the above provisions, which proved to be both unreasonable and impracticable, separate Greek and Turkish Communal Chambers were created with legislative and administrative powers in regard to educational, religious, cultural, sporting and charitable matters, cooperative and credit societies, and questions of personal status. Separate municipalities were envisaged for Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots in the five largest towns of the island. Such separation, apart from being impracticable, as the population and properties in many places were intermixed, made their functioning disproportionately expensive for small towns such as those of Cyprus. The Turkish Cypriots held 30 per cent of the posts in the Civil Service and comprised 40 per cent of the Police Force and Army.

As a result of the Zurich and London Agreements, as briefly shown above, the proper functioning of the state became virtually impossible through a constitutional structure conceived at a time of tension and suspicion and based on notions aiming at divisions rather than cooperation and unity.

But apart from the Zurich and London Agreements, two treaties were also signed which constituted an infringement of the independence of the Republic of Cyprus and which became part and parcel of the package deal agreed upon in Zurich. These were:

1. The Treaty of Guarantee between Cyprus on the one hand and Greece, Britain, and Turkey on the other, whereby the said three powers were given the right of joint or even unilateral action for the purpose of re-establishing the state of affairs created by the Treaty and
2. The Treaty of Alliance between Cyprus, Greece and Turkey to station contingents of their own forces on the island.
It should be noted, however, that these Treaties were never presented to the House of Representatives for ratification as the House would not have ratified them and an impasse would have been created from the earliest days of the birth of the Republic.
The Treaties, moreover, were in direct conflict with the basic principles of international law and morality, with the principles of the United Nations Charter and with the right of every state to full sovereignty and independence. They authorized foreign powers to take such action as would constitute an unprecedented intervention in the domestic affairs of an independent state and member of the United Nations, and violated the internationally accepted principles of democratic government, majority rule and equality among citizens. The United Nations Mediator on Cyprus, Dr. Galo Plaza, in paragraph 163 of his report to the U.N. Secretary-General in March 1965, described the 1960 Constitution, created by the Zurich and London Agreements, as "a constitutional oddity", and in paragraph 129 he stated that difficulties in implementing the Treaties signed on the basis of those Agreements had begun almost immediately after independence.

Nevertheless, the people of Cyprus did their best to ensure the smooth functioning of the new state, but their efforts were doomed to failure. In November 1963 the then President of the Republic, Archbishop Makarios in his sincere desire to improve the situation, suggested thirteen amendments to the Constitution - amendments not involving any radical changes but designed rather to remove some of the more obvious causes of friction. Those amendments were submitted to the leaders of the Turkish Cypriot minority in Cyprus, but before they had a chance to consider them the Turkish Government - to which they had been communicated simply for information - said they were unacceptable, thus compelling the Turkish Cypriot leadership to follow suit.

Partition, the Old Aim

In December 1963 there was a more ominous reaction from the Turkish Government - the rebellion against the state launched by T.M.T. (the Turkish terrorist organisation in Cyprus), and threats of invasion and acts of aggression by Turkey itself, which used the President's proposals for amending the Constitution as an excuse for putting into effect her long-prepared plan for the partition of Cyprus.

The Vice-President publicly declared that the Republic of Cyprus had ceased to exist, and along with the three Turkish Cypriot Ministers, the Turkish Cypriot members of the House as well as the Turkish Cypriot civil servants, withdrew from the Government. On the false pretext that the Government of Cyprus and its forces were about to annihilate the Turkish Cypriot minority, the agents of Turkey in Cyprus, controlled by Turkish officers from Turkey, resorted to the forcible movement of sections of the Turkish Cypriot population, not for their protection as alleged at the time but in order to create compact Turkish areas and bring about a geographical separation of the Turkish minority from the Cypriot people. The Turkish contingent stationed in Cyprus under the Treaty of Alliance, assisted the rebels by moving out of its barracks and illegally deploying in the northern part of Nicosia in hostile occupation of Cyprus territory.

That the underlying reason for obstructing the Constitution was to further Ankara's partitionist plans was openly admitted by the Turks themselves. Given below are some of their statements on the subject, together with press reports:

New York Times, 31.12.1963
Vice-President Fazil Kutchuk said today that the Cyprus Constitution no longer existed because these was "no possibility" of the Turkish and Greek communities living together on the island. Dr. Kutchuk, leader of the Turkish Cypriots, declared: "the Cyprus Constitution is dead".

New York Herald Tribune, 31.12.1963
"The Cyprus Constitution is dead", Dr. Kutchuk, the leader of the island Republic's Turkish community, told reporters. Asked if he wanted Cyprus partitioned between the Turkish minority and Greek majority, he replied: "Call it partition if you like".

Special News Bulletin, 5.1.1964 (issued by the Turkish Cypriot leadership)
Dr. Kutchuk: "I am a Vice-President elected by the Turks of Cyprus and I shall continue to perform my duties towards them. It is out of the question to collaborate any longer with a Government responsible"

Public statement by Kemal Satir, former Vice-President of Turkey, 1964:
"Cyprus will be divided into two sections, one of which will join Turkey".

Statement by F.C. Erkin the then Foreign Minister of Turkey to an Athens newspaper in June 1964:
"The radical solutionΙ would be to cede one part of Cyprus to Greece and the other, closest to the Turkish Asiatic coast, to Turkey".

Address by the then Prime Minister of Turkey, Ismet Inonu, before the Turkish National Assembly, with reference to the Geneva talks of that year:
"Officially, we promoted the federation concept, rather than the partition thesis so as to remain within the provisions of the Treaty".

It is worth noting that the agenda of the Council of Ministers was continuously sent to the Turkish Cypriot Vice-President and the Turkish Cypriot Ministers many months after the 1963 incidents, but they obstinately refused to attend the meetings in order to prove that the state no longer existed.

The Turkish Terrorist Organisation T.M.T.

The first inter-communal violence in the recent history of Cyprus was, in fact, caused by T.M.T. This was the result of a policy of hate cultivated by the Turkish Cypriot leadership and it aimed at persuading world public opinion that Turkish Cypriots could not co-exist with Greek Cypriots and, therefore, partition in one form or another was necessary. On 12 June 1958 eight innocent and unarmed Greek Cypriot civilians from Kondemenos village were murdered by T.M.T. terrorists near the Turkish populated village of Geunyeli. That was the first incident involving human lives. According to the findings of the "Commission of Inquiry into the Incidents at Geunyeli" (appointed by the British colonial administration), which were also included in the official report of Sir Paget Bourke, Chief Justice of Cyprus, "for some days prior to 12 June, in fact from 7 June, inter-communal feeling was running very high in the island and there had been many instances of attacks by Turks, particularly in Nicosia, upon members of the Greek community and upon Greek property". There is no reference to attacks on Turkish Cypriots as there were no such attacks. The T.M.T. terrorists attacked again in 1963. This is evidenced by the fact that they were found in possession of vast quantities of arms. Moreover, Turkish intentions were revealed in the "Deniz" incident when the Turkish ship full of arms was sent to Cyprus as early as 1959, after the conclusion of the Agreement on Cyprus.

And to quote "the New York Times" of 27.12.1963:
"Most of the fighting centered on a police station occupied by Turks in Nicosia, and on family apartments in the suburb of Omorphita. These were overrun and occupied by Turks who chased off Greek families. They were reported to have killed an unspecified number of women and children".

London Conference

In January 1964, in view of the serious situation resulting from the fighting in Cyprus, the threats and acts of intervention and aggression from outside, and the forcible movement of population, the British Government convened a conference in London to deal with the problem. But a few days after the conference had started it became clear that its purpose was to persuade the Cyprus Government to agree a) to the dispatch to Cyprus of troops from various countries friendly and allied to Britain and Turkey for the ostensible purpose of maintaining law and order, and b) to the establishment of an intergovernment committee, with the participation of governments supplying contingents, to issue directives to the troops. Whatever might have been the motives and intentions of the various countries submitting that proposal, the representatives of Cyprus realised that acceptance of that proposal would inevitably result in the occupation of Cyprus by foreign troops and in the replacement of the authority of the Cyprus Government by that of the so-called intergovernmental committee, which would have made it easier for the Turks to pursue their plans for the geographical separation of the Turkish Cypriot minority. In fact, that was precisely what the Turkish representatives had demanded at the opening of the London Conference; but the representatives of Cyprus opposed that plan and all similar plans submitted to them, and the Cyprus Government finally brought the matter before the United Nations. To do so it had to resist pressure brought to bear from several quarters. At one point it had even been told that an appeal to the Security Council would be sufficient reason for Turkey to invade Cyprus. During the entire period the threat of a Turkish invasion was constant. Turkish military aircraft flew over Cyprus, and Turkish war equipment and trained officers clandestinely landed on the island. All this culminated in the bombing by Turkish jets of Cypriot villages and towns in August 1964. About 100 Greek Cypriots - mainly civilians - were killed and a large number were injured. Following Turkish threats to invade the island, the Cyprus Government brought the matter before the United Nations.

U.N. Mediation

The United Nations has been continuously involved in the Cyprus problem since 1964 both in the Security Council and in the General Assembly. In March 1964, under Security Council resolution 186 (1964), a U.N. Peace-Keeping Force (UNFICYP) was sent to the island (originally for three months, but following separate extensions, it is still on the island), to help restore peace and normal conditions. A mediator, originally Mr. Tuomioya of Finland and later Dr. Galo Plaza of Ecuador, was appointed by the U.N. SecretaryGeneral in March 1965.
In his report, Dr. Galo Plaza stated that the problem of Cyprus could not be resolved by attempting to restore the situation which existed before December 1963, but that a new solution had to be found which would be consistent with the provisions of the United Nations Charter. In particular, he concluded, inter alia, that the solution should satisfy the wishes of the majority of the population and at the same time provide for the adequate protection of the legitimate rights of all the people. (Doc. S/62555, para. 130) This report, which could have formed a reasonable basis for the solution of the problem, was rejected by Turkey and Dr. Plaza's mediation efforts came to an end.

Drawbacks of a Separatist System of Government

The T.M.T. leaders, at the instigation of Turkey, were all along trying to promote a "solution" to the problem aiming ultimately at the island's division. Proposals were put forward for direct partition or for federation envisaging removal of populations and the setting up of two distinct administrations for the purpose of creating separate national and racial areas.
The idea of federation in Cyprus was examined in 1956, when the island was still a British colony, by the eminent constitutional expert, Lord Radcliffe, who, in his "Constitutional Proposals for Cyprus", said the following on the subject: "It would be natural enough to accord to members of a federation equality of representation in the federal body, regardless of the numerical proportions of the populations of the territories they represent. But can Cyprus be organised as a federation in this way? I do not think so. There is no pattern of territorial separation between the two communities and apart from other objections, federation of communities which does not involve also federation of territories seems to me a very difficult constitutional form". The United Nations mediator, Dr. Galo Plaza, was of the same opinion. In his report he said:
"To my mind the objections raised (against federation) also on economic, social and moral grounds are in themselves serious obstacles to the proposition. It would seem to require a compulsory movement of the people concerned - many thousands on both sides - contrary to all enlightened principles of the present time, including those set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human RightsΙ" (S/62555, para. 153). "It is essential to be clear what this proposal implies. To refer to it simply as Τfederation' is to oversimplify the matter. What is involved is not merely to establish a federal form of government but also to secure the geographical separation of the two communities. The establishment of a federal regime requires a territorial basis and this basis does not exist. In an earlier part of this report I explained the island-wide intermingling in normal times of the Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot populations. The events since December 1963 have not basically altered this characteristic: even the enclaves where numbers of Turkish Cypriots concentrated following the troubles are widely scattered over the island, while thousands of other Turkish Cypriots have remained in mixed villages" (S/62555, para 150). Elsewhere in his report Dr. Plaza stated: "In fact the arguments for the geographical separation of the two communities under a federal system of government have not convinced me that it would not inevitably lead to partitionΙ" (S/62555 para. 154).
"Again if the purpose of a settlement of the Cyprus question is to be the preservation rather than the destruction of the state and if it is to foster rather than to militate against the development of a peacefully united people, I cannot help wondering whether the physical division of the minority from the majority should not be considered a desperate step in the wrong direction. I am reluctant to believe, as the Turkish Cypriot leadership claims, in the Τimpossibility' of Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots learning to live together again in peace. In those parts of the country where movement controls have been relaxed and tensions reduced they are already proving otherwise" (S/62555, para. 155).

Cyprus at the United Nations

The United Nations, being directly involved in the Cyprus problem and concerned about the Turkish threat to Cyprus' sovereignty and independence, passed a resolution on 18 December 1965 which, inter alia, said:
The General Assembly:
Takes cognizance of the fact that the Republic of Cyprus, as an equal member of the United Nations, is, in accordance with the Charter, entitled to and should enjoy full sovereignty and complete independence without any foreign intervention or interference; Calls upon all states, in conformity with their obligations under the Charter, and in particular article 2, paragraphs 1 and 4, to respect the sovereignty, unity, independence and territorial integrity of the Republic of Cyprus and to refrain from any intervention directed against it;
Recommends to the Security Council the continuation of the United Nations mediation work in conformity with Council resolution 186 (1964) of 4 March 1964. In June 1968, following recommendations by the U.N. Secretary-General, talks started between the Greek and Turkish Cypriots to find a solution to the Cyprus problem, but as the Turkish aim was the promotion of the island's partition no progress was achieved. The holding of the talks had become possible on account mainly of the unilateral normalisation measures taken by the Government in 1968 in spite of the fact that innocent Greek Cypriots (including 4 monks) had been murdered by T.M.T. terrorists in 1967, and that a so-called Turkish Cypriot provisional administration had been set up that year in order to promote partition or the creation of a separate state. The Government lifted all restrictions and abolished all checkpoints, which had been set up following the 1963/1964 clashes. In this way the Turkish Cypriots were completely free to circulate in all parts of the island. But the T.M.T. leadership did not respond to these measures. Moreover, Greek Cypriots were prohibited from entering certain areas and obstacles were continuously created in the way of cooperation between the whole population of Cyprus.
Meanwhile the inter-communal talks continued on the understanding that the two sides would try to find a settlement based on a unitary, independent and sovereign state. This was also stressed by the U.N. Secretary - General and it was repeatedly declared at U.N. sessions.
The sequence of events, however, proved that while at the beginning Turkey seemed to agree to the principle of an independent, sovereign and unitary state, she had all the time been working and preparing plans for the partition of the island and was waiting for the opportune moment.
Turkey's intentions came into the open in February 1974, when following a long Government crisis after the general elections in the autumn, the Turkish Coalition Government of the Republican People's Party with the National Salvation Party, under Premier Bulent Ecevit, signed a protocol in which it declared that only federation could be accepted in Cyprus. Following this official statement, which ruined all prospects for a settlement in accordance with previously accepted principles, Turkey set the invasion machine in motion.

Turkish Aggression

Using as a pretext the coup of 15 July 1974, Turkey invaded Cyprus allegedly as a "guarantor" of the island's independence but with the sole aim of destroying it. On 20 July 1974, 40.000 Turkish troops landed on the island assisted by Turkish air and naval forces, in violation of the U.N. Charter and all principles governing international relations as well as her own contractual obligations1. On 14 August, Turkey launched a second invasion in violation of the Security Council resolutions calling for a cease-fire and troop withdrawal, and of the agreements it signed at Geneva2. As a result, approximately 40% of the total territory of the Republic of Cyprus, which in economic terms is much more significant than its size (accounting for 70% of the economic potential), came under Turkish military occupation and about 40% of the total Greek Cypriot population was displaced. Moreover, thousands of people, including civilians, were killed or ill-treated and many more disappeared and are still missing3. Turkey also pursued a deliberate policy aimed at turkifying the occupied areas and at destroying the cultural heritage of Cyprus

Recourse to General Assembly Session XXIX

During its 29th Session, in November 1974, the U.N. General Assembly adopted unanimously resolution 3212 which provided the framework for a solution to the Cyprus problem. In its key provision it calls for the respect of the sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and non-alignment of the Republic of Cyprus, for the speedy withdrawal of all foreign armed forces from the Republic, the cessation of all foreign interference, and for the taking of urgent measures for the return of the refugees to their homes in safety. The resolution of the General Assembly was endorsed by the Security Council in its resolution 365 (1974) of 13 December 1974, and thus its implementation was made mandatory.
Turkey, however, although one of the countries voting for the resolution refused to comply with any of its provisions.
Meanwhile, on 10 February 1975 the Greek Cypriot side, in an effort to enter into meaningful negotiations with the Turkish Cypriot side to find a peaceful and viable solution to the Cyprus problem sent to the Turkish Cypriot side proposals for a Cyprus settlement based on the U.N. resolutions.
The Greek Cypriot proposals aimed at safeguarding the interests - political and economic - and safety of both communities and the inalienable right of all refugees to return to their homes in safety, without resorting to an artificial geographical division of the island with all the adverse effects which such a division would entail on the economy and lives of the people1.
The Turkish reply to these was a statement on 13 February 1975, announcing the establishment of the "Turkish Federated State of Cyprus" ("T.F.S.C.") - an action denounced by the international community. The Security Council by its resolution 367 (1975) of 12 March 1975 after recalling its previous resolutions and particularly resolution 365 (1974), regretted this unilateral action and affirmed that such action could in no way prejudge the final political settlement of the Cyprus problem. The resolution also called for the urgent and effective implementation of all parts and provisions of General Assembly resolution 3212 (XXIX) endorsed by Security Council resolution 365 (1974). Turkey ignored this resolution and her own solemn undertakings once again. This Turkish move proved once more the insistence on the predetermined goal of Ankara for partition and eventual annexation.

Partition Plans Furthered

In furtherance of its plans of partition, and in violation of the 1949 Geneva Conventions and its international obligations regarding respect for human rights and all relevant resolutions of the United Nations, which it has itself endorsed or voted for, Turkey organized on 8 June 1975, in collaboration with the Turkish Cypriot leadership, a "referendum" in the occupied part of the Republic. This so-called referendum is of course null and void. A referendum in an area where 80% of the population has been forcibly expelled by a foreign occupying country is inconceivable. According to basic theory and logic a referendum is a democratic process and not a tool for racial discrimination against the overwhelming majority of the population. This action is not only against the Greek Cypriots, who have been living in this island for thousands of years, but also against the real interests of the Turkish Cypriot community, which has been used by Turkey in the last decade or so as its tool against the independence of Cyprus. The provisions of the "constitution" of the so-called Turkish Federated State of Cyprus are eloquent. In its preamble it claims that the "Turkish Cypriot community constitutes the inseparable part of the Great Turkish Nation". That the "constitution" aims at linking the occupied part with Turkey also becomes clear from the affirmation of the "members of the Assembly" to respect the "principles of Ataturk" and not the principles of the Constitution of Cyprus. It should be noted that the "constitution", in all relevant provisions, refers to the members of the Turkish Cypriot community as "Turkish citizens" so as to enable Turks from Turkey to colonize Cyprus without being distinguished from the indigenous Turkish population.
Another feature of the above "constitution" is the fact that all the enclaved Greek Cypriots as well as the non-Turkish communities in the territory under occupation by Turkey are defined as "aliens". They are deprived of their fundamental human and political rights, and their rights are determined by a "special law" for "aliens". Moreover, the Greek Cypriots' right to ownership is not respected. On the contrary, the "constitution" contains provisions whose application presupposes the expropriation of property belonging to Greek Cypriot displaced persons, such as houses, fields, factories, hotels etc., and their allocation to Turkish Cypriots and Turks from Turkey. An outrageous act of the Turkish Cypriot leadership was also the enactment of a "law" for the distribution of Greek Cypriot property to the Turks.

The Enclaved and Colonization of occupied areas

Towards the end of June 1975, there was a wave of unlawful and inhuman expulsions of the indigenous Greek Cypriot people who were enclaved in the occupied area. Thousands of Greek Cypriot inhabitants were thus uprooted and expelled from their homes and properties in violation of international law, the Geneva Conventions of 1949, the U.N. resolutions on Cyprus, and the Non-Aligned and Commonwealth resolutions. Hardly a few hours notice was given to these uprooted people, who were not even allowed to take with them any of their personal belongings. It is indicative of Turkey's expulsion policy that an old lady who was forced to leave inspite of her poor health, died on the way. In violation of the agreement on the living conditions of the enclaved reached at the third round of talks in Vienna the expulsion continued on a massive scale. All kinds of direct and indirect pressure were used to speed up the process. In a report, dated 30 October 1979, the U.N. Secretary-General expressed serious concern about the condition of the Greek Cypriots in the occupied area. He said that they continued to be restricted to their respective villages and immediate surroundings. Medical, educational and religious facilities worsened. There were no Greek Cypriot physicians practising in the Turkish-held region. The Greek Cypriot elementary schools did not re-open after the summer holidays, and secondary schools have remained closed since 1974. At present only 536 Greek Cypriots and 215 Maronites remain in the occupied area compared with a total of about 20.000 in August 1974.1
The reason they were forced to leave was to make room for the Turks who were imported as part of the implementation of Turkey's plan to change the demographic structure of the occupied region, as a first step to eventual annexation. While world public opinion was urging the parties in the Cyprus dispute to abstain from any action likely to prejudice the efforts to reach a settlement, Ankara launched and consequently intensified her plan for the colonisation of the occupied areas with settlers from the Turkish mainland. Turkey's plans in this respect provide for the transfer of 200.000 people from the poor provinces of Anatolia and the Black Sea coastal areas to the occupied areas of Cyprus. It is estimated that there are well over 80.000 settlers in the occupied area at present and this is also verified by Turkish Cypriot opposition reports and analysis2. Thus, not only is the island's long historic continuity being defaced but the total number of Greek Cypriot refugees, as stated in U.N. reports, has increased instead of diminished. Turkey neither took into consideration the relevant resolutions of the UN General Assembly and the Commission of Human Rights nor the recourses of Cyprus to the European Commission of Human Rights of the Council of Europe, which was declared admissible by the Commission despite objections of Ankara who alleged that the complaint was lodged by an "unlawful" Government. In fact the Commission, an impartial international judicial tribunal, having carefully evaluated evidence, has found by its report adopted on 10 July 1976, Turkey guilty of grave violations of human rights in Cyprus from 1974, onwards. (Killings, displacement of persons, deprivation of property, detention of civilians, missing persons, mass rape, inhuman treatment, deprivation of possessions and discrimination).

[T_C]

I have to go out for now but....

"I'LL BE BACK!"

MUHUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA.....

[cypezokyli]

and whose opinion is this one ?

[Sotos]

As the wise Zan said: It is my opinion but I copied it from somewhere because I was bored to type it again

[zan]

And you got your answer in the other thread you posted it in.........how about an answer for me..

[Sotos]

I made this whole thread as an answer to you! Did you read it? Do you disagree with anything?

[zan]

I made this whole thread as an answer to you! Did you read it? Do you disagree with anything?

I anwered it on the first thread you posted it in. Did you see it, did you read it, care to comment.

[Sotos]

I didn't post this in any other thread! Why would you answer to something in this thread in some other thread?

[zan]

I thought that you had already given the title of member of the month to the biggest member Kikapu. Are you know trying to take his crown........

http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.p ... c&start=10

[Sotos]

So thats all you have to say? ok good to know that you agree with everything else. I gave you the answer there already you didn't see it?