Cyprus Issue
Presentation on the Cyprus issue
to the Government of Canada
ministry of foreign affairs
by the Hellenic Canadian Congress
The island of Cyprus has over the last three millennia faced war,
devastation and foreign occupation. In 1450 B.C. it was conquered by the
Egyptians and in the first century A.D. it was taken over by the Romans. In
1191 Richard the Lionhearted captured Cyprus and sold it to the Normans in
1192. Three centuries later the Venetians occupied the island but in 1571
they lost it to the Ottoman Empire.
From the time of the Ottoman conquest the overwhelming part of the
population has been Greek Orthodox in contrast to the small Muslim minority
of ex-soldiers, Greeks who converted to Islam, and a small number of Turkish
settlers from the mainland. Ironically, the Ottoman conquest served not
only to end religious persecution by the Venetians, but through the
establishment of the Millet system of organization the Orthodox Church was
given the right of representing the Greek population as well as providing
the civil administration. Despite the hardships of the Ottoman occupation,
heavy taxation, occasional massacres, and little political freedom, the
Greek Cypriots prospered and developed a sound economy.
Although the Ottoman Empire conquered the island of Cyprus in 1571, the
modern Turkish State has claimed special interest in Cyprus due to the
Anglo-Ottoman Treaty of 1878 and the Treaty of Lausanne in 1923. According
to the first agreement, the Ottoman Sultan voluntarily surrendered his
administration over the island to Great Britain and with the conclusion of
the Lausanne Treaty the British acquired full sovereignty over Cyprus. In
1925 Cyprus was given the status of a crown colony but for the next forty
years the Cypriots made a concerted effort to gain their freedom from
British control. The response of the British colonial administrations was
to cultivate the Turkish minority on the island in order to counter-balance
the Greek Cypriots and contain the Cypriot movement for union with Greece.
The pattern of administration established by Britain for its multiethnic and
multi-religious colonies was also applied to Cyprus. British administrators
began with the assumption that each of the Cypriot communities had diverse
needs and aspirations. Accordingly, the most expedient policies were to
formalize ethnic division, encourage communal politicization, and
nationalist expression. Ultimately, this led to the eventual clash of
conflicting Greek-Turkish Cypriot communal aspirations. In the early 1950s
the British in order to blunt Greek and Cypriot pressure encouraged the
Turks to press their own claims to the island, and thus by the summer of
1955 Turkey became an another party of equal interest in the Cyprus Question.
Although Cyprus was granted its independence by Great Britain in 1960 and
became a member of the Commonwealth in 1961, the trend toward political
partition had been initiated by the following factors: a) the
confrontational activity between the two communities, particularly after
1957; b) the clash between Greece and Turkey in NATO and the United States
on behalf of their respective communities on Cyprus, and the suppression of
the Greek minority in Turkey; c) and the international environment in the
1950s. As events have indicated an independent bi-communal Cypriot republic
was accepted by Turkey only as an interim measure. In 1974 Turkey exploited
the crisis brought about by the Junta in Athens and used the opportunity to
occupy over one third of the island thus bringing about a de facto partition
of Cyprus.
For the past quarter of a century the issue of Cyprus has been depicted as a
perplexing problem that has defied any solution by the United Nations or any
other international body. In actual fact the problem of Cyprus is
fundamentally very simple. Cyprus is a state that since 1974 has lost 40%
of its territory to military occupation by forces of the Turkish Government,
which to this day has refused to remove its troops despite repeated
condemnations by the United Nations.
For the Cypriots the impact of the Turkish invasion and occupation has had
devastating consequences. Over 180,000 Greek Cypriots were forced to
abandon their homes and become refugees. In addition to those killed and
wounded during the fighting, 1,619 Greek Cypriots of whom 626 are women and
children have been held prisoner by the Turkish authorities, who have
consistently refused to give any information on their existence or present
condition.
The Turkish Government has remained intransigent to any political solution
but has attempted to divide the island by creating a separate
Turkish-Cypriot state within the occupied territory. Indeed, Turkish policy
toward Cyprus has since the middle of the twentieth century focused on the
partition of the island in order to guarantee the security of the Anatolian
coast.
Remarkably Turkish-Cypriot leaders have also adopted this line and thus have
remained hostages to Turkish strategic interests that have little regard for
the welfare of the Cypriot Turkish community. According to Dr. Fazil
Kuchuk, the first Turkish Vice President of Cyprus: "Cyprus is by natural
necessity tied up with the nation [Turkey] which has control of the
Anatolian mainland...this natural, historical and geographical fact must
always be borne in mind."
In practical terms this has meant that since 1960 the Turkish Government has
effectively maintained a political and economic strangle hold over the
island's Turkish community. In this respect, Ankara has, through the
Turkish Cypriot leadership, encouraged the economic segregation of the Greek
and Cypriot communities and through the use of terror tactics has
intimidated the Turkish Cypriots from having any financial dealings with
their Greek counterparts.
The intention of this was two-fold, first to create a skilled artisan and
managerial class and secondly to lay the foundation and administrative
apparatus for their partition of the island. Despite this effort, Greek and
Turkish Cypriots continue to have an economic relationship. This has been
humorously illustrated by the personal experience of Professor M. A. Ramady,
a specialist on Cyprus, who during an interview with Rauf Denktash, the
self-appointed president of the "Federal Turkish State of Cyprus" was
assured by Mr. Denktash that all possible efforts were being made to stop
trade between Greeks and Turks. After the interview Professor Ramady
overheard Mr. Denktash's personal secretary talking in fluent Greek, to a
Greek Cypriot merchant asking him for spare parts, chemicals, etc.
To some extent this incident highlights the dilemma of the Turkish Cypriots
whose fate, despite all the efforts of the Turkish Government to create a
separate state, is interwoven with that of their Greek counterparts. It is
a common fact that after the Turkish occupation in 1974 the conquered
territories, although the richest agricultural lands of the island, have
suffered a dramatic economic decline, while the independent part of Cyprus
has continued to prosper.
It is important to keep in mind that the Turkish Government has made every
effort possible to establish permanent links between the island and the
Turkish mainland. However, this is not a benign policy of maintaining and
expanding cultural links but one designed to colonize the conquered
territories. To accomplish this end, the Ankara Government has transplanted
over 80,000 landless peasants from the Black Sea region to the occupied zone.
The presence of these "colonists", who are immediately granted citizenship,
has altered the cultural distinctiveness of the Turkish Cypriot population
and is destroying their unique culture and identity. As a result thousands
of indigenous Turkish-Cypriots are leaving the island. The total Turkish
Cypriot population is 160,000 and since the new settlers are automatically
granted "Cypriot citizenship" and given political rights they constitute a
solid voting block who support the exclusive interests of the Turkish
Government.
In addition to transplanting landless peasants from Turkey in order to
increase the Turkish component of the Cypriot population, the Turkish
Government is using radio, press, literature, television, as well as sending
teachers and administrators to establish direct control over the Turkish
Cypriots. All this effort is necessary in order for the Turkish regime to
maintain at least part of Cyprus as a security zone to protect her south
eastern coast. In effect, Turkish security considerations serve as the main
criterion for the future of Cyprus.
Within this context negotiations have been going on and off for almost
twenty years but with little progress. The Cypriot Government has tried to
address the Turkish and Turkish Cypriot concerns by accepting the notion of
a bi-communal and bi-political republic but one that, as the latest UN
resolution (750/92) states, will be based on: "a state of Cyprus with a
single sovereignty and international personality and a single citizenship.
Indeed, the latest round of discussions have stalled on three major issues.
First, the Greek Cypriots have accepted the provision that the president of
the republic could be a Turkish or Greek Cypriot elected by universal
suffrage, but the Turkish side will only agree if the presidents are elected
separately by each community. Secondly, the Turkish Cypriot leaderships
refuses to discuss the resolution of the occupied territory and the return
of the refugees but only wishes to consider specific criteria such as water
sources and location of communities to the proximity of British bases.
Thirdly, the Greek Cypriot Government is willing to accept a limited Turkish
military presence, in accordance with the Zurich and London Agreements of
1959-1960, during a confidence building period, but the Turkish side wishes
to maintain substantial Turkish forces.
To date these are the major points of disagreement which can be resolved if
the Turkish Government exercises its considerable influence over the Turkish
Cypriot leaders and encourages them to accept the latest initiative by the
Secretary General of the United Nations, something which has already been
welcomed by the Cypriot Government.
Unfortunately, there is little desire by Ankara to resolve the Cyprus issue
nor has Mr. Denktash made any effort in all these years to negotiate in good
faith. More recently his intransigence has been soundly condemned by Mr.
Boutros Boutros Galli, in his "Report of the Secretary-General on His
Mission of Good Offices in Cyprus." According to the Secretary of the
United Nations, "I am deeply disappointed that, despite the assurances he
(Denktash) gave on 1 June (1993) in the presence of the President of the
Security Council and the representatives of its five permanent members...Mr.
Denktash failed to honor the agreement of 1 June to resume the meetings on
14 June."
Canadians had for almost two decades maintained the largest peace-keeping
force on the island which in addition to the other UN contingents has
provided a deterrent to further Turkish expansion and kept the peace. It is
not a coincidence that the collapse of the latest round of peace-talks,
which prompted the condemnation of the UN Secretary-General followed the
decision of the Canadian Government to withdraw the Canadian peacekeeping
forces from Cyprus.
As Canadians of Greek origin we are proud of our country's role as a
peace-keeper not only in Cyprus but in other parts of the world. These
efforts have enhanced the reputation of Canada and have gained considerable
good will in the international community. Accordingly, it is incumbent upon
the Canadian government to see through the just resolution of the Cyprus
issue. As one of the most important peace-keeping nations we have an
inherent responsibility not to abandon other states to the hands of their
aggressors. Presently the situation in Cyprus is at a critical phase and
the premature withdrawal of our forces has only served to increase tensions
and postpone a political solution.
It is important to keep in mind that the UN forces serve as the only
deterrent to the Turkish army on the northern part of Cyprus. Without those
forces the Turkish leadership will press for the partition of the island and
end any possibility of a just resolution of the problem. Moreover, the
situation can bring about further de-stabilization in southeastern Europe
and in addition to the current crisis in the Balkans holds the potential of
greater conflict in the region, ultimately necessitating a greater
peace-keeping commitment from Canada. Unfortunately, for the 180,000
refugees any scenario other than peace means a condemnation as refugees for
many more years to come.
Over two decades of peacekeeping has been the result of the Turkish
occupation and the onus of responsibility for this aggression belongs to the
Turkish state. We must also add that the return of Canadian peacekeepers
will not be a burden on the Canadian tax-payer since the Greek and Cypriot
governments have offered to cover a substantial part of the cost while the
rest of the funding will be spread equally among the members of the UN.
It is imperative for Canada to send a clear message to Ankara that Turkey
can longer hide behind Denktash' intransigence and must assume her
responsibilities in resolving the Cyprus problem. The return of Canadian
Peacekeepers to the island will certainly underline Canada's commitment to a
just resolution and force the Turkish representatives to return to the
bargaining table. We must not allow the passage of time to cloud the issue
at stake - a sovereign country has been invaded and occupied by the Turkish
army.
Prepared for by the Hellenic Studies Centre at Dawson College
for the Hellenic Canadian Congress.
The address for the Hellenic Congress of Quebec:
President, Sotiris Antypas
Congres Hellenique du Quebec
5777 Wilderton
Montreal, Quebec,
(514) 738-2421