Is it the Turkish troops or the Greek Cypriot administration whose existence is illegal in Cyprus?
On behalf of the Greek Cypriot administration spokesman Vassilis Palmas challenged Turkey to take the “Cyprus issue” to the Interna-tional Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague after a threatening remark by the Greek Cypriot leader Tassos Papadopoulos declaring the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) “the sole enemy” of his people.
Actually Mr. Papadopoulos, who practiced law for years, knows quite well that Turkey is a guarantor country with Britain and Greece and that the presence of the TSK on the island is based on interna-tional agreements and fully complies with international rules and regulations and Part IV of the 1960 Treaty of Guarantee of the Consti-tution of the Republic of Cyprus and is thus legal.
The question is whether the Greek Cypriot administration estab-lished on Dec. 21, 1963 is legal.
The answer is crystal clear: “No, it is not.”
Soon after the establishment of the Republic of Cyprus, it became apparent that the Greek Cypriots had not given up their long-standing goal of “enosis” (union with mainland Greece). The president of the republic, who had taken the solemn oath to uphold the constitution, proceeded to destroy the very foundations of the bi-communal set-up. The Greek Cypriot leadership tried to render the constitution unwork-able in accordance with a preconceived plan to achieve enosis, which had been prohibited by the constitution itself.
The Greek Cypriot authorities were fervently opposed to the rights of Turkish Cypriots guaranteed by the Constitution. The Constitution was to be rendered inoperative by a concerted action at all levels of government and local administration to undermine the relevant pro-visions designed to protect the rights of Turkish Cypriots.
It was not the Constitution that prevented the cooperation of the two communities but the Greek Cypriot leaders who used their author-ity to paralyze the constitutional rights of the Turkish Cypriot commu-nity. Implementation of certain constitutional provisions was delibe-rately hindered, thus preventing the smooth-functioning of the state and causing inter-communal friction.
During the first three years of the republic, the Greek Cypriots created spurious problems in the implementation of the various provi-sions of the Constitution. Administration of justice was obstructed at every level. The Supreme Constitutional Court was rendered powerless.
Supreme Constitutional Court President Dr. Ernst Forsthoff was forced to resign from his post on May 21, 1963. He had been under pressure and intimidation from the Greek Cypriot side, following his ruling on April 25, 1963, in connection with the dispute created by Makarios’ refusal to extend the law providing for separate municipali-ties in five main towns.
Glafkos Klerides, who was the speaker of the House of Repre-sentatives at the time, summarizes Makarios’ priorities in attempting to amend the constitution:
“Reduction of the excessive rights granted to the minority and abolition of the equal status of the two communities… and the abolition of the Greek Communal Chamber and the creation of a Ministry of Education, thus creating the image that the education of the State was Greek… His third objective was the abolition of those articles which created difficulties, such as separate majorities, the 70 to 30 ratio, municipalities and the army of the Republic.”
The 1960 Republic of Cyprus no longer exists. It was destroyed on Dec. 21, 1963, and is now under the occupation of the Greek Cypriots. It is widely known that Papadopoulos is currently occupying the common administration which was destroyed by the Greek Cypriot side in 1963 and that his efforts to hinder the realization of peace by making such declarations will remain futile.
Turkey has not recognized the legal authority of the ICJ since the late 1970s and thus Turkey taking the issue to The Hague is out of question. On the contrary, the Greek Cypriot administration can take the issue to The Hague if they are really confident in their strong posi-tion and claims.
This is a completely diplomatic tactic.
In the 1960 Treaty of Guarantee signed by Turkey, and under whose terms the Turkish military intervened in the island in 1974, there is no clause saying that parties will go to a peacemaker in the event of a dispute.
What the Greek Cypriots are doing is trying to put pressure on Turkey and looking for means of recognition by Turkey. If Turkey takes the case to The Hague, it will mean a political recognition of the illegal Greek Cypriot administration by Turkey.
Papadopoulos is playing a Byzantine game, aimed at misleading both his own public opinion and the global public opinion.
Greek Cypriot President Tassos Papadopoulos defined the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) “as the biggest enemy” faced by Greek Cyprus in his press conference on Wednesday, demanding the immediate removal of all the Turkish military forces from Cyprus.
The good old Greek chorus started chanting the same tune again.
Mr. Demetris Christofias, the secretary-general of the Greek Cy-priot Progressive Party of the Working People (AKEL), the largest leftist political party in Greek Cyprus and the “last of the world’s communist parties,” mentioned the same in his presidential rally speech.
Mrs. Erato Kozakou-Marcoulli, the Greek Cypriot foreign minister, directed her arrows of hate toward the Turkish military from her first day in the ministerial seat. She verbally attacked the TSK on the island and demanded their withdrawal along with some of the citizens of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (KKTC), who they indiscriminately call “settlers.”
Archbishop Chrysostomos II actually composed this tune during his own rally. Irrespective of his position, words full of hatred toward Turkish people were always present in his speeches. He publicly pin-pointed Turkish Cypriots and the TSK as the mother of the enemy more than 300 times.
The sentence “Europe is Christian” also belongs to him. “Of course Christianity is not simply European, but in any case Europe is Christian. Europe before Christianity was just a geographical term. Its inhabitants were distinguished as those who lived within the borders of the Roman Empire or the ecumene (lands inhabited by Greeks), and those who lived outside the borders and were generally called ‘barba-rians’,” he says.
Though quite conscientious about his words connected with Tur-key and the TSK, Greek Prime Minister Costas Karamanlis speaks from time to time about the withdrawal of the TSK from Cyprus. Of course he never says anything about the Greek Army deployed in Greek Cyprus or the Greek officers positioned in the highest ranks of the Greek Cyprus National Guard (Ethniki Froura).
When speaking of topics related to Cyprus or Turkey, Mrs. Dora Bakoyannis, the Greek foreign minister, always puts the withdrawal of the TSK from Cyprus somewhere in her speech, regardless of whether it is in conjunction with the main topic. She also mentions the return of some of the citizens of the KKTC, who they class as unofficial immi-grants.
The Greek members of the European Parliament consistently send letters and notes to their colleagues focused on the withdrawal of Turkish troops from the island.
The ethnically Greek senators and members of the US House of Representatives are doing exactly the same thing as their European counterparts. Hand-in-hand with the American Hellenic Educational Progressive Association (AHEPA), they call on the US government to support the immediate removal of all Turkish occupying forces as well as the illegal Turkish colonists from Cyprus.
It looks as if a magic wand touched these people and they all speak the same. Perhaps their words actually stem from the same ori-gin or mastermind. They never mention or want others to know what Greeks did to Turkish Cypriots during the dark 10 years stretching from 1963 to 1974.
The period covered the time from the establishment of the Repub-lic of Cyprus in 1960 to 1974. Greek Cypriots attempted to demolish the republic by changing the Constitution and enforced the Akritas plan on Dec. 21, 1963 — a plan of which Mr. Papadopoulos was one of the masterminds.
The international community, accusing Turkey of occupation, seems to be forgetting the fact that Greece secretly sent a division of 20,000 troops to the island in 1964. As a result Turkish Cypriots had to evacuate 103 villages and were squeezed into “ghettos” covering barely 3 percent of the total island. They were forced to survive with unemployment, economic sanctions, restricted rights of movement and no property rights and were even massacred until 1974.
From this point on things changed dramatically on the island. Turkey had to intervene to save the lives of Turkish Cypriots as the speed of the genocide have accelerated after the declaration of the “Cy-prus Hellenic Republic,” on July 16, 1974. It was notorious butcher Nicos Sampson, a right-wing Greek operative, who was installed by the Greek junta as president for the unilaterally declared new republic.
It is a fact that Turkish Cypriots had been struggling for ages to live in peace on the island, but were instead forced by their adversaries to rely on the armed forces and attach to their motherland, Turkey.
The existence of the Turkish military on the island fully complies with the international rules and regulations and Part IV of the 1960 Treaty of Guarantee of the Constitution of Republic of Cyprus.
It is a crystal-clear fact that the existence of the Turkish military on the island has prevented inter-communal clashes since 1974. Ir-respective of thousands of Cypriots losing their lives during the dark years of 1963 to 1974, nobody lost a life afterward.
President of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (KKTC) M. A. Talat and the general secretary of the Progressive Party of the Work-ing People of Greek Cyprus (AKEL), Greek Cyprus’s largest political party, D. Hristofias, were once “comrades” when they were both part of the opposition. Politically, they were on the extreme left and were flying white pigeons representing peace on the island. “Turkish Cypriots are our brothers. Our arms are wide open to them. We can live together like bosom friends,” were the cant phrases of Mr. Hristofias, who is also president of the Greek Cypriot Assembly.
AKEL and the KKTC’s Republican Turks’ Party (CTP) — once President Talat became the chairman — were in deep collaboration from the establishment of the CTP in 1970.
In the Turkish Cypriot press, a local newspaper once published an article about the financing by AKEL of printing machines used for publishing the CTP’s political newspaper titled “Yeni Düzen,” or “New Order.”
Still, the youngsters of both political parties get together from time to time and engage in bi-communal activities.
Suddenly, a magic wand touched Hristofias after he declared his candidacy in the coming presidential elections and his good feelings and wishes toward Turkish Cypriots vanished.
The same probably happened to President Talat, and his vision toward Greek Cypriots and the idea of living together has changed a lot since he was elected president of the KKTC in April 2005.
The opposition days are over now and both deeply feel for the concerns of their people ahead of their own ideas and feelings. During the opposition days, it was quite easy to talk through one’s hat with no responsibility.
A couple of days ago, the presidents of Cyprus finally met at the residence of the UN secretary-general’s special representative to Cy-prus, Michael Moller, situated in the UN-controlled buffer zone in Lef-kosa (Nicosia), the capital of both sides of the island, after 14 months of stagnation.
At the end of a three-hour-long meeting, the two leaders agreed only on the need for a start of a new process toward bringing about a solution to the Cyprus problem.
In this meeting, Turkish Cypriot proposals aimed for a sustaina-ble, comprehensive solution on the island. Mr. Talat proposed an acce-lerated preparatory process for a solution in the shortest time possible, but not later than the end of 2008. Starting substantive negotiations after two to two-and-a-half months of preparatory work, with a deadline for a comprehensive settlement goal being the end of 2008, constituted the core of his constructive proposal.
The Turkish Cypriot proposals were turned down by Mr. Tassos Papadopoulos right away. He only agreed to continue contact through the UN and if progress was reached, to meet with the Turkish Cypriot president, subject to no time limit.
It has been 39 years since the first meeting took place in Beirut in 1968 and with this mentality of Mr. Papadopoulos it will likely take another 40 years to come close to a possibility of a sustainable com-prehensive solution on the island.
This attitude of Mr. Papadopoulos clearly indicated the unwil-lingness of Greek Cypriots to attain a sustainable, peaceful solution to the Cyprus problem. Otherwise they would have accepted the accele-rated negotiations proposal of Mr. Talat, to bring peace to the island for good before the beginning of year 2009.
Mr. Hristofias, the vernal candidate, irrespective of his sayings for a sustainable and peaceful solution in the island for the past thirty years, unexpectedly backed up Papadopoulos, his rival in the presi-dential election, and condemned Talat for his constructive proposal.
Mr. Hristofias was quite afraid of being accused of being a Turco-phile and denied all his past comments.
A solution in the form of a federal government, constituted by the two people of the island, seems quite far from Cyprus. Two separate states living side-by-side would be a better and peaceful solution on the island, as proposed by the Liberals of the EU.
Both presidents of Cyprus finally met at the residence of the UN secretary general’s special representative to Cyprus, Michael Moller, situated in the UN-controlled buffer zone in Lefkosa (Nicosia), the capi-tal town of both Cypruses, after 14 months of stagnation.
The UN has had a presence on the island since March 1964 and has posts in critical locations, most of which are in buffer zones.
“No agenda” was set for this meeting, the first since the July 8, 2006, when the two leaders were brought together by the former UN Undersecretary General for Political Affairs Ibrahim Gambari during a visit to the island. At the end of a three-hour-long meeting, the two leaders agreed only on the need for a start of a new process toward bringing about a solution to the Cyprus problem.
The negotiations on the Cyprus problem finally started, after fierce clashes between the two peoples of the island, in March 1968 in Beirut, Lebanon. Rauf Denktaş and Glafkos Klerides, participated in the discussions held under the auspices of the UN.
Since then, due to the international recognition of the Greek Cy-priot administration by the West, no progress has been achieved. Greek Cypriots have enjoyed the benefits of international recognition and never wished to share it with Turkish Cypriots, who were the actual and active partners of the Republic of Cyprus, declared in August 1960 and kicked out from the partnership by the brute force of Greek Cypri-ots in Dec. 21, 1963 — the beginning of the conflict in Cyprus.
In this meeting Turkish Cypriot proposals aimed for a sustainable comprehensive solution on the island. Participants of this meeting hoped for an accelerated preparatory process for a solution in the shortest time possible, but not later than the end of 2008. The Turkish Cypriot proposal included adjustments and speeding up of the Gambari process — a set of proposals by the UN’s Gambari that hope to resolve the Cyprus issue. Starting substantive negotiations after two to two-and-a-half months of preparatory work, with a deadline for a com-prehensive settlement goal being the end of 2008, constituted the core of this constructive proposal.
All of these Turkish Cypriot proposals were turned down by Mr. Tassos Papadopoulos. He only accepted to continue contact through the UN, and if progress was reached to meet with Turkish Cypriot President Mehmet Ali Talat, subject to no time limit. The same time restriction was also implemented for Papadopoulos’ formation of several committees, to which the Cyprus issue was to be referred. However, it is still ambiguous how long this time period will be.
It has been 39 years since the first meeting took place in Beirut and according to this mentality of Mr. Papadopoulos, it will likely take another 40 years to come close to a possibility of a sustainable com-prehensive solution on the island.
In fact, during the past 14 months since the first meeting of the Gambari process, even one of the committees envisaged by the July 8 process has not been formed yet. Actually, the core of the Gambari implications was to set up “technical committees” to handle “humani-tarian cases” between the two peoples on the island.
The idea originated from the bird flu case, which initially ap-peared in the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (KKTC), in which the Greek Cypriots refused to cooperate. When there was a homicide in Greek Cyprus, this lack of cooperation continued. While all the evi-dence was in the hands of the Greek Cypriot Police, the suspects were in the hands of the Turkish Cypriot Police.
In both cases, the Greek Cypriot bureaucrats and police officers refused to cooperate with their counterparts on the Turkish Cypriot side. Bird flu crossed the border, carried by migrating birds; the murder suspects were released due to a shortage of evidence.
So far the humanitarian technical committee hasn’t been formed because of the unwillingness of the Greek Cypriot side. It is quite ob-vious that the Greek Cypriot side is not seeking to resume substantive negotiations as much as the Turkish Cypriot side is as they wish to enjoy the EU membership and international recognition alone.
To bring a sustainable solution to the island, recognition of the KKTC would be the best next step, as proposed by Greek Cypriot Member of the European Parliament Marios Matsakis.
Turkey’s July 20, 1974 intervention on Cyprus was legal, say the Athens Court of Appeals and the Council of Europe.
The Council of Europe adopted Resolution 573 on July 29, 1974 on this particular case, stating that Turkey’s intervention on Cyprus was a legitimate act emanating from the Treaty of Guarantee, Part IV.
The historical decision of the Athens Court of Appeals, No. 2658/79, dates back to March 21, 1979.
On July 15, 1974, the junta ruling Greece implemented a coup d’etat on Cyprus, overthrowing the elected government of President Makarios, which had been in control since the independence of the Republic of Cyprus in 1960. On July 20 of the same year Turkey staged a military intervention to reverse the coup.
Turkey’s action was perfectly legitimate and understandable. It was in fact a duty, stationed by the 1960 Constitution of the Republic of Cyprus; in Part IV of the Treaty of Guarantee, which forms part of the constitution. Cyprus was saved from being annexed by Greece and the Turkish Cypriots freed from Greek oppression.
During the 1960s and 1970s, the Western world only watched as the Turkish Cypriots were being massacred by their Greek Cypriot neighbors, with the aid of Greece, in a systematic campaign of ethnic cleansing, and did nothing.
The splitting of Cyprus into two ethnically homogeneous, self-governing states was not achieved by the Turkish military intervention in 1974, as is commonly believed, but by Makarios and Georgios Grivas a decade earlier in 1963. All that the Turkish intervention of 1974 accomplished was to consolidate Turkish Cypriot enclaves into a uni-fied Turkish Cypriot zone in Northern Cyprus and to save their lives.
Of all the nations in the world only Turkey had the humanity to save what was left of the Turkish Cypriot population after years of eth-nic cleansing in 1974, and only Turkey now stands for justice in Cy-prus.
Under the provisions of the 1960 Treaty of Guarantee which pro-vided that the Hellenic Republic, Turkey and United Kingdom would ensure the independence and sovereignty of the Republic of Cyprus, it was Turkey’s legal duty to take unilateral military action purportedly to restore constitutional order.
The Turkish intervention was perfectly legal according to the Treaty of Guarantee of 1960. Its legality has even been acknowledged by the Standing Committee of the Consultative Assembly of the Council of Europe in a resolution dated July 29, 1979, and by the Athens Court of Appeals in a decision dated March 21, 1979. Sampson admitted that he was just about to proclaim enosis (union of Cyprus with Greece) when the Turkish intervention occurred (Cyprus Mail, July 17, 1975).
A father of one of the Greek commandos sent to Cyprus by the Greek junta in July 1974 to fight against Turkish Cypriots and Turkish troops who was shot down by Greek Cypriot National Guard members, filed a case against the Greek government for compensation in December 1976.
The Court of Athens ruled in favor of the father and ordered rea-sonable compensation to be paid by the Department of the Treasury of the Greek Ministry of Finance.
The Ministry of Finance objected to the decision of the Court of Athens and appealed to the Athens Court of Appeals for a cancellation of this order.
But unexpectedly the Supreme Court decided in favor of the fa-ther again and confirmed the decision of the Court of Athens.
The first paragraphs of the justification of the Athens Court of Appeals explains in detail the 1960 Constitution of the Republic of Cyprus, Part IV of the Treaty of Guarantee, the rights of Turkey, the coup d’etat organized by the Greek junta against Makarios and the improper behavior of Gen. Phaedon Gizikis, the head of Greece’s junta government in 1974.
The very last paragraph clearly highlights the legitimacy of the Turkish intervention on Cyprus.
The preposterous assertions by the Greek and Greek Cypriot gov-ernments that the Turkish Cypriots are nothing but a rebellious mi-nority and that the Turkish peace operation of 1974 was an unprovoked act of aggression are in fact aimed to misinform the world.
Unfortunately many European and American politicians sub-scribe to this spurious version of events, not knowing that by promoting the withdrawal of Turkish troops from Cyprus without adequate guarantees for the protection of the Turkish Cypriot people they are, in fact, promoting the creation of new problems on the island which will turn out like Iraq if Turkish troops withdraw.
