From: sera@zuma.UUCP (Serdar Argic)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast,soc.culture.greek
Followup-To: soc.culture.turkish
Subject: Re: To all the Turkish Cypriots
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 19:52:16 EST
Reply-To: sera@zuma.UUCP (Serdar Argic)
Distribution: world

In article <C0o4tr.9vI@acsu.buffalo.edu> v999saum@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Varnavas A. Lambrou) writes:

>Through my questions, I am trying to understand you, the Turkish Cypriots.
>I am not trying to blame anyone for what had happened in Cyprus. There is no 
>point in doing this; we, the Greek Cypriots have our opinions, you have yours.

You eat yours and I'll eat mine.

     TWO NATIONS IN ONE ISLAND - WE MUST BE FAIR TO BOTH

*We, the All Party British  Parliamentary Group of the Friends of
 Northern Cyprus,  consider this statement necessary  so that the
 Turkish Cypriot  side of the  Cyprus issue can be  understood in
 Britain.  For too  long the  official channels  of communication
 have been  controlled by the  Greek Cypriots and a  fair hearing
 for Turkish  Cypriot side of  the case is overdue.  An injustice
 has been  done and is still  being done to the  Turkish Cypriots
 and we  believe that fundamental misunderstandings  about Cyprus
 need to be put right.

SOVEREIGNTY VESTED IN BOTH COMMUNITIES JOINTLY

Turkish and  Greek Cypriots  have no  common language,  no common
religion, no  common culture  and no common  heroes. There  is no
Cypriot nation. In  1960 Britain recognised that each  of the two
communities   had   a   right  of   self-determination.   Britain
transferred sovereignty  not to  the Greek  Cypriots but  to both
communities acting  as equal partners under  a constitution which
they  had  agreed between  themselves  as  political equals.  The
numerically weaker  Turkish Cypriots  would never have  made this
agreement if the  Greek Cypriots had not agreed to  give Turkey a
legal right to intervene in the last resort.

VIOLATION BY GREEK CYPRIOTS OF THE CONSTITUTION AND HUMAN RIGHTS

In   April  1963   the   Greek  Cypriots   ignored  the   Supreme
Constitutional Court  of Cyprus when  it ruled against  them, and
its neutral President resigned. At  Christmas that year they then
attacked  the  Turkish  Cypriot community.  The  Foreign  Affairs
Select  Committee of  the House  of Commons  unanimously reported
that "There is  little doubt that much of the  violence which the
Turkish Cypriots claim led to the total or partial destruction of
103  of their  villages was  directly inspired  by, or  certainly
connived at, by the Greek Cypriot Leadership".

From  that day  forward the  Turkish  Cypriots lived  in fear  in
fortified enclaves for mutual protection, squeezed into less than
3% of  the island and excluded  from their rightful place  in the
state. It was then in 1963 not in 1974, that Cyprus divided.

TURKEY INTERVENES UNDER TREATY OF GUARANTEE

Article IV of the 1960 Treaty  of Guarantee gave Turkey the legal
right  to intervene  if  the 1960  Agreement  was violated.  They
refrained from doing so despite  the attack of 1963 and refrained
again when attacks on the  Turkish Cypriots were renewed in 1967.
Finally, when Greece invaded on 15th July 1974 and tried to annex
the  island, Turkey  acted and  established an  area in  Northern
Cyprus where Turkish Cypriots could live free from fear.

Having created a  bridgehead on 20th July at  Kyrenia, they moved
in August  to rescue the  Turkish Cypriots of Famagusta.  On 30th
August 1974 "Die Zeit" reported "The Massacre of Turkish Cypriots
in Paphos and  Famagusta is the proof of how  justified the Turks
were to undertake their (August) intervention."

It is sometimes  argued that having defeated the  Greek and Greek
Cypriot attack, Turkey should have withdrawn and left the Turkish
Cypriots to their mercy again. We regard this as unrealistic.

THE NEED FOR SECURITY

British  troops, United  Nations troops  and "guarantees"  having
failed to  protect the Turkish  Cypriots from 1963 to  1974, they
are justified in regarding Turkish troops on the ground in Cyprus
as the only reliable guarantee to their existence. For so long as
the Greek Cypriots fail to  understand this, there is unlikely to
be an agreement.

The Greek Cypriot proposals seem to  us to be clear evidence that
whilst paying  lip-service to federation, they  are still seeking
to re-establish  their control over  the whole island  which they
enjoyed,  contrary to  the Constitution  from 1963  to 1974.  The
Turkish  Cypriots, on  the other  hand have  offered their  Greek
Cypriot  counterparts, a  genuine federation  based on  political
equality and power sharing. Their offer should be taken up.

On 26th January 1989 the Greek Cypriot leader, George Vassilious,
said "Cyprus is a bastion of  Greece. The number of islands which
are Greek are many and Cyprus is  just one of them". In our view,
this  exemplifies the  root problem  in Cyprus.  It must  be made
clear to  the Greek Cypriots that  Cyprus is not a  Greek island,
but  an  island which  belongs  to  both  the Greek  and  Turkish
Cypriots.

BI-ZONALITY

The  principle of  bi-zonality was  agreed long  ago between  Mr.
Denktas for the Turkish Cypriots  and Archbishop Makarios for the
Greek Cypriots and is fundamental  to progress for the future. It
means each community can live in  its own area free from fear and
can  deal with  the  other from  a firm  base.  This will  enable
members  of  both  communities   to  enjoy  freedom  of  movement
throughout both territories. Freedom  of settlement and the right
of property of  members of one community in the  territory of the
other  will be  regulated by  the competent  authorities of  that
territory. In view  of their past experiences,  this safeguard is
particularly  important  for  the  Turkish Cypriots.  So  far  as
property is concerned, compensation must be paid to those on both
sides who suffered loss.

REFUGEES AND MISSING PERSONS

Turkish Cypriots  were rendered  refugees in  their own  land and
hundreds of  their loved ones  went missing four times  in recent
history.

There are no longer any Cypriots  who can properly be regarded as
refugees  and both  communities  have resettled  their people  in
their own  areas. We believe  that all persons missing  from both
communities since 1963 are probably dead, and the Turkish Cypriot
people accepted this  long ago. It is cruel to  keep the hopes of
relatives alive for political purposes.

IMMIGRATION

It  is  inhuman  to  expect the  Turkish  Cypriots  to  introduce
compulsory repatriation for those who  came to help rebuild their
economy from  ruins in 1963.  They do not  ask this of  the Greek
Cypriots,  and  there are  according  to  the British  Government
(Hansard 20.6.88) about 15,000 non-Cypriots resident in the Greek
Cypriot area. There may well be many more.

ECONOMIC AID

International  aid received  for  "all  Cyprus" benefited  almost
entirely the Greek Cypriot  Community. This together with decades
of economic  embargo account for  much of the  economic imbalance
between the two communities.

We agree  with the Select  Committee that "The  disparity between
aid  provision   and  need  in   the  two  parts  of   Cyprus  is
self-evident.  By  most  criteria  the southern  sector,  with  a
relatively high  GNP, is no  longer eligible for economic  aid at
all".

THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY

It would be  grossly unfair for an application  for membership of
the Community to be considered  unless agreed by both the peoples
of  Cyprus.  In  the  mean   time  Article  5  of  the  Cyprus/EC
Association  Agreement  forbids  discrimination  against  Turkish
Cypriot individuals or companies.

THE COMMONWEALTH

When Cyprus joined the Commonwealth  in 1960 the Turkish Cypriots
became Commonwealth citizens just as the Greek Cypriots did. They
are entitled to participate in its  affairs, and it is wrong that
Cyprus  is  represented in  its  institutions  by Greek  Cypriots
alone.

TRADE EMBARGO AGAINST TURKISH CYPRIOTS

We agree with  the Select Committee on Foreign  Affairs that "The
Greek Cypriot Government's policy of seeking to impose an embargo
on much  of the Turkish  Cypriot's trade and  communications with
the  outside  world  cannot  contribute to  a  settlement."  This
embargo,  particularly   in  the  field  of   air  transport,  is
vindictive, and the British Government should cease to be a party
to it.

AN AGREED SETTLEMENT

The Turkish Cypriots accepted the  1986 UN plan, which bought the
British Government and  the Secretary General endorsed  as a good
basis for  a settlement, but  the Greek Cypriots rejected  it and
still hold out  for "better terms". It must  always be remembered
that whilst  an agreement might  improve the quality of  life for
Greek Cypriots, futher concessions  by the Turkish Cypriots would
significantly impair their security.

Negotiations continue  today under the auspices  of the Secretary
General,  who receives  the  leaders of  the  two communities  as
equals.  British Ministers  frequently  discuss  Cyprus with  the
Greek  Cypriot leader,  but refuse  to meet  the Turkish  Cypriot
leader.  We  think  that  this  is wrong,  and  contrary  to  the
principle  that both  sides  of the  case must  be  given a  fair
hearing at  equal level.  It is not  sufficient that  the Turkish
Cypriot  leader   can  communicate  through  officials.   In  our
considered judgement meetings at highest level between H.M.G. and
the  Greek  Cypriot  leaders  can only  encourage  Greek  Cypriot
intransigence,  unless  matched  by  similar  meetings  with  the
Turkish Cypriot leaders.

RECOGNITION

The Greek  Cypriots repudiated the 1960  agreements, which formed
the legal basis of the Republic  of Cyprus, by their conduct from
1963 to  1974, and by  express declarations in February  1966 and
June 1967. They  cannot possibly be regarded today  as the lawful
Government  of the  Republic,  which  was by  its  very nature  a
bi-communal  state. The  Turkish Cypriots  had no  choice but  to
establish their own state and  this state should be recognised as
an independent  state. Resolutions of  the United Nations  to the
contrary seem to us to ignore this and are counter productive.

There will be in our opinion  unlikely to be an agreed settlement
in Cyprus  until the  Turkish and Greek  Cypriots deal  with each
other as equals, and international policy, which treats the Greek
Cypriot  administration as  if it  alone were  the Government  of
Cyprus, impedes this.

Serdar Argic

                           'We closed the roads and mountain passes that 
                            might serve as ways of escape for the Turks 
                            and then proceeded in the work of extermination.'
                                                       (Ohanus Appressian)
                           'In Soviet Armenia today there no longer exists 
                            a single Turkish soul.'    (Sahak Melkonian)