Why has the Cyprus Conflict not been solved? By Rachel Salomon

Introduction

The Cyprus issue has been on the international agenda for the past 44-years. Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots have been negotiating on and off since 1968, but have failed thus far to reach an agreement. As of today, Turkish Cypriots continue to live under an international embargo that forces them to live in isolation from the rest of the world, with the sole exception of Turkey. To the contrary, the Greek Cypriots are now members of the European Union and have become pretty wealthy compared to their Turkish Cypriot counter-parts. The two-sides have not lived together since the 1963 and are moving further apart from each other by the day. There are two peoples on the beautiful island of Cyprus, yet only one, the Greek Cypriot side, is recognized by the international community. In this paper, I hope to examine how we got to this point and explain the evolution of the political situation of Cyprus.

Beginning of the Enosis Struggle

There was once a time when Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots peacefully coexisted. For over three hundred years, there were no problems between Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots. Under Ottoman rule, from 1571 through 1878, Greek Cypriots were freely able to practice their religion and engage in economic and cultural activities. Even Hepworth Dixon spoke of how well Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots coexisted under Ottoman rule and his amazement over the amount of rights that the Ottoman Empire granted her Greek Cypriot subjects (Atakol 6).

This coexistence would continue under British rule up until 1955. Dr. Kenan Atakol wrote:

As a young boy, I had Greek Cypriot friends from the village of Kato Yialia with whom I would play. Our friendships were so sincere that on occasions we would stay over at each other’s house. I used to go to many Greek Cypriot weddings and baptisms with my parents and many Greek Cypriots would reciprocrate by coming to the weddings and circumcision ceremonies of the Turkish Cypriots” (9).

What happened to change all of this?

Over time, Greek Cypriots formed this idea called Enosis, which called for the unification of Cyprus with Greece. On October 20, 1950, Archbishop Makarios declared, “I take the Holy Oath that I shall work for the birth of our national freedom and shall never waiver from our policy of uniting Cyprus to mother Greece” (Stephen 6). This whole philosophy was the beginning of the tensions between Turkish and Greek Cypriots.

On April 1, 1955, the Greek Cypriot terrorist organization known as EOKA started to engage in terrorist activities against the British presence in Cyprus. Their goal was Enosis. Greek Cypriots viewed Turkish Cypriots as an obstacle to achieving this dream of theirs. During this time period between 1955 and 1960, hundreds of Turkish Cypriots were killed, 6,000 Turkish Cypriots were made refugees, and EOKA had destroyed thirty-three Turkish Cypriot villages (Atakol 29). Evidently, the terrorism worked. EOKA would eventually drive the British out of Cyprus.

The Establishment of the Republic of Cyprus

In the London and Zurich Agreements, the British, Greek Cypriots, Turkish Cypriots, Greeks, and Turks all agreed that a new state would be created that would be called the Republic of Cyprus. “The Republic of Cyprus was not a unified state but a political partnership between the two main Cypriot communities each of which retained its own language, religion, and cultural traditions” (Moran 145). The President was to be a Greek Cypriot. The Vice President was to be a Turkish Cypriot. 70% of the House of Representatives would be Greek Cypriot, while 30% would be Turkish Cypriot. However, legislation and executive action required an agreement between the President and Vice President. On sensitive issues, a vote on both sides would occur, where each side required a majority for action. Also, the Treaty of Guarantee was put into place to ensure that the sanctity of the constitution would remain intact (Stephen 8-9). Thus, independence was granted to Cyprus on August 16, 1960.

Destruction of the Partnership Republic of Cyprus

Unfortunately, the bi-communal partnership based on political equality between the two communities was short-lived. On September 4, 1962, Archbishop Makarios stated in a speech in Panayia, “Until this Turkish community forming part of the Turkish race which has been the terrible enemy of Hellenism is expelled, the duty of the heroes of EOKA can never be considered as terminated” (Stephen 10). Makarios was a man who had absolutely no respect for the constitution of the Republic of Cyprus.

Makarios regarded the Turks in Cyprus as a decidedly alien and insignificant minority who should never have been given partnership status with the Greeks. […..] Consequently in 1963-1964, by a series of drastically and uncompromising maneuvers, he forcibly ousted the Turkish Cypriots from all their positions in the new government (Moran 146).

On April 25, 1963, the Supreme Court of Cyprus, which consisted of a Greek Cypriot, Turkish Cypriot, and a neutral president, declared that it was illegal for the Greek Cypriots to ignore Article 173 of the Constitution, which provided for the establishment of separate municipalities between Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots (Stephen 11). The Greek Cypriots ignored this ruling, which thus led to the disintegration of the rule of law and the beginning of a brutal campaign by the Greek Cypriots to ethnically cleanse the Turkish Cypriots from their homes.

On December 21, 1963, the Turkish Cypriot Genocide began. Two Turkish Cypriots were murdered by Greek Cypriot police officers for doing absolutely nothing except wanting to go home.

Zeki Halil Karabuluk, happy husband and father, and Jemaliye Emir, happy, good looking divorcee with few cares, were standing together when the first burst came. They were only a few hundred yards from home. The bullets cut them nearly in two, flinging them into the road in a jumpled heap. Three onlookers rolled over on the pavement, wounded by a second hysterical outburst (Gibbons 9).

Unfortunately, this was not the only tragic incident that occurred on this day. “There were shots every where in Nicosia and shortly thereafter, the roads, water supplies and resources, power plants, refinery, radio, television, telecommunications, airport, and all seaports of Cyprus came under Greek Cypriot control” (Atakol 42).

As the rest of the world was celebrating Christmas on December 25, 1963, the Turkish Cypriots were living in terror.

Nicos Sampson, who was the symbol of Greek Cypriot fanaticism, hatred for Turks and a psychopathic murderer, went to Kucuk Kaymakli with his gang and picked up 550 of the remaining 750 Turkish Cypriots […] and took them to the Greek part of Nicosia. They were detained at Kykkos school, with 150 other Turkish Cypriot hostages who were brought there on December 24, 1963. [….] One hundred and fifty Turkish Cypriots never returned and the ones who returned were not allowed to go back to their homes. The residents of Kucuk Kaymakli became refugees for the rest of their lives (Atakol 43).

On December 28, 1963, Rene MacColl and Daniel McGeachie of the Daily Express reported:

We went tonight into the sealed-off Turkish Cypriot quarter of Nicosia in which 200 to 300 people had been slaughtered in the last five days. We were the first western reporters there and we have seen sights too frightful to be described in print. Horrors so extreme that the people seemed stunned beyond tears (Stephen 14).

On January 1, 1964, the Daily Herald reported, “When I came across the Turkish homes they were an appalling sight. Apart from the walls, they just did not exist” (Stephens 15). Il Giorno reported on January 14, 1964, “Right now we are witnessing the exodus of Turks from their villages. Thousands of people are abandoning homes, lands, herds; Greek terrorism is relentless” (Denkas 40). Such reports were confirmed by the Washington Post, who stated on February 17, 1964, “Greek Cypriot fanatics appear bent on a policy of genocide” (Stephen 15). Harry Scott Gibbons reported the following on the village of Kokkina slightly after August 9, 1964:

The village was blasted. It ceased to exist. The women and children
were living in caves, crudely hollowed out of the low sandstone cliffs
near the sea. [….] I find it difficult to express as I walked in among these wretched creatures. What had they done to deserve this? Here was a government, recognized by the rest of the world as the legal government of these people, coldly and calmly massacring its citizens
in full view of the whole world, and nothing could be done about it? It was more than a massacre. Their backs were to the sea, they had nowhere to run. No one could pretend they were being chased out of their country. [….] These people were going to be put to death. It was genocide (256).

Over 300 Turkish Cypriots are still missing without a trace from the massacres that occurred between 1963 and 1964. The UK Commons Select Committee concluded that:

There is little doubt that much of the violence which the Turkish Cypriots claim led to the total or partial destruction of 103 Turkish villages and the displacement of about a quarter of the total Turkish Cypriot population, was either directly inspired by, or certainly connived at, by the Greek Cypriot leadership (Stephen 17).

The Separation

After the massacres that occurred between 1963 and 1964, Turkish Cypriots were forced to withdraw into small enclaves, which constituted three percent of the land that they owned (Dodd 23). They were a stateless people within their own country, living their daily lives in fear. The UN Secretary General reported:

When the disturbances broke out in December 1963 and continued during the first part of 1964, thousands of Turkish Cypriots fled from their homes, taking with them only what they could drive or carry, and sought refuge in what they considered to be safer Turkish Cypriot villages and areas (Stephen 18).

The plight of the Turkish Cypriots of Yayla was the plight of many Turkish Cypriots. According to Dr. Atakol:

Yayla was under siege by the Greek Cypriots from December 1963
until the middle of 1968. During those five years, the villagers of
Yayla went through unimaginable hardship and misery. Their
survival under those inhumane conditions is a tribute to their courage
and determination (55).

Turkish Cypriots were denied the right to freedom of movement. They did not have access to postal services, building materials, electrical equipment, motor parts, fuel, chemicals, and many other commodities. The Turkish Cypriots who sought to return to their government jobs were denied the right to do so. Many Turkish Cypriots were forced to live in tents (Stephen 19). Food was scarce (Gibbons 253).

Children who had Turkish Cypriot parents were not recorded as existing by the State Register of Persons. They were not permitted to get passports nor were any Greek Cypriot person prosecuted for crimes that they committed against Turkish Cypriots. “Turkish Cypriots became, to all intents and purposes, stateless persons without any civil rights” (Oberling 126). They did not even have the right to freedom of religion, as demonstrated by the fact that the Greek National Guard seized the most important Muslim shrine on the island in 1965 and one year later declared it off-limits for the Turkish Cypriots (Oberling 132).

Such treatment played a significant role in the separating the Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots. As former British Prime Minister Sir Alec Douglas-Home once wrote, “I was convinced of the view that if Archbishop Makarios could not bring himself to treat the Turkish Cypriots as human beings he was inviting the invasion and partition of the island” (Stephen 24).

The role of the international community

Despite the inhumane treatment of the Turkish Cypriots by the Greek Cypriot administration, the reaction of the international community has not been sympathetic to the plight of the Turkish Cypriots. To the contrary, they have chosen instead to support the Makarios regime.

Galo Plaza of Ecuador […] minimized the suffering of the Turkish Cypriots at Kokkina, […] and his final report, issued in March 1965, displayed such a callous disregard for the welfare of the Turkish Cypriot community that the Turkish government promptly called for his resignation (Oberling 125).

Galo Plaza undermined principles that were vital to the 1960 Constitution, such as bizonality, and questioned the need for the Treaty of Guarantee. His views reflected the fact that he was a close associate of Makarios.

However, Galo Plaza was not the only person who fell under the influence of Makarios. The Greek Lobby in the United States had been advocating the idea of Enosis for years. They were so successful at it that by 1964, thirty-seven US Senators, thirty-six US Congressmen, and four US State Governors had made statements in favor of Enosis. Makarios was also working with the CIA, who sought to use British airfields to eavesdrop on communications in the Middle Eastern and Soviet-bloc countries (Oberling 124).

Unfortunately, the United Nations has not been much friendlier to the Turkish Cypriots than Galo Plaza and the United States has been. On March 4, 1964, UN Resolution 186 recognized the Greek Cypriot regime as the legitimate government of Cyprus, despite the fact that such recognition was in violation of the 1960 Cypriot Constitution. Sir Anthony Kershaw, Chairman of the UK House of Commons Select Committee on Foreign Affairs, explains:

It was decided that UN troops should be sent to preserve order, but the UN can only send troops if the legal government of the country concerned asks for them. The only organization which could in 1964 be called the Government of Cyprus was the administration headed by Makarios (Stephen 20).

Since then, only the Greek side has been recognized as representing the whole island of Cyprus, while the Turkish side has been ignored and neglected by the international community. Nevertheless, despite the major flaws associated with UN Resolution 186, the UN peacekeepers did restore some order. However, we are facing the consequences of this decision to this date. As Atakol wrote in his book:

Treating the Greek Cypriot administration as the legitimate representative of the whole island meant that the Greek Cypriots were able to go on with their lives as they did before and in the eyes of the world, they were the government of Cyprus. They did not face any negative consequences for the atrocities they had committed and continued to commit in Cyprus and therefore were in no real rush to settle the Cyprus dispute (53).

Thus, in the long run, the United Nations helped to create a situation on the island which punishes the victim and rewards the aggressor.

Crisis Continued

A power struggle began between Grivas and Makarios. Makarios sought to bring about Enosis through strangling the life out of the Turkish Cypriots in regards to economics and making them third class citizens, while Grivas sought to use brute force against the Turkish Cypriots. Starting in 1966, Makarios began to see Grivas as a direct threat. He “accused Grivas of trying to start a civil war and asked the Greek government to limit his powers” (Oberling 131). Obviously, this did not work. In 1967, Grivas tried to provoke the Turkish Cypriots into engaging in violence.

On April 8, a National Guard unit comprising two armored cars, a
Land-rover mounted with a heavy machine gun and a truckload of
Infantrymen stopped in front of the village of Mari, in the district of
Larnaca, and began firing. During the four hours of the barrage, at
least forty two-pounder shells and one thousand rounds of ammunition were fired by the armored cars alone (Oberling 135).

No Turkish Cypriot was permitted to leave Mari and food was only provided by the United Nations. The Turkish Cypriot people of Mari were facing the possibility of starving to death.

But as if things were not bad enough, the Grivas-supporters received additional encouragement for their terror when the junta took power in Greece on April 24, 1967. This junta was a major blow to the Makarios supporters, who were left-wing and against the anti-communist policies of the junta government. Indeed, the junta killed the dream of Makarios to achieve Enosis. From this day forward, Makarios would prefer independence to Enosis. However, Makarios was powerless to prevent Grivas, who was backed by the Greek Junta Government, from operating in Cyprus. Grivas would continue to try to provoke the Turkish Cypriots.

The two communities of the mixed Greek-Turkish village of Ayios Theodoros near Larnaca were segregated because of earlier outbreaks of fighting. In November Grivas sent Greek patrols through the Turkish sector, an operation that had not been carried out for the previous four years. The Turks objected, the UN were called in. […] The UN began negotiations with the Turks to allow the patrols in order to satisfy the demands of the Greeks. But while the talks were going on, Grivas surrounded the village with some 2,000 troops, and despite advice to the contrary by the UN, started the patrols again on November 14. [….] The same day, Ayios Theodoros was visited by Grivas himself, who inspected the Turkish quarter and warned the inhabitants that he would blast them into the ground if they dared make any challenge to the National Guard patrols. On the mourning of November 15, police patrols again went through the village. The Turks, seeing the trap Grivas had set, again ignored them. [….] Later reports said that Grivas, strutting, impatient little general, was furious with the Turks for not springing the trap by resisting the patrol. As the convoy reached the Turkish sector of the village, the armored cars opened up with two plunders. The 2,000 guardsmen, already positioned in the area, rushed forward and mortars and heavy artillery went into action against the Turks. As the hordes of Greeks rushed up, they seized the UN troops, watching helplessly, and forcibly disarmed them. Then they smashed the radio to prevent a call for reinforcements (Gibbons 265-6).

As if what happened in Ayios Theodoros was not bad enough, the all Turkish Cypriot village of Kophinou, which was two miles away from Ayios Theodoros, was attacked around the exact same time. For what reason were these villages attacked? Because Grivas had high-jacked control over the Greek Cypriot patrol and used them to act on his hatred of the Turkish Cypriot people.

Not surprisingly, on the mourning of November 16, 1967, the Turkish government warned that they would intervene militarily if the assault on the Turkish Cypriot people continued. The next day, the Turkish Parliament authorized the government to take military action against Cyprus and even Greece if necessary. By November 19, the Greek junta government had recalled Grivas. The Greek junta government was not in a position internationally where it would be advisable for them to go to war with Turkey.

The Turkish Cypriots learned something very important from this crisis, however. The status quo was not acceptable. They could no longer afford to live as a stateless people. So, on December 28, 1967, a Provisional Turkish Cypriot Administration was established.

With the formation of the Provisional Turkish Cypriot Administration, the separation of the two communities became complete. Hence, the splitting up of Cyprus into two ethnically-homogenous, self-governing states was not achieved by the Turkish armed intervention of 1974, as is commonly believed, but by Makarios and Grivas in the 1960’s (Oberling 145).

1974-----The Beginning of the End

The death of Grivas in January 1974 emboldened all of the Makarios supporters to take action against EOKA-B. On April 25, 1974, Makarios outlawed EOKA-B. On May 4, Makarios ordered all persons illegally possessing weapons to hand them over. He then proceeded to arrest two hundred suspected EOKA-B terrorists, attempted to reassert his control over the Greek Cypriot National Guard, and demanded that 650 Greek officers staffing the National Guard be sent back to Greece. These demands resulted in the end of Makarios’ career.

On July 15, 1974, Makarios was overthrown in a Greek-orchestrated coup. The Greek coup appointed Nicos Sampson as his replacement. This nightmare was the beginning of the end. Nicos Sampson’s first actions while in office were to murder ruthlessly innocent Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots. As Greek Cypriot MP Rina Katsellis wrote in her memoirs:

My God! Every one is frozen with fear….the old man who asked for the body of his son was shot on the spot. The tortures and executions at the central prison…..every one is frozen with horror. Nothing is sacred to these people, and they call themselves Greeks (Stephen 23)!

According to the Greek Cypriot priest, Papatsestos, the man who was in charge of the Greek Orthodox cemetery in Nicosia, 127 bodies were buried immediately after Nicos Sampson took power. On July 17 alone, seventy-seven people were buried in mass graves in Nicosia. He also claimed that there were massacres outside of the Kykko monastery, as well as in Paphos and Limassol (Oberling 159-160). The Washington Post quoted a Greek Cypriot university student, who had witnessed the bodies of Makarios supporters being dumped into mass graves (Gibbons 431). Bora Atun, a Famagusta architect and later mayor, described how Sampson treated the Greek Cypriot people:

We sat tight and watched the brutal fight for supremacy between Greeks developing into a massacre as the tanks pounded the police headquarters into submission. The crackle of machineguns and small arms fire filled the air, and we, the watchers, couldn’t believe what we were seeing, the Greeks were killing their own people (Gibbons 232).

As bad as Nicos Sampson was for Greek Cypriots, he was even worse for Turkish Cypriots.

He was a notorious killer who hated the Turks and was very well known in Cyprus for shooting his victims in the back. Nicos Sampson represented hatred, terrorism, and the Greek Cypriot Orthodox Church’s fanaticism (Atakol 72).

The Iphestos Plan clearly indicates that Nicos Sampson had genocidal intentions against the Turkish Cypriots.

It had been carefully plotted, meticulously worked out, with the sort of care that had gone into the Normandy landings in 1944, if you like. The moon landings even. There were plans, hundreds of plans, and thousands of type-written pages and maps, gone over and corrected, and altered and changed. Every command HQ, every unit, every man knew exactly what to do (Gibbons 415).

Under Nicos Sampson rule, Turkish Cypriots would suffer unspeakable tragedies. As a German tourist eye-witness to the violence said about the situation in Cyprus on the “Voice of Germany” radio station:

In the villages around Famagusta, the Greek National Guard have displayed unsurpassed examples of savagery. Entering Turkish homes, they ruthlessly rained bullets on women and children. They cut the throats of many Turks. Rounding up Turkish women, they raped them all….the human mind cannot comprehend the Greek butchery (Gibbons 462).

Another eye-witness, Yujel Ashan, spoke of the horrors that he faced from the Greek Cypriots as a Turkish Cypriot in Limassol:

We went through the Turkish park. The shell and mortar fire was unbelievable. The Greeks were blowing up the whole place. They had whole streets under fire and we couldn’t cross. There were dead and wounded everywhere. At one street, a close friend of mine, Atay Izanoglu, started to run across. I called to him to come back, then a mortar hit him and he was blown up. What was left of him landed on the roof of a parked car. We went to the Limassol Turkish Hospital. A wounded Turkish woman was lying in the yard, one leg threshing. Then she died. The Turkish quarter was overrun by four in the afternoon. We stayed in the hospital until midnight. Then the Greeks came for us (Gibbons 465).

During the night of July 20/21, Yujel Ashan and about 200 other men were taken from the Turkish Hospital to the football stadium. There, they would stay as hostages of the Greek Cypriots until the UN found them two days later. Time Magazine described the fate of the Limassol Turkish Cypriots:

Thousands of Turkish Cypriots were taken hostage, Turkish women were raped, children were shot in the street, and the Turkish quarter of Limassol was burnt down by the National Guard (Gibbons 472).

The plight of the Turkish Cypriots of Larnaca was not much different. 873 Turkish Cypriot men were detained in a school building that was made to accommodate 100 students. They were all forced to sleep on the bare concrete floors, did not have access to doctors and medicine, and were fed starvation rations (Oberling 174).

On July 23, 1974, the Washington Post reported, “In a Greek raid on a small Turkish village near Limassol, 36 out of a population of 200 were killed” (Stephen 25). On the exact same day, The Times reported:

Kazan Dervic, a Turkish Cypriot girl aged 15, said she had been staying with her uncle. The Greek Cypriot National Guard came into the Turkish sector and began shooting. She saw her uncle and other relatives taken away as prisoners. And later heard her uncle had been shot. “Before my uncle was taken away by the soldiers, he shouted to me to run away. I ran to the streets, and the soldiers were shooting all the time. I went into a house and I saw a woman being attacked by soldiers. They were raping her. Then they shot her in front of my eyes. I ran away again and Turkish men and women looked after me. They were escaping as well” (Stephen 25-26)

On July 24, 1974, France Soir reported, “The Greeks burned Turkish mosques and set fire to Turkish homes in the villages around Famagusta. Defensely Turkish villagers who have no weapons live in an atmosphere of terror and they evacuate their homes and go and live in tents in the forests. The Greeks actions are a shame to humanity” (Stephen 26).

Indeed, although Nicos Sampson’s presidency only lasted eight days, he caused quite a lot of damage on the island during that time period. In fact, Nicos Sampson declared himself in the Greek newspaper Eleftherotipia, on February 26, 1981, “Had Turkey not intervened I would not only have proclaimed Enosis but I would have annihilated the Turks in Cyprus” (Stephen 27). Indeed, the Turkish Intervention was very timely.

Partition of Cyprus

Between the years 1963 and 1974, 103 Turkish Cypriot villagers were destroyed and over 7,000 Turkish Cypriots lost their lives. Turkish Cypriots owe their existence today to the Turkish Intervention, which is now a national holiday for the Turkish Cypriots that is celebrated annually on July 20 called the Turkish Intervention Day.

As a result of Greek Cypriot policies aimed at the establishment of Enosis, the Turkish intervention of 1974, and a population exchange agreement between the Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots that took place in 1975, two peoples that once lived side-by-side now live separately. Turkish Cypriots live in Northern Cyprus, while Greek Cypriots live in Southern Cyprus. People on both sides suffered immense losses. Many innocents died and a large percentage of civilians became refugees. However, Greek Cypriots were able to recover from this much quicker than their Turkish Cypriots counterparts, for the Greek Cypriots had the international community behind them, while Turkish Cypriots only had Turkey.

On February 13, 1975, Turkish Cypriots formed the Turkish Federated State of Cyprus in the hopes of creating a bi-communal Federal Republic of Cyprus, based on the equality of the 1960 Cypriot Constitution. Turkish Cypriots drafted their constitution, put it to a referendum, and held parliamentary elections. The Turkish Cypriots requested that the Greek Cypriots form their own Greek Cypriot Federated State, so that the two federated states of Cyprus could unite as one. However, the Greek Cypriots did not want to do that. To make matters worse, since the United Nations had recognized the Greek side as representing all of Cyprus, the Greek Cypriots were using this to their advantage to leave the Turkish Cypriots in limbo, where they would be a stateless people who had no rights in the Republic of Cyprus while at the same time not having a country to call their own. The Greek Cypriot leadership effectively used the United Nations and the Non-Aligned Movement to silence Turkish Cypriot voices. The result was that the Turkish Cypriots gave up any hope of being able to live as equals in a united Cyprus and declared the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus to be an independent country on November 15, 1983.

The Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus has all of the features of a nation state. They have their own government with complete control over their own domestic affairs, a unique national identity, make up the majority on a land with defined border, and have their own national flag. The only thing preventing the TRNC from being a country is the fact that it is only recognized as a country by Turkey. Every time a country tries to recognize the TRNC or even engage in direct trade with them, they get into trouble with Greeks and Greek Cypriots. For example, when Bangladesh tried to recognize the TRNC, all Bangladeshi foreign workers in Greece and Greek Cyprus faced expulsion. This is the primary reason why most countries have not recognized the TRNC, because the Greeks and Greek Cypriots are obsessed with forcing the Turkish Cypriots to live in isolation from the rest of the world.

Despite the stability that exists on Cyprus today based on the Turkish intervention, it would be deceiving to think that there is true peace in Cyprus. For instance, on October 7, 1995, the US State Department Report on Human Rights reported that a Turkish Cypriot farmer named Egmez required ten days of hospitalization due to being tortured by the Greek Cypriot police (Stephen 38). According to the Stephens report to the British Northern Cyprus Parliamentary group:

On April 11, 1996, several thousand young people, many on motorcycles who were organized to ride from Berlin, were encouraged to break into the UN buffer zone and confront the Turkish Cypriots at their border. They rampaged in the buffer zone, in defiance of the UN forces, setting fire to vegetation, brandishing knives, and throwing stones and Molotov cocktails. They tore down the UN barbed-wire fence near Dherynia, and one was beaten to death in a violent struggle with Turkish Cypriots. Another was shot when he broke through the Turkish Cypriot line and tried to desecrate their flag (Stephens 38).

Even recently, on November 22, 2006, twenty Greek Cypriot students attacked a Turkish Cypriot student because they heard Greek Cypriot media reports that were inciting hatred.

There is only one mixed village left in Cyprus, Pile, which is located in the Intermediate Zone controlled by the UN peace-keeping forces. And even in this one mixed villages, the Greek Cypriot authorities fail to treat the Turkish Cypriots who live their like human beings. In Pile, Greek Cypriots are fined and jailed if they are caught buying any goods from Turkish Cypriots. Greek Cypriots also prevent foreign tourists from buying goods from Turkish Cypriot shops in Pile. Foreign tourists that have the chutzpah to do so have their souvenirs confiscated, and are fined by the Greek Cypriot authorities.

To this day, as the Greek Cypriot side gets richer and richer due to their vibrant tourism industry and now, European Union membership, while the Turkish Cypriots continue to lag behind. Since there are no direct flights to the TRNC, not as many tourists come to visit the TRNC and the ones that do mostly come from Turkey. You can not send mail or call the TRNC directly either. All international phone calls and mail has to go through Turkey, because of the international embargo. With the sole exception of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, Turkish Cypriots are denied a voice in all international organizations. This has been especially problematic at the United Nations and the European Union. Turkish Cypriot athletes can not compete with any non-Turkish Cypriot sports teams. Cultural activities involving the TRNC and foreign countries are rare. In fact, the Greek Cypriots went out of their way to try to prevent a cultural exchange program between San Diego State University and Eastern Mediterranean University. And there is no significant foreign investment in the TRNC with the sole exception of Turkey.

This whole environment where Turkish Cypriots are constantly being punished for doing nothing more than wanting equality has done nothing but confirm that Cyprus will be a partitioned island. In 2003, when the borders opened between the two sides, there was hope that perhaps the two Cypriot peoples could unite on the basis of equality. However, this hope was soon trampled upon when seventy-six percent of the Greek Cypriot population rejected the Annan Plan without coming up with any sort of counter peace proposal. Despite its flaws, the Annan Plan was the best peace proposal thus far and the lack of compromise on the behalf of the Greek Cypriots has done nothing more than strengthen the Turkish Cypriot desire to have their state recognized as an independent country. After the Greek Cypriots rejected the Annan Plan, EU Enlargement Commissioner Mr. Gunther Vergeugen stated, “Turkish Cypriots must not be punished because of this result…..now we have to end the isolation of the North. The Commission is ready to take various measures for that aim” (Denkas 19). Turkish Cypriots are still waiting for their isolation to end. Four generations of Turkish Cypriots have been yearning to be treated like human beings, while watching one promise being broken after another. They were betrayed by the United Nations, who illegally treated the Greek Cypriot regime as representing all of Cyprus. They were just recently betrayed by the European Union, who promised them membership if they voted for the Annan Plan. And they are still waiting for the big countries to recognize that they exist.

The future

I have no idea whether or not a solution will be found to the Cyprus conflict within the imminent future. Since the Greek Cypriots are now in the European Union, they have very little incentive to treat their Turkish Cypriot neighbors as equals and even less of an incentive to recognize their right to exist as a separate entity. Atakol summed up the situation pretty well when he stated:

The separation of the Turkish and Greek Cypriots for now is irreversible. It took over a hundred years and many incidents to force the Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots to separate. Maybe it should never have happened, but it did and the reality now is different to what it used to be. The clock can not be turned back. As for now, what the Turkish and Greek Cypriots need to do is to find ways and means of cooperating and living side by side as friends and good neighbors (120).

Until the Greek Cypriots accept the right of the Turkish Cypriots to economically and culturally develop themselves as human beings, there will be no solution to this conflict.





Source Citations:

Atakol, Dr. Kenan. Turkish and Greek Cypriots: Is their separation
Permanent? Metu Press, Ankara: 2003.

Dodd, Clement. The Cyprus Imbroglio. Eothen Press, Cambridgeshire:
1998.

Denkas, Rauf. The Cyprus Problem: What it is----how can it be solved?.
Cyrep, Nicosia: 2004.

Gibbons, Harry Scott. The Genocide Files. Charles Bravos Publishers,
London: 1997.

Moran, Michael. Sovereignty Divided. Cyrep, Nicosia: 1998.

Oberling, Pierre. The Road to Bellapais: The Turkish Cypriot Exodus to
Northern Cyprus. Columbia University Press, NY: 1982.

Stephen, Michael. The Cyprus Question. British Northern Cyprus
Parliamentary Group, London: 1997.

Israel Should Recognize the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus by Rachel Salomon

Israelis don’t have many allies in the Middle East. Essentially, Israel’s only reliable friend in the region is Turkey. Given that, it makes a lot of sense for Israel to seek out other friends that are not too far away geographically. If Israel recognizes the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, not only will Israeli-Turkish relations be strengthened-----Israelis will have another reliable friend not too far away from home.

Israel has always had an interest in Cyprus since the founding of Israel in 1948. However, Israel only got its embassy in Cyprus in 1961 upon the insistence of the Turks and the Turkish Cypriots that there be an Israeli diplomatic presence on the island. This was, of course, before the Turkish Cypriots were ousted from the government in 1963. If the Greek Cypriots did not hijack the Cypriot constitution, there would have been a Cypriot embassy in Israel way before 1994, when the Greek Cypriots decided to finally open up their embassy in Tel Aviv, in accordance with a general shift in Greek policy that supported increasing its ties with Israel to try to minimize the Turkish-Israeli alliance.

For the first 45-years of Israel’s existence, the Greeks and Greek Cypriots seldom had any interaction with Israel, choosing instead to side with Israel’s adversaries in the region. These sentiments were vividly expressed by the Greek Cypriot support for Dr. Vassos Lyssarides, who had served as an advisor to Palestinian, Syrian, Libyan, and other internationally known terrorist organizations.

To the contrary, as early as 1959, Dr. Fazil Kutchuk, former leader of the Turkish Cypriots, told Peretz Leshem, Israel's consul in Nicosia, that “the Turks of Cyprus sought warm relations and close economic ties with Israel.” Unfortunately, the Israelis decided against this out of the vain hope that this would cause them to strengthen their diplomatic ties with the Greeks and Greek Cypriots. Nevertheless, Israel did firmly reject the idea of Enosis (Cyprus unifying with Greece) and generally did support Turkey overall on the Cyprus issue.

Right now, Turkish-Israeli relations are very close. Israel has multiple military agreements with Turkey and free trade agreements. Many Israelis choose Turkey as their number one tourism destination. Turkey was the first Muslim country to recognize Israel in 1949 and has continuously backed Israel on issues of crucial importance. If Israel recognizes the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, definitely the Turkish Cypriots and probably the Turks as well will agree to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of the Jewish people.

Israelis and Turkish Cypriots have fundamental similarities in their way of thinking. Both countries are democracies and have faced immense persecution, thus forcing both peoples to want to create their own state. The Turkish Cypriots and Israelis both understand what it is like to live in a state of constant warfare and are against terrorism. And both peoples yearn for a better future than what currently exists. Given this, Israeli recognition of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus only seems natural.

Justice Denied by Rachel Salomon

It is an interesting fact that people living in dictator ships have more rights than people living in a democratic country like the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC). Indeed, Cuba receives millions of tourists every year because many countries do have direct flights to their country. However, a democratic TRNC does not have such a privilege because of the unjust isolation imposed on them; Turkish Cypriots can not fly to any country directly other than Turkey and no other country has direct flights to the TRNC. A Cuban can accept mail directly and can receive telephone calls. But a Turkish Cypriot can only make telephone calls and receive mail via Turkey. Dictatorships like Cuba do not have fair elections and have been internationally condemned for their human rights record. Yet what has the democratic TRNC been condemned for? They have been and still are punished because Turkey intervened to preserve their existence in 1974.

Starting in 1963 up until 1974, the Greek Cypriots orchestrated a campaign in favor of the unification with Greece in violation of the Treaty of Guarantee and other international agreements. During this same period of time, thousands of Turkish Cypriots were massacred by their Greek Cypriot neighbors. Nevertheless, it was the Turkish Cypriots who voted in favor of the Annan Peace Plan---the most elaborate plan on the Cyprus issue which was supported by the entire international community.

With the Annan Plan, the European Union was supposed to have all of Cyprus enter into the European Union as a united island. Unfortunately, because the Greek Cypriots voted against the Annan Peace plan, this did not happen. Nevertheless, it was the Greek Cypriot side that was rewarded with European Union membership, while the side that actually cooperated with the international community by voting in favor of the Annan Plan, the Turkish Cypriots, continued to suffer under unjust isolation.

It is a sad but ironic anomaly that a democracy which has voted in favor of peace continues to be treated worse than dictatorships, rogue states, and people who have voted against peace. The fact that the international community, especially the European Union, have not kept their promises to change this injustice is a travesty. Nevertheless, despite the feelings of hurt, pain, disappointment, and betrayal that most Turkish Cypriots feel by being left in limbo, they are yearning the day when justice will awaken from its slumber and become a reality.

Orphic Hymn just does not get it! By Rachel Salomon

A) Have you not accused the H/C of teaching to their youth hatred? You did, so where is my requested quote or name of a poem? All you have provided is some ill comparison to the Lydra Street grafitti that is a condemned event.

I shall once again reprint this quote from the Greek Cypriot author, Antonis Angastiniyotis, who wrote:“The majority of the Greek Cypriot youth know very little about the events that led to the island's division. The tragic events of 1974 have been used as a huge curtain to cover up the real events that led to the division of the two people. In our schools it has always surprised me that while talking about the heroism of EOKA, they skip 15-years and continue with 1974. Either nothing happened between 1960 and 1974, or no one wants to discuss this. While researching the events during this period (1960-74), I realized that the second choice was right. When I started to write this research, my cousin from Greece and her two daughters came to visit me and we started to discuss the events of 1963-74. The daughters knew nothing and what their mother knew was very confusing. At one stage of the discussion I mentioned some of the Greek Cypriot leadership's mistakes and all of a sudden this brought out the nationalist monster in my cousin who said: "Makarios' biggest mistake was not to have killed all the Turkish Cypriots in order for us to be comfortable". This sweet and pretty woman, who couldn't even kill an ant, had suddenly turned into a killer who could carry out mass murders. She wanted a whole race to be wiped out. This is what I said to her: "In other words, do you mean taking out all the children from school, all mothers with their babies and all the men from their work places and taking them to a big hole in Messaria and murder them…Do you want to be one of the murders or the one of the persons using the bulldozer to cover the mass graves…" There was silence. The example I gave helped her to understand the meaning of what she said. Then I started to speak again. "We tried this before in Ayvasil, Murataga, Atlilar, Taskent, but the only thing we succeeded in was soughing the fruits of our efforts". During our childhood we were taught that the Turks were barbaric dogs. My aunt used to say to me that they smelled because they weren't baptized. Whereas according to the Bible, we are modern Christians who love their environment. Then, why did our religious leader Makarios in 1964 say that 'If Turkey comes to intervene to protect the Turkish Cypriots, she will not find a single Turkish Cypriot to save…' The answer is clear. In Cyprus there is a saying, 'another priest's sermon'. In certain situations this enables us to hate. This book will deal with some of these special situations.”

Also, according to the US government’s 2005 Country Report on Human Rights practices in Cyprus, “The government continued to use textbooks at the primary and secondary school level that included inflammatory language derogatory of Turkish Cypriots and Turks. This was a particularly serious concern with history textbooks.”

b) Have you or have you not directly attacked the Hellenic people by titling them xenophobic and racist in a topic that is totally unrelated. And since you DID, do explain for what reason exactly did you resort to this totally unrelated to the topic, slander???

First of all, I quoted from a credible source, the Jerusalem Center for Strategic Studies. I did not just make these accusations up out of this air. Here is the report:

http://www.jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DBID=1&LNGID=1&TMID=111&FID=381&PID=470&IID=640

It is in this report that I get the findings of the 2000 Eurobarometer survey, which found that 38 percent of Greeks were troubled by the presence of non-Greeks living in their country. According to the Jerusalem Center for Strategic Studies, this makes Greece the most xenophobic country in the European Union. This is not an attack. It is just a mere fact that I just backed up with this academic source citation. The only reason why I even brought up this fact is because Argyrou said the following: “When Salomon refers to the Ottomans giving the expelled Jews of Spain a home in the Ottoman empire she neglects to mention that this was at the expense of the Greeks of Thessalonica who were deported by the Turks so that the Jews could take their homes.” I have never heard this in my entire life. As a child, I was taught that the Jews of Spain moved to Salonika because they were welcome with open arms by Sultan Bayezid II. Argyrou sounded to me like he was mocking the home that this Turkish Sultan gave to the Jews, namely my ancestors. I got offended. Naturally, I responded, for I found this comment to be very anti-Semitic.

c) You claim to have not manipulated the Guardian quote, when not once but twice you attempted to relate it to T/C deaths. I want to see a specific Stephen's article that does relate it to T/C and not to the coup.

Michael Stephens report called “The Cyprus Question,” published by the British Northern Cyprus Parliamentary Group, quoted the Guardian, which reported on December 31, 1963, that “it is nonsense to claim, as the Greek Cypriots do, that all causalities were caused by fighting between armed men of both sides. On Christmas Eve many Turkish Cypriot people were brutally attacked and murdered in their suburban homes, including the wife and children of the Turkish Cypriot head of army medical services----allegedly by a group of forty men, many in army boots and greatcoats.” This is a direct quote. It can be found on page 15 of the report. This was the quote that I published in Israel Insider in my second article. It has absolutely nothing to do with the coup. As you can tell by the date, it was a good eleven years before the coup.

e) You totally manipulated the events of Aug. 95' and 96'. WHY distort the second that has been officially condemned by the UN and there are literally hundreds of links that could provide you with accurate info, so WHY the distortion especially when a H/C was killed??

To my knowledge, what I said about August 1995 and August 1996 is the truth. Here is what Michael Stephen had to say about the whole event, pages 38-40.

On 7th October 1995 a Turkish Cypriot farmer, Erkan Egmez, was snatched from his fields, and tortured by Greek Cypriot police. On 5 March 1996 the US State Depart report on human rights in Cyprus said: Egmez, appears to have been severely beaten in the period during and immediately after his arrest and eventually required ten days of hospitalization. According to some eye-witnesses hooded police officials continued beating him even as he was being admitted to hospital.

On 8th November 1995 hundreds of schoolchildren were given permission by Greek Cypriot officials to be absent from school. They participated in a violent riot under the guidance of teachers, in which Greek Cypriots seized a UN observation post and hoisted a Greek flag in the buffer zone. It is worth noting that it is almost always the Greek flag, not the Greek Cypriot flag, which is used on these occasions.

On 3rd June 1996 at 6:30am a Greek Cypriot National Guardsman in uniform was shot when he violated the buffer zone and refused to stop when challenged by Turkish Cypriot sentries. On 6th August 1996 armed Greek Cypriots tried to abduct a Turkish Cypriot shepherd from the buffer zone.

On 11th August 1996 several thousand young people, many on motorcycles who were organized to ride from Berlin, were encouraged to break into the UN buffer zone and confront the Turkish Cypriots on their border. They rampaged in the buffer zone, in defiance of the UN forces, setting fire to vegetation, brandishing knives, and throwing stones and Molotov cocktails. They tore down the UN barb-wire fence near Dherynia, and one was beaten to death in a violent struggle with Turkish Cypriots. Another was shot when he broke through the Turkish Cypriot line and tried to desecrate their flag. Instead of regretting these incidents and apologizing to the UN and to the Turkish Cypriots, the Greek Cypriots have treated the two hooligans as national heroes.

Neither of these men should have been killed, and the Turkish Cypriots must exercise greater restraint in future, whatever the provocation, for there are those on the Greek Cypriot side who are deliberately putting the lives of their young people at risk for political purposes. The Greek Cypriot motorcyclist leader Hadjicostas was asked by Selides magazine whether he had not thought that there might be victims. “Of course I did,” he said, “approximately 40 bikers die on the roads each year. Let some of them die for the country.”

The Greek Cypriot leadership must take ultimate responsibility for the death of the two men. They should have called off the incursion before it was too late, and should not have allowed them to cross into the UN Zone. Interviewed by the press immediately afterwards UN envoy Gustav Feissel said, “It was the responsibility of the Greek Cypriot government to ensure that the cease-fire line was not violated.”

Nor should the Greek Cypriot leadership have encouraged the organizers in the first place. The Greek Orthodox Church made a large financial contribution and Archbishop Chyrisostomos declared in September on Greek Star TV “The time has come to launch a full-scale struggle against the Turks-----it does not matter how much bloodshed there is or how many victims there are.” Many people may be surprised by such remarks from a senior clergyman. Also, the leader of the Greek Cypriot motorcyclists told Periodiko on 21st August 1996, “We were promised that the Greeks would provide transfer back to Germany in a Hercules transport plane of the Greek Air Force.”

Immediately after the riot, President Denkas called upon President Clerides to meet him. He said, “there is more need than ever for talks. I am ready to meet immediately, but Clerides may use the incident as an excuse not to meet.” He did refuse to meet. In a letter to Clerides on 22nd September 1996 Denkas said, “It is upon us, the leaders, to tell our peoples that there is no other way in Cyprus except coexistence as good neighbors under separate roofs, or as co-founders partners under one mutually agreed bizonal, bicommunal roof. Rushing our borders claiming the right to come and sweep off our properties and demanding submission by brute force, waving Greek flags and telling us that Hellenism will be victorious in Cyprus is surely not the way to a negotiated settlement.”

On 13th August 1996, the Greek Cypriot Cyprus Mail wrote that “The government’s handling of the whole matter has been naïve, indecisive, and irresponsible,” and quoting Clerides as saying that the bloody clashes had “given the message abroad that the two communities can not live together, and that the presence of Turkish troops in Cyprus was necessary.”

Orphic, I recognize that some Greek Cypriots died. But you have to ask yourself, what did they do to get themselves in that situation? Not that I am condoning that they were killed. I am just pointing out that they were encouraged by their leadership to harass Turkish Cypriots and violate a UN buffer zone.

Orphic Hymn, just another propagandist! By Rachel Salomon

According to Mr. Hymn, “But the point here is not some medieval rule but that the population despite being ruled by Byzantines, Arabs, Venetians, Ottomans, British, was always predominantly Hellenic since the Bronze age.”

No one denies that there have been Greeks in Cyprus for quite some time. Nevertheless, the fact remains, as Mr. Hymn even admitted, that the island has never been owned by Greeks and others, namely Turkish Cypriots, also have a right to the island as well.

According to Mr. Hymn, “The problem is well known and that is not the 500 year old population of the North, but the illegally imported Turks from the mainland that are the reason the Cypriot Turks fear total alienation from their own identity.”

Turks only started to be imported to Northern Cyprus after 1974. The roots of the problem can be traced back to 1963, when the campaign of genocide against Turkish Cypriots began. The only reason Turks have been imported from the mainland is to ease the isolation of the Turkish Cypriots. I understand that many Turkish Cypriots fear that they are being overtaken by these people, because many of their own have moved to London due to the economic isolation of the country. Nevertheless, I don’t blame this on Turkey. I blame this more on the embargo. If there was no embargo, perhaps these people would not be needed and you would see more Turkish Cypriots staying in their own country.

According to Mr. Hymn, “Taking a single condemned event which the pseudo-state is exploiting in an attempt to distort history. Of course while making the comparison between the alleged school texts and graffiti made by a small group of hoodlums; she avoids presenting any true comparison, a scanned page, a quote from a poem.”

There are lots of examples. Allow me to display a report given by the British Parliament:

“On 8 November 1995 hundreds of schoolchildren were given permission by Greek Cypriot officials to be absent from school. They participated in a violent riot under the guidance of teachers, in which Greek Cypriots seized a UN observation post and hoisted a Greek flag in the buffer zone. It is worth noting that it is almost always the Greek flag, not the Greek Cyprus flag, which is used on these occasions.”

“On 11 August 1996, several thousand young people […] were encouraged to break into the UN buffer zone and confront the Turkish Cypriots on their border. They rampaged in the buffer zone, in defiance of the UN forces, setting fire to vegetation, brandishing knives, and throwing stones and Molotov cocktails.”

According to Greek Star TV, Archbishop Chyrisostomos said on July 28, 1996, “The time has come to launch a full-scale struggle against the Turks----it does not matter how much bloodshed there is or how many victims there are.”

According to Mr. Hymn, “By reading basic articles of the "Universal Declaration of Human Rights", we see that according to Art. 1 and 7 the basic rights that the 70/30 percentage proposed in the constitution, proved to be discriminatory against the Hellenic Cypriots.”

As I have proven in my bellow article, this same document can also be applied to the Turkish Cypriots as well. This document applies to all people all over the world. To say that these rights only apply to Greek Cypriots but not the Turkish Cypriots is absurd. The Greek Cypriots, as I have proven, are no angels. They can just as easily be accused of violations of this document, actually to a far greater extent, as I have demonstrated in my last article, “Greek Cypriot leadership violates the rights of Turkish Cypriots as set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.”

According to Mr Hymn, “WITHDRAWAL dear R. Salomon, NOT expulsion. As previously mentioned the abandonment of the government and public service positions through Turkish and TMT instigation is evident.”

I know that there is a difference between withdrawal and expulsion. However, the Turkish Cypriots did not withdraw. Despite what Mr. Hymn says, the truth is that they were expelled. Again, this goes contrary to reports from the British government that say quite the contrary.

“Greek Cypriots often claim that the Turkish Cypriots withdrew voluntarily from their positions in the state, but this is not correct. They were excluded by threats to their personal safety.”

According to the UK Commons Select Committee, “When in July 1965 the Turkish Cypriot members of the House of Representatives had sought to resume their seats they were told that they could do so only if they accepted the legislative changes due to the operation of the Constitution enacted in their absence.” Note that no Turkish Cypriot leader could accept these changes.”

The UK Commons Selection Committee continued: “In February 1966 Makarios declared that the 1960 agreements had been abrogated and buried.” Thus, the basis for any kind of joint government between Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots was eliminated.

Mr. Hymn proudly quotes the Galo Plaza report as if it is G-d. Nevertheless, even the author of the Galo Plaza report, stated On 29 March 1965, “It is obvious that the Cyprus problem cannot any longer be solved by trying to implement fully the Nicosia treaties and the constitution by the treaties. The events since December 1963 have created a situation which makes it psychologically and politically impossible to return to the previous situation.” Thus, under such a situation, Dr. Plaza recognizes why the Turkish Cypriot side felt the need for partition. The very same report that Mr. Hymn uses also states:

84. My predecessor observed--and from my own knowledge I can confirm--that there could be no concealing the fact that the formal "prohibition" of the Enosis idea did not suppress it in Cyprus. It continued to be discussed and advocated (as well as opposed), in and out of the institutions of government, long after the date of independence. It was and remains impossible to escape the impression that for a large body of the Greek-Cypriot leaders' following, and for many of the leaders themselves, the official demand for "full independence and self-determination" had no other meaning than this: that Cyprus should be released from the treaty and constitution obligations which limited her freedom of choice, whereupon she would opt by some acceptable democratic procedure for union with Greece, this union to take place by agreement exclusively between Cyprus and Greece.

85. The records of the previous Mediator show that the possibility of majority support for Enosis--together with the need to find a way of avoiding a situation in which it might have to be imposed on an unwilling Turkish-Cypriot minority--led to a search among a number of the parties concerned in the Cyprus problem for a formula of union between Cyprus and Greece which might prove acceptable to them all. My predecessor observed that such a formula would clearly need the agreement of all of them, for juridical as well as political reasons. In principle, it would need not only to satisfy the aspirations of a numerical majority of the population of Cyprus but also to avoid provoking the active resistance en bloc, or nearly so, of the Turkish-Cypriot community and assure them of the reasonable protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms; and it would need in addition to satisfy the legitimate interests of the other parties to the problem, namely the Governments of Greece, Turkey and the United Kingdom.

137. I am certain in my own mind that the question of Enosis is the most divisive and potentially the most explosive aspect of the Cyprus problem. I have been assured by the Turkish-Cypriot leadership and by the successive Governments of Turkey that any attempt to bring it about against their will would provoke active and vigorous resistance. And I judge this to be true, short of a change in attitudes which only a long passage of time could bring about. I feel bound, therefore, to examine this question with the greatest care.

142. I have stated the foregoing as matters of fact and of impression. I do not wish it to appear that I have any opinion on the merits or otherwise of Enosis. Moreover, I must also make it clear that neither the President nor the Government of Cyprus, in their discussions with me as the Mediator, actually advocated Enosis as the final solution of the Cyprus problem. Archbishop Makarios and members of the Government acknowledged that Enosis had been the original aim of the uprising against British rule and that it remained a strong aspiration among the Greek-Cypriot community. They went so far as to express the opinion that if the choice between independence and Enosis were to be put to the people there would probably be a majority in favour of the latter. Some of the Ministers and other high officials of the Government have openly advocated it in public statements.

146. I must state here in all frankness how I myself see the Enosis question in the light of the above considerations. My observations of the situation in Cyprus over a period of many months, my discussions with many of its citizens, and my consultations with representatives of all the parties concerned have made it difficult for me to see how any proposed settlement which leaves open the possibility of Enosis being brought about against the will of the Turkish-Cypriot minority can secure agreement at present or in the foreseeable future. Serious warnings have been given that an attempt to impose such a solution would be likely to precipitate not only a new out- break of violence on Cyprus itself but also a grave deterioration in relations between Turkey on the one hand and Cyprus and Greece on the other, possibly provoking actual hostilities and in any case jeopardizing the peace of the eastern Mediterranean region. The question can be raised, consequently, whether it would not be an act of enlightened statesmanship -- as well as a sovereign act of self-determination in the highest sense -- if the Government of Cyprus were in the superior interests of the security of the State and the peace of the region to undertake to maintain the independence of the Republic.

151. The reason why the Turkish-Cypriot leadership seeks a geographical separation, which does not now exist, of the two communities should, also be understood. If the fear of Enosis being imposed upon them is the major obstacle to a settlement as seen from the Turkish-Cypriot side, one reason for it is their purported dread of Greek rule. Their leaders claim also, however, that even within the context of an independent Cypriot State, events have proved that the two communities, intermingled as they are now, cannot live peacefully together. They would meet this problem by the drastic means of shifting parts of both communities in order to create two distinct geographical regions, one predominantly of Turkish-Cypriot inhabitants and the other of Greek-Cypriots. They claim that this would now be merely an extension of the process that has been forced on them by events: the greater concentration than usual of their people in certain parts of the island, notably around Nicosia and in the north-west.

156. It is essential, I think, to reconsider the objective intended to be served by the geographical separation of the two communities and to look for other ways to achieve that objective. I am inclined to regard separation not as, in itself, a basic principle in the proposals of the Turkish Government and the Turkish-Cypriot leadership, but rather as the only means which they consider workable of ensuring respect for the real principle at stake: namely, that the Turkish-Cypriot community must be protected and protected adequately. I fully support that principle. I feel strongly that the protection of the Turkish-Cypriot community is one of the most important aspects of the Cyprus problem and that everything possible must be done to ensure it, including safeguards of an exceptional kind.

159. From the moment a settlement is in sight, the Charter's insistence on respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all, without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion, will assume a capital importance in Cyprus. It will be an indispensable condition for the progressive re birth of confidence and the re-establishment of social peace. The obstacle against the full application of the principle cannot be over-estimated; an they are no less psychological than political. The violent sharpening of "national" sentiments over the months of crisis will for some time make it extremely difficult for officials at all levels to impose or even exercise strict impartiality towards all the citizens of the country, and without that impartiality and understanding there will be a constant risk acts of discrimination, even if laws are respected in the formal sense.

161. It is hardly necessary for me to say that while the safeguards would apply to all the people of both communities, in practice it is the Turkish-Cypriot minority which will stand most in need to them. The safeguards are justified not only by the need to re-establish a durable peace in the life of the island, nor only by the need to ensure that the settlement accords with the Charter of the United Nations. Simple equity also demands that these safe-guards should be provided. It will need not to be forgotten that the Turkish- Cypriot community obtained from the Zurich and London Agreements a series of rights greatly superior to those which can realistically be contemplated for it in the future. In addition, it would be just and fair to recognize that however effective the safeguards that can be devised any Turkish-Cypriot who fails to find in them a basis for reasonable confidence in the new order of things, would have the right to resettle in Turkey, and should be assisted to do so, with adequate compensation and help in starting a new life. Appropriate assistance should also be provided, without discrimination, to rehabilitate all those whose property has been destroyed or seriously damaged as a result of the disorders. This will be a task of reconstruction for which, I am confident, external assistance, including that of the United Nations family of organizations, would be forthcoming at the Government's request.

Given that the Galo Plaza report also stated the understanding for the Turkish Cypriot need for partition after every thing that had happened to them, I don’t see how Mr. Hymn can continue to use this document to criticize the Turkish Cypriots for wanting partition. After all, they only sought independence AFTER they realized that the Greek Cypriots were NOT WILLING TO WORK WITH THEM UNDER THE CONSTITUTION IN A JOINT-PARTNERSHIP. ENOSIS IS WHAT KILLED THE CONSTITUTION, NOT TURKISH CYPRIOTS WANTING PARTITION AFTER THEY WERE ALREADY KICKED OUT OF THE GOVERNMENT!

Mr. Hymn really needs to re-examine his facts. As proven by his statements above and his blindness to my very good source citations, he has proven himself to be nothing more than a propagandist.

Greek Cypriot leadership violates the rights of Turkish Cypriots as set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Article 1.

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

In other words, under the Republic of Cyprus, both Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots needed to have equality. Neither should be treated as a minority. To try and impose minority status on the Turkish Cypriots goes contrary to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Article 2.

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

In other words, despite the fact that the TRNC is not recognized by any other country other than Turkey, is no excuse for trying to reduce the Turkish Cypriots to minority status.

Article 5.

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Committing mass murder and imposing inhumane isolations because the Turkish Cypriots refuse to have their rights reduced to being a minority, when this declaration clearly states that they should be given equality, qualifies as cruel and unusual punishment that goes contrary to the principles set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Article 15.

(1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.

Given this, no one has a right to deny the rights of the Turkish Cypriots, for to do such is violating their right to have a nationality.

Article 28.

Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.

In other words, international recognition of the Greek Cypriots without recognition of the Turkish Cypriots in every aspect of life goes contrary to the rights and freedoms mentioned in the Universal Declaration of Universal Rights, as proven above.

Article 30.

Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

Given this, it is us supporters of the Turkish Cypriots who should be quoting the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, not the Greek Cypriot side. As the saying goes, those in glass houses can not throw stones. As long as the Greek Cypriot side is violating the rights of the Turkish Cypriots, they have no right to manipulate this document in their favor.

Orphic Hymn, wake up to reality! By Rachel Salomon

According to Mr. Hymn, “Seems like some pawns on the pseudo-state's payroll can't even enjoy the festive season without spilling their venom and hatred through blunt propaganda.”

First of all, I would like to verify that I am an unpaid intern who is also a full-time student at the University of Maryland at College Park, where I am majoring in Jewish Studies and Government and Politics, with minors in French and Middle Eastern Studies. I pay $25 per week in metro expenses just so that I can aid the Turkish Cypriot cause. I receive absolutely no income outside the $50 per week in allowance that my parents give me. My main incentive for doing all of this work on behalf of the TRNC is a love for the Turkish Cypriot people and exposing what I consider to be the truth. Spreading hatred and venom was never one of my intentions nor is not part of my work with the TRNC Representative Office.

According to Mr. Hymn, “The Cyprus issue goes as far back as 1570, specifically the 9th of September 1570 which is when Nicosia fell to the invading Ottomans. But the siege itself and the occupation are not so much of an issue, especially when we look upon how they chose to celebrate their victory and send a message to the rest of the island’s population. The message was sent by slaughtering some 20,000 Nicosians, burning churches, public buildings, and then looting any thing that had remained standing. But if we look into later events, we’d see that Turkey through the activities of TMT clearly advocated the partition and THAT is the beginning.”

I would be very interested to learn where Mr. Hymn heard such myths. It would have been nice if he actually gave some sources to back up his grave accusations. Unfortunately for him, I am a woman who BACKS UP WHAT I HAVE TO SAY. I shall now reveal the truth through source citations.

According to Harry Scott Gibbon’s “The Genocide Files,” “The first definite evidence of human habitation was about 7,000 BC, when settlers arrived from southern Turkey, Syria, and Palestine.”

“The island split up into several kingdoms which paid tribute to the Assyrians, the Egyptians, and then the Persians. Alexander the Great’s defeat of the Persians in 333 BC freed Cyprus, but on his death ten years later the island was fought over by his generals Ptolemy and Antigonus and finally became part of the Egyptian Ptolemy kingdom for 250 years. The Roman Empire took over from 58 BC to 395 AD, then followed Byzantine Cyprus from 395 to 1191.”

In other words, thus far, we have Assyrian, Egyptian, Persian, Macedonian, and Romans ruling Cyprus. No Greeks. Contrary to what the Greeks claim, the Byzantines were a Roman people, not Greek. They were known in history as the Eastern Roman Empire. Ptolemy was Egyptian, not Greek. And Alexander the Great was Macedonian, not Greek.

Richard the Lionheart of England took conquered Cyprus from the Byzantines in 1191. He would quickly hand over control to the Templars. But when ruling the island become too much for them to handle, Richard the Lionheart handed control of the island over to his friend Guy de Lusignan.

“The Venetians then took over the island from 1489 to 1571 when the Ottoman Turks conquered it and held it until 1878. Greek Orthodoxy was encouraged by the Ottomans, who banned the Latin Church. In 1878, the Ottomans leased Cyprus to Britain in return for supporting Turkey against Russia. When Turkey chose to fight on the side of Germany in WWI, Britain annexed the island.”

Thus, looking at this history, it is impossible to conclude, as Mr. Hymn does, that the Cyprus conflict began in 1570 with the arrival of the Ottoman Turks. It is also impossible to not recognize the existence of the Turkish Cypriots, whose roots can be traced back to 7,000 BC.

I would also like to inquire from Mr. Hymn, in what period in history did the Turks slaughter 20,000 Greek Cypriots from Nicosia alone and deliberately burn churches? From what sources did you hear this from? What documentation do you have to support this accusation?

I would also like to clarify why the TMT was formed and provide documentation to back this up. According to the non-biased website http://www.cyprus-conflict.net/narrative-main-%203.htm, the TMT was founded as a direct result of Greek violence. “Although the TMT organized the defence of the Turkish minority and there were a number of acts of retaliation directed at the Greek Cypriots, there is no doubt that the main victims of the numerous incidents that took place during the next few months were Turks. 700 Turkish Cypriot hostages, including women and children, were seized in the northern suburbs of Nicosia. The mixed suburb of Omorphita suffered the most from an independent gang of Greek Cypriot irregulars led by Nicos Sampson who, claiming to be rescuing a Greek section surrounded by Turks, in fact made a full-dress assault on the Turkish Cypriot population.” Thus, the Turkish Cypriot TMT was doing nothing more than defending their little enclaves from EOKA attacks, just as the Jewish Warsaw Ghetto Fighters defended themselves against the Nazi aggression. And given all of the atrocities that the Turkish Cypriots faced from EOKA, can any one blame them for wanting their own state separate from the Greek Cypriots? How can any one trust a neighbour who is slaughtering their family members? Try to tell a Turkish Cypriot child whose parents were murdered by Greek Cypriots that they should be able to live peacefully with their Greek Cypriot neighbours.

According to Mr. Hymn, “What R. Salomon fails to understand is the people’s desire for liberation and self-determination. But one must wonder why the attempt to imply that the British ‘allowed the Greeks to settle on the island’….is this a probable attempt to present the aboriginals as the invaders, the newcomers that disrupted the islands peace while we disclose the fact that it’s actually the other way around?”

My only point in bringing this up was to demonstrate that under British rule, the number of Greeks on the island increased and that is all. The Greeks are not the aboriginals on the island. Greeks have lived on the island for some time, but through out history the island has never been owned by Greeks before the Greek Cypriots high jacked the title of the “Republic of Cyprus.” I am not trying to deny Greek Cypriots rights to live on Cyprus. My only intention is to show that Turkish Cypriots have just as much of a right to live there as Greek Cypriots. And I understand “a people’s desire for liberation and self-determination” very well. I am a Zionist. I have supported Israel’s right for self-determination through out my life. I also strongly support the Turkish Cypriot right to self-determination and liberation. That is another reason why I was against the War in Iraq, because I support people’s right to self-determination. I have also supported the Sudanese, Rwandans, and Bosnians in their struggles to liberate themselves from genocide. If any one has an issue recognizing “a people’s right for liberation and self-determination,” it is you, for you support that for the Greek Cypriot people but want to deny that same right to the Turkish Cypriot people. No one is saying that Greek Cypriot’s don’t have a right to exist. All we pro-Turkish people are arguing is that the same rights should be given to Turkish Cypriots.

According to Mr. Hymn, “Singing in favour of slaughter is one thing and singing songs that speak of liberty from oppression, songs celebrating the strive for freedom from foreign yoke are a totally different issue which the author unfortunately seems unable to understand.”

I agree that singing songs in favour of liberation and singing songs of slaughter are two different things. I understand the difference. However, the reality is that the Turkish Cypriots sing songs of liberation, while the Greek Cypriots sing songs of slaughter. Allow me to give some examples to prove this.

This Turkish Cypriot song was taken from http://www.cyprus-conflict.net/renewal_of_violence%20-%20'57-58.htm:

Oh Turkish Youth!
The day is near when you will be called upon to sacrifice your life and blood in the 'PARTITION' struggle -- to the struggle for freedom. . . .
You are a brave Turk. You are faithful to your country and nation and are entrusted with the task of demonstrating Turkish might. Be ready to break the chains of slavery with your determination and willpower and with your love of freedom. All Turkdom, right and justice and God are with you.

To the contrary, Greek Cypriot youth are trained in their schools to chant and sing slogans calling for the “Death of the Turkish Dogs.”

According to Mr. Hymn, “Seems like R. Salomon despite her visit to Turkey and open support of the pseudo-state, she hasn’t actually learnt or neglected to tell us about how the Turkish and Turkish Cypriot youth are raised and educated.”

I would first like to state that all of the quotes provided by Mr. Hymn in this field are fabricated lies. It is the Greek Cypriot youth, not the Turkish Cypriot youth, who are taught to hate. The Greek Cypriot author, Antonis Angastiniyotis, writes:

“The majority of the Greek Cypriot youth know very little about the events that led to the island's division. The tragic events of 1974 have been used as a huge curtain to cover up the real events that led to the division of the two people. In our schools it has always surprised me that while talking about the heroism of EOKA, they skip 15-years and continue with 1974. Either nothing happened between 1960 and 1974, or no one wants to discuss this. While researching the events during this period (1960-74), I realized that the second choice was right. When I started to write this research, my cousin from Greece and her two daughters came to visit me and we started to discuss the events of 1963-74. The daughters knew nothing and what their mother knew was very confusing. At one stage of the discussion I mentioned some of the Greek Cypriot leadership's mistakes and all of a sudden this brought out the nationalist monster in my cousin who said: "Makarios' biggest mistake was not to have killed all the Turkish Cypriots in order for us to be comfortable". This sweet and pretty woman, who couldn't even kill an ant, had suddenly turned into a killer who could carry out mass murders. She wanted a whole race to be wiped out. This is what I said to her: "In other words, do you mean taking out all the children from school, all mothers with their babies and all the men from their work places and taking them to a big hole in Messaria and murder them…Do you want to be one of the murders or the one of the persons using the bulldozer to cover the mass graves…" There was silence. The example I gave helped her to understand the meaning of what she said. Then I started to speak again. "We tried this before in Ayvasil, Murataga, Atlilar, Taskent, but the only thing we succeeded in was soughing the fruits of our efforts". Since our childhood we were taught that the Turks were barbaric dogs. My aunt used to say to me that they smelled because they weren't baptized. Whereas according to the Bible, we are modern Christians who love their environment. Then, why did our religious leader Makarios in 1964 say that 'If Turkey comes to intervene to protect the Turkish Cypriots, she will not find a single Turkish Cypriot to save…' The answer is clear. In Cyprus there is a saying, 'another priest's sermon'. In certain situations this enables us to hate. This book will deal with some of these special situations.”

This, my friend, is the truth about what is really going on in the field of Greek Cypriot education.

According to Mr. Hymn, “It’s quite interesting to note that while R. Salomon mentions the Hellenic-Cypriots not wanting the constitution to work and thus opposed the idea of coexistence. She neglects to mention that ALL Turkish Cypriots in favor of coexistence were KILLED by the Turkish TMT. While we could continue with endless examples of TMT instigation and promotion of partition, but as a note, let’s just say that it’s at least sad to see allegedly impartial writers promoting such blind propaganda. Finally, it’s highly interesting to note that although according to R. Salomon the Hellenic Cypriots had no interest in coexistence. According to the Gallo Plaza report, we find the exact opposite.”

First of all, the TMT did not kill ALL of the Turkish Cypriots in favor of coexistence. That is a flat out lie. Like many revolutionary organizations, they were not perfect. Nevertheless, their crimes don’t even approach the number that EOKA committed. And keep in mind that the TMT was founded as a response to EOKA, not the other way around.

According to the Washington Star, “Bodies littered the streets and there were mass burials. People who were told by Makarios to lay down their guns were shot by the National Guard.”
The EOKA terrorists began to murder the Makarios supporters because they were not slaughtering the Turkish Cypriots quickly enough.

According to the memoirs of the Greek Cypriot MP Rina Katsellis, “The Makarios supporters arrested, the EOKA-B supporters freed……I did not shed a tear. Why should I? Did the stupidity and fanaticism deserve a tear? There are some who beg Turkey to intervene. They prefer the intervention of Turkey. […] Every one is frozen with fear….the old man who asked for the body of his son was shot on the spot. The tortures and executions at the central prison….every one is frozen with horror. Nothing is sacred to these people, and they call themselves Greeks!”

Some Greek Cypriots preferred Turkish Intervention to Greek terror from EOKA. I don’t blame them for feeling this way. According to the British Parliament, “In the four days that followed the coup, an estimated 2,000 people known to be ardent supporters of Makarios were killed. Their names were later added to those killed during the subsequent Turkish invasion.” Thus, this further proves my point that a great number of the Greek Cypriot civilian deaths were the result of the junta, not the Turkish intervention.

According to Professor Alexis Heraklides, “Some of the Greek Cypriot missing persons were killed by their very compatriots. [….] In an attempt to re-write a different version of history based on certain selected memories, this inevitably leads to a picture which is detached from the realities of the past.”

On March 3, 1996, Cyprus Mail published, “Subsequent Greek Cypriot governments have found it convenient to conceal the scale of atrocities during the coup in an attempt to downplay its contribution to the tragedy of the summer of 1974 and instead blame the Turkish invasion for all causalities. There can be no justification for any government that failed to investigate this sensitive humanitarian issue. The shocking admission by the Clerides government that there are people buried in Nicosia cemetery who are still included in the list of the missing is the last episode of a human drama which has been turned into a propaganda tool.”

On October 19, 1996, Mr. George Lanitis wrote, “I was serving with the Foreign Information Service of the Republic of Cyprus in London. I deeply apologize to all those I told that there are 1,619 missing persons. I misled them. I was made a liar, deliberately, by the Government of Cyprus. Now it seems that the credibility of Cyprus is nil.”

I could go on and on about how the EOKA terrorists persecuted both Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots. I believe the list would be much longer than the list that Mr. Hymn provided for the TMT.

As for the TRNC seeking partition, who can blame them, when they have been denied equal rights under the federal system that they were promised under the Treaty of Guarantee and were forced into enclaves by armed EOKA gunmen? People resort to such measures when they feel that there is NO OTHER ALTERNATIVE. They were being attacked constantly by the Greek Cypriots. The Turkish Cypriots needed to take such measures in order to save Turkish Cypriot lives. Apparently, Mr. Hymn does not comprehend the need for self-defense and methods for surviving constant ambushes and genocidal attacks.

According to Mr. Hymn, “The Akritas Plan had NOTHING to do with the use of force and anyone that has actually read the plan knows this as a fact.”

I have read the plan several times and I beg to disagree with Mr. Hymns strongly on this matter. Many highly respectable sources would also disagree with him on these facts.
As Rauf Denkash said, “The Akritas Plan destroyed the only compromise ever reached between Greece and Turkey and between Greek and Turkish Cypriots about Cyprus. It revived bloodshed and hatred. It thrust Cyprus and its peoples back into the extremes of Enosis and partition.”

According to Rauf Denkash, “The Akritas Organization started planning a different future for Cyprus. Apart from military plans, a general plan for the extermination of Turkish Cypriots was prepared.”

According to Alekos Constantinides, writing in the Greek Cypriot daily Alithia, December 14, 1985, “We have to accept that the Akritas Plan not only did open the way to partition of the island but it also caused the collapse of the Republic of Cyprus.”

This article from Turkish Daily News tells it all:
http://www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/editorial.php?ed=ali_kulebi
This article on the history of Cyprus also confirms this fact:
http://www.cypnet.co.uk/ncyprus/history/republic/akritas.html
Harry Scott Gibbons also speaks of this same topic in the Journal of International Affairs:
http://www.sam.gov.tr/perceptions/Volume6/September-November2001/HARRY_SCOTT_GIBBONS_6.PDF

According to Mr. Hymn, “It is a well proven fact that immediately after Turkey received Makarios’ letter informing them of the alterations of the Constitution he was about to propose, the Turkish Cypriot representatives received orders from the newly appointed Turkish Ambassador Mazar Ozgol to abandon all public service and governmental positions.”

THIS IS A BLATANT LIE.

According to Michael Stephen of the British Parliament, “Greek Cypriots often claim that the Turkish Cypriots withdrew voluntarily from their positions in the State, but this is not correct. They were excluded by threats to their personal safety.”

The UK Commons Select Committee concluded that “When in July 1965 the Turkish Cypriot members of the House of Representatives had sought to resume their seats they were told that they could do so only if they accepted the legislative changes to the operation of the Constitution enacted in their absence.”

Since these constitutional changes would have given the Turkish Cypriots the status of being minorities, instead of equal citizens, no Turkish Cypriot leader could accept the 13 Points made in their absence. They were unacceptable.

According to Mr. Hymn, “It was then the Hellenic Cypriots first presented the Iphestos Plan toward the US by stating that they should allow Turkey to invade, the very second they enter the country’s waters it would leave them approximately 75 minutes to exterminate the Turkish Cypriot population in order to protect themselves.”

THIS JUST PROVES RIGHT HERE THAT MR. HYMN IS PROMOTING THE IDEA OF COMMITING GENOCIDE AGAINST THE TURKISH CYPRIOTS IN ORDER TO PROMOTE ENOSIS AND DISTORT HISTORY IN FAVOR OF THE GREEK CYPRIOTS, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AKRITAS PLAN!

The whole purpose of the plan, according to the unbiased British journalist Harry Scott Gibbons, was “to attack the Turkish Cypriots suddenly, every where in the island, and to eliminate them one and all.” This the Greek Cypriot administration planned on doing, regardless. It had nothing to do with preventing a Turkish reaction.

Indeed, it was Makarios himself, who declared in 1964, while the Greek Cypriots were brutally attacking Erenkoy that “he would order an attack on every Turkish village and Turkey would find no Turkish Cypriots left alive if they landed.” In other words, the goal was to kill as many Turkish Cypriots as possible before any outside force could intervene to save the Turkish Cypriots.

As American Under-Secretary of State, George Ball said, “Makarios’ central interest was to block off Turkish intervention so that he and his Greek Cypriots could go on happily massacring Turkish Cypriots.”

According to Mr. Hymn, “The ridiculous comparison of Cypriots to Nazis is at least described as pathetic and actually indicates that the pseudo-state has managed to infest her with.”

First of all, I was comparing the Greek Cypriot leadership to the Nazis, not the Greek and Turkish Cypriot peoples. This is not a ridiculous and pathetic comparison, as Mr. Hymn would like people to believe, for as I demonstrated above, the Greek Cypriot leadership sought to exterminate the entire Turkish population on Cyprus. Allow me to show some quotes made by the Greek Cypriots that demonstrate such vile hatred and compare them with quotes made by the Nazis.

According to Nicos Sampson, “Had Turkey not intervened, I would not only have proclaimed Enosis-----I would have annihilated the Turks in Cyprus.” (Greek Cypriot)

According to Adolph Hitler, “Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.” (Nazi)

According to Makarios, "Until this Turkish community forming part of the Turkish race which has been the terrible enemy of Hellenism is expelled, the duty of the heroes of EOKA can never be considered as terminated." (Greek Cypriot)

According to Julius Streicher, “If the danger of the reproduction of that curse of God in the Jewish blood is finally to come to an end, then there is only one way - the extermination of that people whose father is the Devil.” (Nazi)

According to the Greek Cypriot newspaper, Simerini, 17 August 1996, “We will drink Turkish blood. Death to the Turks.” (Greek Cypriot)

According to Joseph Gobbels, “A Jew is for me an object of disgust. I feel like vomiting when I see one. Christ could not possibly have been a Jew. It is not necessary to prove that scientifically - it is a fact.” (Nazi)

Looking at these quotes, one can not help but see the resemblance between the two.

According to Mr. Hymn, “Let’s just end this by stating that it’s beyond pathetic to exploit the memories and sorrow of an entire people to promote some sick propaganda. But as we’ve proven, the pseudo-state’s propagandist places their payroll above humanity and the truth.”

First of all, I am not on payroll. Second of all, I had family that died in the Holocaust. I have family friends who have personally survived the Holocaust. As a Jew, I would have never made the comparison if I did not find it valid. Unfortunately for you, Mr. Hymn, my comparison is very valid, despite your denial of this.

According to Hellenic Pride’s comment on Mr. Hymn’s article, “Great post Orphic, what else would you expect from Turkey’s allies the Jews?”

This proves the Greek Lobby’s anti-Semitism beyond a reasonable doubt. As long as Greece is ranked the most xenophobic and anti-Semitic country in all of Europe, expect the Jewish people to side with the Turks on all issues of importance to you guys.