Mr. Papadopoulos, the president of Greek Cypriot administration, and leading Greek politicians continue propagating that the presence of the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) is the only factor hindering peace on the island.
Their catchphrase nowadays is, “If the Turkish military goes away, peace will come.” They repeat this at every occasion, domestic or international, anytime and anywhere.
Of course the Greek Cypriots do not want the Turkish military on the island. It is the only thing stopping them, the Greek Cypriot major-ity, from exterminating the Turkish Cypriots in 45 minutes, as Mr. Papadopoulos mentioned in his telegram sent to a US official in 1964.
After the declaration of independence in 1960, it became clear that the Greek Cypriots and Greece did not intend to abide by the con-stitution. They did not give up their ambition for the annexation of the island to Greece, and the Greek Cypriot leadership sought to unlawfully bring about constitutional changes.
In effect this would negate the “partnership” status of the Turkish Cypriots and clear the way for annexation with a Turkish minority.
The only way the Greek Cypriots could achieve their goals was to destroy legitimate order by the use of force and take over the state. Rule of law collapsed on the island in 1963 as a result of a ruling by the Supreme Court of Cyprus.
Christmas of 1963 saw the Greek Cypriot militia attack Turkish Cypriot communities across the island, killing many men, women and children. Around 270 mosques, shrines and other places of worship were desecrated. The constitution became unworkable because of the refusal on the part of the Greek Cypriots to fulfill the obligations to which they had agreed.
The bi-national republic which was imagined by the treaties ceased to exist after December 1963. The Greek Cypriot wing of the “partnership” state took over the title of the “government of Cyprus” and the Turkish Cypriots, who had never accepted the seizure of power, set up a Turkish administration to run their own affairs.
Under the Akritas plan — Mr. Papadopoulos was one of the two who drafted it — which was completed as early as 1961, the Greek Cy-priots sought to annihilate the entire Turkish Cypriot population on Cyprus and, accordingly, the attacks on Turkish Cypriots started the night of Dec. 20, 1963. This atrocious night is known as “Bloody Christmas” in Turkish Cypriot history and over 600 innocent Turkish Cypriot men, women and children were ruthlessly slaughtered in one single night.
The UN Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP), with the mis-sion of bringing peace to the island, was sent to the island in March 1964.
They could not stop the clashes and the inhumane Greek attacks on Turkish Cypriots continued. Some 20,000 Greek troops arrived on Cyprus clandestinely to back up the Greek National Guards in their mission of massacring the Turkish Cypriots.
The outstanding Greek author Mr. Georgios Roussos, in his book titled “The Latter-day History of the Hellenic Nation, 1826-1974, Volume 7,” published in Athens in 1975, reveals this information, based on several official documents and memoirs of some outstanding high-ranking Greek politicians. As a result of grave human rights abuses, 103 Turkish Cypriot villages were destroyed and the inhabitants of these villages were forced to withdraw into small enclaves. Almost 60,000 Turkish Cypriots left their homes, belongings and memories and took shelter in safe areas to save their lives. In these enclaves their fundamental human rights were severely restricted and they lived out their lives as refugees within their own country. They had no access to most of life’s basic necessities, had no political representation and were exposed to constant violence and harassment regulated by the Greek Cypriot leadership.
The goal of the Greek Cypriot leadership under Makarios was to force all Turkish Cypriots off the island, either by brute force or by implementation of inhumane living conditions.
But the pace of Makarios for ethnic cleansing of Turkish Cypriots was not fast enough for the junta generals in Greece and this led to the Greek Cypriot National Guards overthrowing Makarios in a coup d’etat on July 15, 1974, under the command of Greek officers and with support of Greek troops from Greece.
From this point on, things changed dramatically on the island. Turkey had to intervene to save the lives of Turkish Cypriots since the speed of the genocide would have accelerated after the declaration of the “Cyprus Hellenic Republic” on July 16, 1974, by notorious human butcher and right-wing Greek operative Nicos Sampson, installed by the Greek junta as president of the unilaterally declared new republic.
After the intervention of the Turkish military on July 20, 1974, there were no clashes between the two peoples of Cyprus.
From that day, the Greek Cypriots never dared to attack Turkish Cypriots. No lives were lost, no Turkish Cypriots were exterminated because of their race and peace arrived on Cyprus.
It is the Turkish military who brought peace to the island, not the UN peacekeepers.
The Turkish Cypriots do not want the Turkish military to leave the island. They know that if the Turkish military leaves they will be exterminated by Greek Cypriots at the very first opportunity.
Public opinion polls held recently in both parts of Cyprus, the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (KKTC) and the Greek Cypriot side, revealed the stunning fact that both people see the sustainable solution in two separate states rather than a unified federal state. The ages-long mistrust of each other by both peoples of Cyprus finally sur-faced as in Brussels, where nowadays something toward separation is cooking in this capital city of the European Union and Belgium.
The political decision-makers of the globe and the borderline builders of the world consistently disregard the existence of the Turkish Cypriots in Cyprus, their self-proclaimed state, the KKTC and their basic human rights.
The KKTC is now in its 44th year of existence since the “Bloody Christmas” of Dec. 21, 1963, when innocent Turkish Cypriots were ruthlessly killed by Greek Cypriots in Tahtakala of Nicosia, the capital city of Cyprus, as part of Greek Cypriot efforts toward “enosis,” or union with Greece.
Irrespective of separation or velvet divorce efforts in Belgium, po-litical decision-makers consistently apply pressure for unification on both of the peoples living on Cyprus, although they no longer want it.
There are two separate peoples of two different races living in two different states in Cyprus, speaking two languages originating from two different sources and using two different linguistic scripts, two different histories, two different literary traditions, two different flags, two different sets of national heroes, two different ideals, two different sacraments, two different legal doctrines, two different sets of religious practices, two different dogmas and two different holy books.
Nothing at all is common, except living on the same island under the same sun.
In the northern parts of Belgium live the Dutch-speaking Flemish and in the south the French-speaking Walloons. Their languages and nations are different; the Flemish are of German origin and Walloons French. They are separated in such a way that no Flemish can settle in a Walloon area and no Walloon in a Flemish area.
Now the separatist winds are shaking the federal system of Bel-gium from top to bottom. The rightist Flemish are determined to secure a velvet divorce; they do not want to carry the Walloons on their backs anymore.
The separation concept surfaced and grew stronger after the June 10 elections, and is expected to peak during the budget talks this month.
Uneasiness has enveloped the European Union, and the separa-tion in Belgium will create a new headache and open up new doors in politics.
The European Union, mainly built on the concept of “unification,” is now in the verge of a new burden originating from a separation, con-tradictory to the main concept of the EU. The Kingdom of Belgium was actually created artificially by the superpowers of Europe in 1830 as a buffer zone or buffer kingdom between them and their disputes. The concept of a common nation never existed in Belgium since the first day of independence, same as in Cyprus.
High-level politicians of the European Union, while advising the Flemish and Walloons to divorce if they cannot manage to live together, subject to keeping their EU membership separate, advise the opposite to Turkish and Greek Cypriots. They insist on a “united federal Cyprus,” knowing that both parties are not keen on this solution and the federal state will not last beyond a day, though both people on Cy-prus are willing to separate but stay EU members individually.
The EU, the US and the UN have disabled themselves as impartial interlocutors by taking the side of Greek Cypriots on the fundamental question which divides the two peoples — namely, whether the Greek Cypriot administration is entitled to be treated as the government of Cyprus.
Because of the one-sided international perception of Cyprus, Turkey and the Turkish Cypriots are always seen as being in the wrong and pressure is constantly applied to them to make accommodations for Greek Cypriot wishes. This is something they will not do and cannot reasonably be expected to do by anyone who understands how the present situation in Cyprus has arisen, originating from the one-sided attacks by Greek Cypriots to fulfill their eternal dream, “enosis,” on Dec. 21, 1963. The Cyprus problem did not start in 1974, but 1963.
The two peoples of Cyprus have negotiated for the many years since 1964, under the auspices of the UN. And in March 1986 and May 2004, Turkish Cypriots twice accepted UN plans for a settlement in its entirety. However Turkish Cypriots eventually realized that the UN talks go nowhere and the UN and EU can not be relied upon as impartial interlocutors.
It is time for the EU, the UN and the US to change their policy toward Cyprus and realize the existence of two separate people, like in Belgium, and their separation wishes. A united Cyprus will never be able to survive if both parties, as today, do not wish to live together.
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s visit to the United States was so strapped for time that he could barely even breathe.
The main cause of visit was to participate in the 62nd United Na-tions General Assembly meeting.
But the fully packed program gives hints of the beginning of a new era in Turkey’s political relations with the US and the revalued strategic importance of Turkey by the White House.
In particular the Nabucco pipeline, energy demands of European countries, safety and control of energy resources in Middle East and Caspian regions, Iran’s threats and the catastrophic position of the US in Iraq have forced American policymakers to renew the US approach to Turkey.
It seems Turkey will play a different and important role in the Middle East after this visit.
When checked or compared with the programs of other leaders, Erdoğan’s visit to the US seems to have been organized brilliantly and clear-sightedly.
The visit goes beyond its basic purpose — participating in the 62nd UN General Assembly meeting — and spills over into the main centers of American mercantilism, American policy centers and to the outstanding politicians of the world.
During his tight program, Erdoğan delivered a speech on Monday at a high-level UN meeting on climate change and addressed the UN General Assembly on Friday.
He also participated in a reception hosted by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Monday and had talks with French President Nicolas Sarkozy, Portuguese Prime Minister Jose Socrates, Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt and Austrian Chancellor Alfred Gusenbauer.
Erdoğan continued on Tuesday and had bilateral talks with Ger-man Chancellor Angela Merkel, Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi and Colombian President Alvaro Uribe Velez.
On Wednesday he attended opening session of the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), struck the gong to announce the start of trading and met NYSE executives.
The next day he took the floor at a meeting held by the Foreign Relations Council and on Friday he was part of a panel discussion organized by the Clinton Global Initiative on “Building a Multiethnic Global Society” and received Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) Secretary-General Ekmeleddin İhsanoğlu.
And within this fully packed program he spared time to meet with the executives of the leading US companies at a meeting hosted by Coca-Cola.
Like Erdoğan, Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan also had a very full and well-organized schedule.
Babacan delivered a speech on Thursday at a meeting held at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, where he discussed foreign policy and global affairs, including the Cyprus issue, the presence of the ter-rorist Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) in northern Iraq, PKK attacks on Turkey and the tense Turkish-American relations as a result.
He talked about Turkey’s reform process and the country’s target to become the 10th largest economy worldwide by 2023 by increasing foreign investment and the rapid growth rate.
Referring to the Cyprus problem, Babacan stressed the unfair and inhuman isolation of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (KKTC), giving examples of how it is still ongoing.
Meanwhile Babacan held talks with representatives of Jewish as-sociations such as the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) in Chicago, where representatives said they are opposing the bill on the incidents of 1915. It now is very clear that the enactment of the bill by the US Congress will definitely have a serious impact on Turkey-US and Turkey-Israel relations.
The strategic partnership between Turkey and the US has the strength to adapt itself to the changing conditions. Since Turkey is one of the rare countries having good relations with both Israel and Arab states, the US seems to have changed its vision for the Middle East, relying strongly on Turkey as a dependable and trustworthy ally to become a party to the settlement of problems in the area.
When Erdoğan and Babacan’s abovementioned programs are studied in detail the fact surfaces that a new era in Turkish-American relations is already in full swing.
A possible approval by the European Court of Human Rights of a property exchange between a Greek and Turkish Cypriot is on the agenda. The European court seems to be in the final stages of deciding whether to accept a land exchange between a Greek Cypriot and a Turkish Cypriot. The European court will possibly ratify the exchange of properties in Cyprus in the case of Mike Tymvios, a Greek Cypriot who petitioned the Property Commission in the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (KKTC) for a land exchange with a Turkish Cypriot. Now the case is in the hands of the European court for approval.
The move has far-ranging implications for all Turkish and Greek Cypriot refugee applicants to the European court, who would then have to use the Property Commission until a Cyprus settlement is reached.
If this request of both parties is ratified by the European court, then an exchange of lands will take place officially in the land registry offices of the KKTC and the Greek Cypriot administration. Following this decision, it is very likely that all the other appeals to the European court will possibly be conveyed to the Property Commission in the KKTC.
Another issue relevant to this property exchange would be the Guardian of Turkish Cypriot Property, which is part of the Greek Cy-priot administration and is the only so-called authority in southern Cyprus legally allowed to return land to Turkish Cypriots who claim it back under the courts, if they have been residing in southern Cyprus for six months or more.
Turkish Cypriots would not need to be inhumanely forced to re-side in the Greek Cypriot territories to repossess their property, if the current property exchange is ratified by the European court. To repos-sess their lands, Turkish Cypriots have since 1974 been forced to re-side in the territories of Greek Cypriot administration, although they are citizens of the European Union. The European court will put an end to this inhumane enforcement, which is against human rights as well.
Although the Greek Cypriot administration claims that a Turkish Cypriot living in the territories of the KKTC could take the property of a Greek Cypriot refugee, it is unlikely that the reverse could apply, since Turkish Cypriot properties in the Greek Cypriot southern areas are protected by the “Guardianship Act.” The European court’s final deci-sion will also nullify this law.
If the European court gives the green light to the property ex-change, not only does it give legitimacy to the Property Commission of the KKTC, but it also puts the guardian on the spot because the Greek Cypriot refugee would be claiming Turkish Cypriot land not legally returned by the guardian, the Greek Cypriot administration.
A possible refusal by the guardian to accept the European court’s ruling, if it is in favor of the Greek Cypriot refugee, could propel the Greek Cypriot administration into a collision course with the court. The Greek Cypriot administration may very well say they don’t want to accept the decision to hand over the land which is under the jurisdic-tion of the guardianship, but the result will be a head-on clash between the Greek Cypriot administration and the European Court of Human Rights and, as a consequence, the Council of Europe. The council would ultimately raise the matter if the European court ruling was not implemented by the Greek Cypriot administration.
This case is a real nightmare in the policy of the Greek Cypriot administration and Mr. Palmas, who in his last statement stated that if this property exchange is ratified by the European court, the Greek Cypriot administration will refuse to enforce it.
The Greek Cypriot administration is opposed to this act and has requested from the European court that a private settlement for the exchange of properties in Cyprus be reassessed and the same day made an official call to Greek Cypriots not to follow Mr. Tymvios, as this act would deeply damage their policy on the road to settlement.
Actually the “enosis” dreams and inactivity of Tassos Papadopou-los’ administration in the Cyprus problem have not only led to a dead end, but have also showcased the incapability of the Greek Cypriot administration to handle serious aspects of the problem, such as the settlement of property disputes, along with others.
The local Greek newspaper Simerini published a comment on Aug. 14, 2007 about the interment of Lt. Panikos Sotiris Danezis of the Greek Hellenic Army in the Makedonitissa Tomb in the Greek Cypriot sector of Nicosia. The remains of his body were found in Ozanköy (Kazafani) near Girne (Kyrenia) during the excavations being done by the Autonomous Missing Persons Committee. He was a sub-lieutenant in the troops sent by the government of Greece illegally to the island and was shot during combat with Turkish Peace Mission forces on July 22, 1974, at Bellapais.
According to Simerini, the excavated remains were identified by a DNA test and were inhumed with a military memorial.
His name is not in the list of the Greek mainland contingent dep-loyed in Cyprus according to the 1960 Cyprus Treaty of Alliance. This means he was sent by the government of Greece and entered Cyprus illegally before 1974, unlawfully breaking international laws and United Nations rules and regulations.
Another local Greek newspaper published a comment on Sept. 9, 2007, about the enlargement of the Greek military cemetery.
The cemetery is now completely full and remains of soldiers sent by the Greek mainland government, now identified by the Autonomous Missing Persons Committee, can not be inhumed due to the shortage of ground.
On instructions given by Papadopoulos, the Greek Cypriot ad-ministration announced that the cemetery will be enlarged and the Ministry of Defense will handle the enlargement process.
The total number of graves already existing is not numerically in balance with the losses of the officially deployed Greek contingent in Cyprus during the 1974 Turkish intervention.
When the total number of missing Greek soldiers, buried Greek soldiers and Greek soldiers in Nicosia and Greece who managed to survive the intervention are added up, it is obvious that the amount of Greek soldiers was far more than the official number of those allowed to be deployed in Cyprus according to the 1960 Cyprus Treaty of Alliance.
Now it is time to ask what these additional Greek mainland sol-diers, sent by the government of Greece, were doing on the island of Cyprus. Were they sent for a sunny holiday on the beaches of Cyprus or to massacre Turkish Cypriots in an effort to fulfill the great dream named the “Megalo Idea” by Alexander Ypsilanti in 1796?
It is officially recorded that some 20,000 Greek soldiers were sent to the island of Cyprus by the government of Greece in 1964, unoffi-cially sneaking in with their armor, arsenal, ammunitions and vehicles.
In 1968, after four years of their tyranny and numerous massa-cres of Turkish Cypriots, these illegal Greek troops were forced to go back to Greece by an ultimatum from Turkey.
Paragraph 25 of the UN Secretary-General’s Report S/83446 of March 1968 to the UN Security Council, Appendix 18, titled “With-drawal of Greek mainland troops from Cyprus,” reads as follows:
“25. The repatriation of the Greek national troops took place be-tween 8 December 1967 and 16 January 1968, in pursuance of an agreement between Greece and Turkey arrived at in response to the Secretary-General’s appeals of 22 November, 24 November and 3 De-cember 1967 (S/8248/Adds. 3,5 and 6). Since the responsibility for the repatriation operation was assumed at the time by the parties themselves and did not, strictly speaking, come within the UNFICYP mandate, UNFICYP undertook no independent observation in this connection. It was evident however that several thousand Greek Na-tional troops had left the island, taking with them a considerable amount of equipment and vehicles, including tanks. It is believed that most of the troops who were embarked came from formed units that were serving as part of the [Greek] Cyprus Government’s armed forces. It is known however that Greek national army officers and men are still serving individually in the National Guard and on the headquarters staff, but UNFICYP has not been in a position to estimate their number.”
It is quite obvious that the withdrawal of Greek mainland troops from Cyprus was just a display or a comedy staged by the Greek Cypriot administration and the government of Greece.
They existed on the island of Cyprus illegally and unlawfully from 1963 to 1974 and have numbered around 7,000 since 1974.
Whose existence is illegal on the island?
Is it the Turkish troops, who intervened according to the 1960 Cyprus Treaty of Guarantee on July 20, 1974 to prevent inter-communal clashes, or the Greek mainland troops, who are on the isl-and with no official reason or treaty and killed thousands of innocent Turkish Cypriots during the dark years from 1963 to 1974?
