Solutions and pseudo-solutions

Submitted by Ianus (Poland), Jun 8, 2011 at 09:43

Dear friend Stavros ,

Let me first stress that I don't doubt your noble intentions or sincerity.

Let me also en passant note that I am no Greek at all but a Pole by nationality and so I won't adress your argument "Ianus you are a nationalist ... yourself" which is thus without substance.True, I do love Hellas and think that Phillellenism is the heart and soul of European civilization.But it doesn't matter here.

Now you make a number of assertions which are to my mind hardly borne out by reality.

You write, to start with : "I am Greek and I am ashamed of having my country's Junta in1974 assisting the Greek Cypriots facists (Sampson) in commiting genocide against the Turkish population."

First, it was not the Greeks that started massacring Turks, but vice versa.The first massacres in Cyprus between the Turks and the Greeks took place at Geunyeli on the 12th of July 1958. On that occassion some 50 to 150 Turks armed with firearms,clubs, knives and iron bars attacked 35 unarmed Greeks killing 8 of them.The British established a "Commission of Inquiry into the Incidents at Geunyeli" which noticed exceptional sadism displayed by the Turkish attackers. But what did the Turkish propaganda do out of that and other riots organized by the Turks ? Although not a single Turk died Kucuk claimed that "thousands of Turks had been murdered by Greeks in the recent disturbances" ! Sounds familiar, doesn't it?

And your second factual error is suggesting that the coup of 15.07.1974 posed a threat of "commiting genocide agaisnt the Turkish population". I have the impression you have taken it from some Turkish newspaper,haven't you?The events on 15.07.1974 had nothing to do with Turks in the first place but were an internal affair within the divided Greek community.The Turks had long since moved into their enclaves,didn't recognize Makarios,used their own currency and had their own forces,so forming a state in a state.And even if the coup had been of any vital concern for them as you insinuate,then why didn't they return to negotiations after it had become clear that the coup failed and Makarios survived?Butt no! Makarios was safe, the old status quo was restored and so no threat was posed to the Turks and yet the Turks start their invasion and occupation.An interesting piece of Turkish "logic", isn't it?

Anyway, I'd love to see also by what reasoning you conclude that Enosis was tantamount to "genocide of the Turkish population"? Furthermore, I am quite bewildred by your omission , in your alternative history of the most unlikely scenario of "Turkish genocide" by Greeks, of the actual genocide which did take place and was perpetrated against the native Greek population by the foreign Turkish hordes the moment the Turkish militarists in Ankara sent them to conquer Cyprus for Turkey.So again, to remind you of the what really happened, the Turks massacred,raped,tortured,burnt people with napalm,desecrated churches and demolished everything else on their way.You are not ashamed of that, are you?

Now in Northern Cyprus what you can see from four millenia of Hellenism are desecrated cemeteries,plundered archaeological sites,churches and chapels changed into mosques,stables or latrines,stolen Greek property for sale...In short Turkish barbarity at work as we all know it so well,don't we? But you don't care, do you? You won't blame the Turk for doing what he has always done so well, will you?You will blame Greece,won't you?Well, Turks may be happy to have such a good raya who blames other rayas and not the Turkish pashas for the disasters and ruins around him!

You also say : "my country's Junta in1974 assisting the Greek Cypriots facists (Sampson)".

Now the junta that had been ruling Greece from 1967 was a CIA creation and had little or rather nothing to do with the Greek people that subsequently overthrew it within hours.It had been imposed when the Americans realized that in free elections the Greek people would vote for the Left-Centre coalition and so no spineless obedient pro-American government would emerge in Athens to serve US interests.They staged therefore the coup d'etat on 21.04.1967 and imposed the military rule which was technically just an instrument in the hands of its foreign masters.So contrary to what you say the overthrow of Makarios could not be and wasn't just a Greek affair but had to be and was consulted, if not masterminded, and approved by the Americans who were more than happy to get rid of a charismatic independent leader out of control who used to travel to Moscow,buy Soviet arms(too few,alas, to oppose the Turkish hordes armed with US weapons in 1974!) and made of Cyprus a neutral,non-alligned country.

But relying on America's friendship,let alone America's gratitude, is always a tricky matter.And Greeks are neither the first nor the last to learn this hard lesson.Having to choose between Greece and Turkey the US always chooses the latter.That is clearly demonstrated in the case of Cyprus.The junta did the dirty job of suppressing the left movement in Greece and for that rewards in Cyprus were promised to it.But as Dimitrios Ioannidis ,who died last August, said in his interview "The Americans have deceived me". The Greek thought they were playing their own game but it turned out they were playing Turkey's and America's dirty game against Greece.Kisisnger told Ioannidis i.al. that the US 6th Fleet would keep the Turks at bay while the Greeks were overthrowing the communist darling Makarios and implementing Enosis.But it turned out that the 6th Fleet was there not to stop the Turkish invasion but to secure it against possible Greek naval and aerial attacks.When things went to extremes and Kissinger's double game was revealed the Greeks were abandoned without allies and no effort was made by his former masters to save Ioannidis.

Later, true to his Turkish solution of the Cyprus problem Kissinger opposed the sham US arms embargo on Turkey.But it's another story between him and his former student Ecevit.

Now back to your further line of argument.You write :"Greece was chiefly responsible for what followed." Unfortunately enough,Greece was responsible for nothing.At that time as now she was not even a sovereign state but a client or vassal state run by illegitimate CIA-imposed dictatorship.And note also that Turkey had no right whatsoever to give advices on Cyprus,let alone send an army of invasion to conquer Cyprus as it had solemnly given up any rights to Cyprus in the Treaty of Lausanne signed in 1923 which as far as I know the Turks have never repudiated.

The main culprit in the Cyprus problem remains the US and personally Henry Kissinger, this notorious hater of Hellenism and enemy of human rights and international justice.

You add : "After the Turkish intervention and subsequently invasion the mess of course started and has not been resolved since then.'

If you are interested in the issue,then you must know that the mess was created intentionally and much earlier than 21.07.1974. Not to lose control over the strategically important island of Cyprus Britain invited Turkey -despite the clear provisions of the Treaty of Lausanne - to have a say in Cyprus, so playing its favourite game of "Divide and Rule" hoping to remain in power as the arbiter between the two rivalling communities.Previously on various occasions Britain had promised Cyprus to Greece without ever mentioning the Turkish minority though.

After the British gave Cyprus limited independence the same old game was continued by America whose main interest was to change a neutral, non-alligned and Soviet-friendly island into a firm NATO military base.Turkey as a NATO mamber did this job for America and human costs and civilizational disasters of it have never been a consideration for such a cold-blooded nihilist as Kissinger.

You conclude : "we don't need your kind if we want to resolve the issue (ever...). It is your type of nationalistic maniacs with a false patriotism who are the major problem in finding resolutions.'

I think that 37 years is a long enough time to find a solution if there were any, don't you think?But I am afraid that to a wrongly defined problem there can't be but wrong solutions.The fundamental flaw and misunderstanding in all the eternal search for the "Cyprus solution" is the belief it is an international issue that can be solved within the UN.The fact is that it's no UN but a NATO internal problem-I repeat not that of the UN!It was created by the unprovoked aggression of a full NATO member abetted,aided and armed to the teeth all along by its NATO overlord. And so it can be solved only the way it was created-by either driving the Turk out of NATO and depriving it of the territory it occupied under protection and on behalf of NATO and its US master to make Cyprus a NATO-controlled territory or by forming a coalition against Turkey,neutralizing its American masters and protectors and expelling the Turk from the island he has occupied relying on his American masters and weaponry.Unless forced the Turkish barbarian will give nothing back.This is what must happen to really solve the Cyprus issue.If you don't want to solve it, then go on inventing more and more imaginary and failed solutions as e.g. the Anan plan that have been suggested ad nauseam for the last 37 years and will be for the next 300 or more with the same glaring lack of results as long as the problem they are intended to solve is not clearly and honestly defined !

With kind regards,

Jan

PS The title "A democrat Greek" suggests there are "undemocratic Greeks" and no doubt you meant me,didn't you?Well, you may be right in a sense. I think that if a democracy runs counter to common sense,produces nefarious effects and abuses,harms large segments of population,inhibits the will to survive,makes promises it doesn't keep , then I would rather oppose it ...as Socrates,Plato and Aristotle did too.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".