Talk:Cyprus problem/Archive 1

message: Please, people, if you do not agree with this version of the history, you are free to change it - but please try and keep a NPOV (Neutral Point Of View). Always try to distinguish hard facts from opinions and colored views! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snchduer (talk • contribs) 22:26, 15 October 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  History Dispute 

message: It seems my previous call for NPOV was not heeded by some anonymous editor... As we do not know who it was, but he seems to have a fixed IP (81.178.249.165) he used for several days, I would like to know if we should do anything else but re-editing the whole stuff (which I have done today, as far as I could - thanks to everybody who also tries to restore NPOV) [User:snchduer|-snchduer] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snchduer (talk • contribs) 13:53, 29 April 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits violating NPOV 

message: The whole explanation of the violence in the run up to 74 is completely pro Greek. Some examples:
"A bombing incident at the Turkish consulate in Thessaloniki, Greece, in June led to serious rioting in İstanbul and İzmir. It was later learned that the bombing had been carried out by a Turk, and that the riots had been prearranged by the government of Turkey to bring pressure on the Greeks and to show the world that Turks were keenly interested in Cyprus. Greece reacted by withdrawing its representatives from the NATO headquarters in Turkey, and relations between the two NATO partners became quite strained." (where is your source for this?)
Akritas plan: "Turkish Cypriot extremists presented them as proof that the Greek Cypriots were aiming for the extermination of the Turkish population on Cyprus" (It was not just extremists, every Turkish Cyprriot was aware of this)
:: Well, I guess that he meant the the extremists were using this as a proof. While this can be proven more or less, the fact whether the general public might or might not agree should be an empiric fact, and not an assumption. –snchduer
"In this politically charged atmosphere, violent unrest erupted, leading to the deaths of 350 Turkish Cypriot terrorists and 200 members of the Greek Cypriot security forces between 21 December 1963 to 9 August 1964" You try to portray the whole conflict between Turkish Cypriot terrorists and Greek Cypriot security forces. (You do not mention that the first casualty of this conflict erupted when Greek policemen opened fire on unarmed Turkish Cypriots in their car. Much of the conflict involved the killing of civilians by Greeks)
:: As seen earlier as well, careful with the use of the word "terrorist"! Terrorists mostly die during police raids or during armed guerilla attacks (or bombings), but not during public unrest –snchduer
"From the conflict to the Turkish Invasion
The Turkish Cypriot leadership imposed an embargo on the Turkish Cypriots in the Turkish Cypriot enclaves....
...The UN, however, managed to make them lift the sanctions. The living conditions in the enclaves were very poor, even though the Turkish government sent food and supplies. The Greek government of George Papandreou secretly sent an army division (about 10000 men) in Cyprus." (Your trying to portray the Turkish Cypriots as persecuting their own people)
"Seizing the opportunity of an island in turmoil, Turkey invaded on July 20, 1974," (You portray Turkey as an opportunist waiting to invade. Violence was occuring for over 10 years before Turkey came)
:: That is outrageous. Actually, you forgot to mention that Turkey did in fact have the right to invade the island under certain circumstances, and tried to convince one of the other guarantor forces, namely Britain, on its side. When, however, Britain hesitated, Turkey invaded the island, however seizing territory instead of reinstating the 1960 constitution (as was written in the gurantor contract) later on. –snchduer
"Tureky then lauched a second invasion on August 14, and proceeded to annex and brutally ethnically cleanse 37%" (Ethnically cleanse implies Turkey had a motive to eradicate Greek Cypriots, which it did not. Yet, you do not mention the mass graves found with Turkish Cypriots in them)
"Under leadership of the UN and most especially Kofi Annan, the plan was revised several times. It provided for a loose confederation of the two parts that looked nothing like the Swiss model it claimed to be based on, and included many constraints for the Greek Cypriots and serious permanent violations of their democratic and human rights, most significantly a limited right of return to the northern confederate state with no right to vote unless they spoke fluent Turkish" (These are your opinions and clearly not shared by the international community who was in favour of the plan)
As a result, the whole island joined the EU on May 1, 2004 with the EU acquis suspended in the occupied north (The whole island did not join the EU, the south did. You are trying to show Turkey as preventing North Cyprus from joining the EU, when it was the south)
:: Actually, he is right 'and' wrong. 'De juro', the whole island joined the EU (as the Republic of Cyprus is the only legal representant of the island), but 'de facto', only the southern part did (as the northern part is not under control of the government of the Republic of Cyprus). –snchduer
Aspects of the Cyprus Problem from The Republic of Cyprus Press and Information Office (http://www.moi.gov.cy/moi/pio/pio.nsf/a_problem_en/a_problem_en?OpenDocument) 
The Cyprus Problem Homepage (http://www.kypros.org/Cyprus_Problem/) 
Lobby for Cyprus (http://www.lobbyforcyprus.org/) 
Action-Cyprus (http://www.greece.org/cyprus/) 
The Cyprus Conflict: an educational website (http://www.cyprus-conflict.net) 
Map by Le Monde Diplamatique:Ethnic cleansing in Cyprus (http://mondediplo.com/maps/cyprusmdv49) 
(None of your links show the Turkish Cypriot point of view) --E.A 23:18, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you think this is bad? Have you seen Annan Plan for Cyprus? –Hajor 00:04, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unbalanced/Innacurate and pro Greek account 

message: This is reading like a Greek Cypriot political broadcast again. "so called president", "self styled TRNC", "Turkish colonists", "brutally ethnically cleansed" - you make no mention of Greek attrocities on Turks prior to the invasion. Can you honestly tell me Greek Cypriots acted in a lawful way and only fought 'Turkish paramlitaries'? Of course not, they killed Turkish men, women and children and this is mentioned nowhere - This whole article has become POV. --E.A 17:46, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  This has become a propoganda page 

message: So according to you, the mass graves found in North Cyprus in which Turkish bodies were exhumed warrant no mention in this article? Also according to you, Greek Cypriots committed no atrocities against Turks, despite historical, photographic and eyewitness accounts. You have focused much on post 74 and filled this article with UN resolutions and rulings. Yet you completely deny any Greek Cypriot attrocities on Turks, whether backed by the Cyprus government or not. This is why your article is POV. --E.A 21:32, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: First you claim the mass graves in the North, which i have personally visited, as propoganda, now you accuse me of making up references. It seems you will not acknowledge any proof of wrongdoing to Turks, it is pointless arguing with you.
You accuse ME of playing poltiics? You were the one who quoted Makarios of saying "there would be no Turkish paramilatries to save"! when it was "there would be no Turkish Cypriots to save".
You will not even refer to 'Constantinople' as Istanbul. A typical trait of a Greek nationalist. This whole article is a testament to Greek nationalism. --E.A 20:33, 13 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ridicolous 

message: http://www.moi.gov.cy/moi/pio/pio.nsf/index_en/index_en?OpenDocument This source does not mention Britain ONCE!
This is from the Financial Times website (http://news.ft.com/cms/s/8a6a8d00-1f15-11d9-9015-00000e2511c8.html):
"Greek Cypriots block EU plan to help Turkish community
By George Parker in Brussels and Vincent Boland in Ankara
Published: October 16 2004 03:00 | Last updated: October 16 2004 03:00
A European Union bid to end the economic isolation of Turkish northern Cyprus has been scuppered, after the Greek Cypriot government won a protracted battle with its EU partners.
The Greek Cypriot authorities in Nicosia blocked a move by the European Commission to allow their Turkish counterparts to trade freely with the outside world.
The initiative has now been effectively shelved, after Britain, Germany and Sweden finally accepted they could not get the Greek Cypriots to move.
The Greek Cypriot "No" has infuriated the Commission, which wanted to bring the Turkish community into the economic mainstream.
But it revealed the power wielded by the internationally recognised Greek Cypriot government, which joined the EU on May 1, and now effectively holds a veto over moves to help the 200,000 people of the north.
The issue was settled this month after six separate meetings between EU ambassadors in Brussels, which saw Britain leading the fight on behalf of the Turkish Cypriots.
Under the deal agreed in Brussels, to be endorsed by EU foreign ministers on November 22, the Commission will shelve its plan to allow northern Cyprus to trade directly with the outside world.
Although a new timetable for progress will be agreed, Nicosia can ultimately deploy a veto, because it says the trade package would bestow international recognition on the north, occupied by Turkish troops since 1974.
The shelving of the trade deal meant Greek Cypriots were able to endorse a separate Commission plan to pump €259m ($321m, £179m) of aid into northern Cyprus to modernise the impoverished enclave.
The money was made available by the EU as a reward to the Turkish Cypriots, who voted Yes to a United Nations plan to reunite the island in a referendum on April 24. The plan was rejected by Greek Cypriots, now full members of the European Union, by a margin of 3 to 1 leaving the Turkish occupied north in the international wilderness.
The Nicosia authorities have also insisted on conditions on where money can be spent in the north, so that EU aid can only go to territory not owned by Greeks before 1974.
That means that only 15-20 per cent of the Turkish enclave can receive EU money, leaving the European Commission with a headache in how to distribute the cash.
"It's going to be difficult," said one official. "But the Greek Cypriots have us over a barrel - they are in the EU now, and there is nothing we can do."
The Commission will now aim to fund projects not tied to land, such as training schemes and agricultural machinery grants.
Britain and the other supporters of the Turkish community backed off partly to avoid antagonising the Nicosia government.
The Greek Cypriots, like the other 24 EU members, have a veto when the union decides whether to start accession talks with Turkey at a summit on December 17. Nicosia has already made it clear that its support should not be taken for granted. Additional reporting by John O'Doherty"
--E.A 22:17, 14 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  You are lying