http://www.mfa.gov.tr/grupe/eh/eh07/
Cyprus which was ruled by different suzerains, but which never in its
entire history came under Greek rule, was conquered by the Ottomans in
1571 and ruled by them until 1878. Under Ottoman rule the Turks and
Greeks of Cyprus lived in peace and harmony, despite their differences
in terms of ethnicity, religion, language, culture and communal
traditions. Unlike the Venetians, who were the previous rulers of
Cyprus, Ottoman Empire enabled the Greek Cypriot population to
flourish in all fields. In 1878, Great Britain assumed the provisional
administration of Cyprus. In 1914, when the Ottoman Empire entered the
First World War, Cyprus was unilaterally annexed by Great Britain.
Turkey formally recognized this annexation with the signing of the
Peace Treaty of Lausanne in 1923.
Although the Turks and Greeks of Cyprus peacefully co-existed under
the Ottoman administration, their relationship began to deteriorate
following the take-over of the island by Great Britain. Under British
rule, the Greek-Orthodox Church campaigned for the union of Cyprus
with Greece (Enosis). Starting from the mid-1950s, this campaign was
given support by Greece. EOKA was established as an underground
terrorist organization to achieve this aim. Thus, the Enosis movement
took a turn for violence, ostensibly against the British, but in fact
with the objective of uniting the island with Greece. EOKA violence
claimed British and Turkish Cypriot lives. From 1955 to 1958 Turkish
Cypriots were driven away from mixed villages and their houses were
burnt down. Greek and the Greek Cypriot coercion, killing and
intimidation, however, failed to achieve its aims. Turkey and the
Turkish Cypriots strongly opposed Enosis. Geopolitically, Cyprus was
of great importance for the national security of Turkey and the
Turkish Cypriots refused to accept Greek dominance and regarded Enosis
as neo-colonialism. Britain, as the colonial power, also resisted
Enosis and declared that the Turkish and Greek Cypriots were equally
entitled to freely determine their own future. In the meantime, Greece
made several attempts to exploit the UN as a means of realizing
Enosis. However, the UN General Assembly did not support Greek demands
designed to achieve annexation under the guise of self-determination,
but urged a peaceful and just solution among the parties concerned.
++++++++++++++
After causing much suffering to achieve Enosis, the Greek government
realized that neither Turkey or the Turkish Cypriot people, nor Great
Britain or the UN would consent to the union of Cyprus with Greece. In
shaping the destiny of Cyprus, a negotiated settlement remained to be
the only way. In the late 1950s the world was undergoing rapid change
and the colonies were becoming independent one after another. Britain
expressed its readiness to transfer sovereignty jointly to the Turkish
and Greek Cypriot peoples for the creation of an independent,
partnership state in Cyprus. To achieve this, Britain insisted on
retaining sovereign bases in Cyprus and safeguarding the rights of
both Turkish and Greek Cypriots. Besides, Britain maintained that she
should have the right to intervene along with Turkey and Greece, if
there was an attempt to alter the agreed state of affairs.
Against this background, talks were initiated between the Turkish and
Greek governments, with the knowledge of the two sides in Cyprus.
These talks led to the Zurich Agreement of 1959 which soon afterwards
was endorsed in London between five parties, namely, Turkey, Greece,
United Kingdom, Dr. Küçük on behalf of the Turkish Cypriot people, and
Archbishop Makarios on behalf of the Greek Cypriot people. On this
basis, the constitution of 1960 was negotiated and the Treaties of
Guarantee, Alliance and Establishment were concluded. When the
five-party Treaties were signed, Great Britain transferred sovereignty
to the two peoples on the island. Thus, the Republic of Cyprus came
into being as an independent partnership state.
These arrangements were based on the equality and partnership of the
Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots in the independence and the
sovereignty of the island. The legitimacy of the 1960 partnership
Republic lay in the joint presence and effective participation of both
sides in all the organs of the state. Neither party had the right to
rule the other, nor could one of the partners claim to be the
government of the other. Basic articles of the constitution and the
Treaties safeguarded the rights of the two equal peoples.
In addition to the internal balance thus created between the two
constituent peoples of Cyprus, the Treaties also established an
external balance between the two respective motherlands. In this
connection, Turkey and Greece would not be able to obtain a more
favorable political or economic position than the other over Cyprus.
As part of these balances the 1960 Agreements prohibited the
membership of Cyprus in any international organization or pacts of
Alliance in which both Turkey and Greece were not members.
Enosis and partition were expressly prohibited. Since the two peoples
had special and close ties with their motherlands, both Turkey and
Greece were given the right to station military contingents in the
island. Turkey, Britain and Greece undertook to guarantee this state
of affairs. Finally, as a result of the Cyprus Agreements, Britain
retained sovereignty over two military bases.
+++++++++++++++++++
As established in 1960, the Republic of Cyprus was not a unitary state
but a political partnership. It was hoped that the Turkish Cypriots
and the Greek Cypriots, as the two peoples of the island and new
partners, would be able to live peacefully together. But this
expectation was not fulfilled. The Greek Cypriots and Greece did not
give up their ambitions and designs. They regarded independence merely
as a springboard for annexation of the island to Greece. The Greek
Cypriot leadership continued to campaign for this "objective" and
sought to unlawfully bring about constitutional amendments which would
negate the partnership status of the Turkish Cypriots. This would
clear the way for annexation by creating in effect a Greek Cypriot
state, with a Turkish minority.
Since the pursuit of such goals were prohibited under the constitution
and the guarantee system of 1960, they could only be achieved by
defying and destroying the legitimate order. This meant the use of
force to overtake the joint-State and to force the other partner into
submission. Greek Cypriot and Greek designs and the use of force to
achieve their unlawful aims led to the collapse of the partnership
system. As a result of the Greek Cypriot armed attacks, the
bi-national Republic, as envisaged in the international Treaties,
ceased to exist in December 1963. The breakaway Greek Cypriot wing of
the partnership state usurped the title of " Government of Cyprus".
The Turkish Cypriots who never accepted this seizure of power, began
to set up a Turkish Administration to run their own affairs.
+++++++++++++++++
Starting in December 1963, for the next eleven years the Turkish
Cypriots had to seek survival in violent and traumatic conditions.
Nearly 30,000 Turkish Cypriots who were forced out from their homes
became refugees in enclaves which corresponded to a mere 3% of the
territory of Cyprus. In these enclaves the Turkish Cypriot people
lived under what the UN Secretary-General called, in his reports to
the Security Council, "veritable siege", with no freedom of movement
and deprived of basic necessities to survive. The Greek Cypriots, with
Greek military assistance, raided isolated Turkish villages and
attacked the Turkish Cypriot quarters of the different towns. The
armed campaign led to the destruction of 103 Turkish Cypriot villages
along with all the mosques and holy places. Hundreds of Turkish
Cypriots were murdered, wounded and taken as hostages. In the course
of the violence that erupted in 1963, over 200 Turkish Cypriots went
missing. Due to immense human suffering, thousands of Turkish Cypriots
fled from the island. Those who managed to survive were deprived of
their salaries, their land, and their other means of livelihood. The
Security Council discussed the situation and decided to dispatch a UN
peace-keeping force. This force which was stationed in the island in
March 1964 could not however secure the return to normal conditions
since power was already in the Greek Cypriot hands.
As part of the Enosis strategy, Greece had secretly sent 20,000 troops
to the island in collaboration with the Greek Cypriot leadership. A
military junta had assumed power in Greece and differences developed
between the junta and the Greek Cypriot leadership over the method of
achieving annexation. On 15 July 1974, a coup d'etat took place in
Cyprus, planned and executed by Greece, as a short-cut to Enosis. A
puppet Greek Cypriot government was formed under a Greek Cypriot
gunman. The coup staged by the military junta in Athens resulted in
further bloodshed in the form of massacres of Turkish Cypriots and
through clashes between anti- and pro-coup Greek Cypriot factions.
During the events of 1974 more Turkish Cypriots went missing who
remain unaccounted for until today. The Greek Cypriot leader Makarois,
barely managing to escape, appeared on 19 July 1974 in the Security
Council to accuse Greece of an act of invasion and occupation.
+++++++++=
After consultations with Britain which did not want to take joint
action under the Treaty of Guarantee, Turkey intervened as a guarantor
power on 20 July 1974 in conformity with its treaty rights and
obligations. The Turkish intervention blocked the way to the
annexation of the island by Greece, stopped the persecution of the
Turkish Cypriots and brought peace to Cyprus. The conditions became
ripe for a negotiated settlement for the first time since December
1963.
In February 1975, the Turkish Cypriot people re-organized itself as a
federated state in the hope that this would facilitate a federal
settlement. The UN Secretary-General was entrusted with a mission of
good offices by the Security Council in order to bring the two sides
together and facilitate their negotiations on an equal footing. On 2
August 1975, at the third round of the Vienna talks an agreement was
reached between the two sides, for the voluntary regrouping of
populations. The agreement made it possible for the Turkish and Greek
Cypriots to live in two geographically separate areas and under their
own administrations. Following 1974, the new set of circumstances
contributed to the prosperity of the island. Democracy flourished in
both parts of Cyprus.
The high-level agreement of 1977 between the two sides in Cyprus set
the goal as the establishment of a new partnership in the form of a
bi-communal, bi-zonal federation. Under the auspices of successive UN
Secretaries-General, a number of parameters such as political
equality, bi-zonality, bi-communality, property exchange, the
continuation of the Treaties of Guarantee and of Alliance and the
tackling of EU membership after a settlement emerged as a framework
for a solution. Turkey and the Turkish Cypriot side strived for a
federation. They maintained that partnership and reconciliation in the
island can only be achieved by safeguarding the sovereign equality of
the Turkish and Greek Cypriots and the balance between two motherlands
vis-a-vis Cyprus.
From 1974 onwards, in defiance of the rule of law and the established
principle that federations can only be built between equal partners,
the Greek Cypriot side continued with its sovereignty claims over the
entire island. This prompted the Turkish Cypriot side to assert its
rights by proclaiming the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC)
in 1983.
But the Turkish Cypriot side continued to participate in the UN
process and to contribute to the efforts for the achievement of a
federal settlement. On the other hand, the Greek Cypriot
administration paid only lip-service to the internationally supported
proposal of federation and dragged its feet in the talks that were
being held under the auspices of the UN Secretary-General. The course
which the Greek Cypriot side followed, namely its rejection of the
1985-86 UN Draft Framework Agreements, the 1992 UN Set of Ideas and
the 1994 Confidence Building Measures, demonstrated that it was out to
ignore the framework established through the UN process. Indeed, the
defiance against the basic parameters for a solution clearly show that
the Greek Cypriot side never foresaw a bi-zonal federal system and
that it totally rejects the idea of equal partnership with the Turkish
Cypriot side.
+++++++++++++++++++
After consultations with Britain which did not want to take joint
action under the Treaty of Guarantee, Turkey intervened as a guarantor
power on 20 July 1974 in conformity with its treaty rights and
obligations. The Turkish intervention blocked the way to the
annexation of the island by Greece, stopped the persecution of the
Turkish Cypriots and brought peace to Cyprus. The conditions became
ripe for a negotiated settlement for the first time since December
1963.
In February 1975, the Turkish Cypriot people re-organized itself as a
federated state in the hope that this would facilitate a federal
settlement. The UN Secretary-General was entrusted with a mission of
good offices by the Security Council in order to bring the two sides
together and facilitate their negotiations on an equal footing. On 2
August 1975, at the third round of the Vienna talks an agreement was
reached between the two sides, for the voluntary regrouping of
populations. The agreement made it possible for the Turkish and Greek
Cypriots to live in two geographically separate areas and under their
own administrations. Following 1974, the new set of circumstances
contributed to the prosperity of the island. Democracy flourished in
both parts of Cyprus.
The high-level agreement of 1977 between the two sides in Cyprus set
the goal as the establishment of a new partnership in the form of a
bi-communal, bi-zonal federation. Under the auspices of successive UN
Secretaries-General, a number of parameters such as political
equality, bi-zonality, bi-communality, property exchange, the
continuation of the Treaties of Guarantee and of Alliance and the
tackling of EU membership after a settlement emerged as a framework
for a solution. Turkey and the Turkish Cypriot side strived for a
federation. They maintained that partnership and reconciliation in the
island can only be achieved by safeguarding the sovereign equality of
the Turkish and Greek Cypriots and the balance between two motherlands
vis-a-vis Cyprus.
From 1974 onwards, in defiance of the rule of law and the established
principle that federations can only be built between equal partners,
the Greek Cypriot side continued with its sovereignty claims over the
entire island. This prompted the Turkish Cypriot side to assert its
rights by proclaiming the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC)
in 1983.
But the Turkish Cypriot side continued to participate in the UN
process and to contribute to the efforts for the achievement of a
federal settlement. On the other hand, the Greek Cypriot
administration paid only lip-service to the internationally supported
proposal of federation and dragged its feet in the talks that were
being held under the auspices of the UN Secretary-General. The course
which the Greek Cypriot side followed, namely its rejection of the
1985-86 UN Draft Framework Agreements, the 1992 UN Set of Ideas and
the 1994 Confidence Building Measures, demonstrated that it was out to
ignore the framework established through the UN process. Indeed, the
defiance against the basic parameters for a solution clearly show that
the Greek Cypriot side never foresaw a bi-zonal federal system and
that it totally rejects the idea of equal partnership with the Turkish
Cypriot side.
+++++++++++++++++++++++
The international community is trying to help the two parties to reach
a negotiated settlement ever since the outbreak of the Cyprus conflict
in 1963. There is more than one source of division in Cyprus. But the
most crucial one is the differences in the aspirations of the two
sides. Soon after the creation of the bi-national State of Cyprus in
1960, the Greek Cypriots attempted to eliminate the Turkish Cypriots
through ethnic cleansing in order to clear the way for Enosis. They
destroyed the 1960 order and turned the joint state into a Greek
Cypriot entity by usurping the title of "Government of Cyprus".
However, in the face of the strong resistance of the Turkish Cypriots
and the stance of Turkey, the Greek/Greek Cypriot camp failed to
realize their design of "Hellenizing" Cyprus.
In the period following 1974 it became clear that the Greek Cypriots
and Greece have not given up their ambitions of achieving dominance
over Cyprus. Despite the bitter events from 1963 to 1974, the Greek
Cypriot administration, instigated by Greece, increased its military
build-up and provocative activities in the island. The armament
efforts were stepped up under the so-called " joint military
doctrine". Sophisticated weapon systems were introduced into the Greek
Cypriot military arsenal. Air and naval bases for the use of Greece
were constructed. All these military activities have further raised
tensions and deepened the existing mistrust in Cyprus. In the past,
Greek Cypriot arms build-up has only brought about suffering. Then why
does it continue? The Greek Cypriot leadership has made it clear that
they would never give up the cause of Hellenizing Cyprus and that use
of force would not be excluded in attaining this goal.
On the other hand, the Turkish Cypriot side has expressed its
readiness for a partnership agreement which safeguards the sovereign
equality of the two sides and the balance between Turkey and Greece.
But the Greek Cypriots have shown that they do not want a partnership
on this basis. And why should they? They have not destroyed the 1960
order in order to share power with the Turkish Cypriots in a new
partnership. The Turks want to live as equals. The Greeks want
dominance and power over the Turks.
Today, the two peoples of Cyprus are enjoying conditions of peace and
tranquility. But the bitter events from 1963 to 1974 are not
forgotten. The humanitarian tragedy of the Bosnians and the Kosovars
recall the sufferings endured by the Turks of Cyprus. The conflict in
Kosovo has also unveiled the open support of the Greek Cypriot
administration to the aggressor. The Greek Cypriot community and the
church have mobilized their means for the Serbs.