One correction, Susan

Submitted by Ianus (Poland), Dec 16, 2006 at 13:22

Dear Susan ,

While all other things you write are admirably lucid and impeccable , your question :

>What's the role of america in Turkish army stealing land of the greeks in northern cyprus?

doesn't belong to the category. It was Henry Kissinger and through him the US government that was aware beforehand and fully endorsed the Attila plans (invasion of Cyprus in the summer of 1974) elaborated by the Turkish army. It was the American army that equippped the Turks with weapons and vehicles which were used against the Cypriotes in 1974.

Briefly speaking the story is as follows . Greece had been ruled since 1967 by the military junta first under colonel Giorgos Papadopoulos and then Dimitros Ioannidis . It had come to power after the coup d'etat masterminded by the CIA in view of a likely victory of the Left-Centre bloc in the elections proclaimed by king Konstantinos in May. Undesirable consequences for the USA of such a victory might be very grave. The colonels were very pro-American after they came to power. They hoped that in exchange the USA would support Greek claims to Cyprus where the strongest force was represented by the Enosis ("Unity" with Greece) group. They cherished the idea that in case of a coming major Hellenic-Turkish war , for which both parties were preparing , America would not abandon her faithful ally Greece or at least not interfere on behalf of Turkey. This would allow Greece to knock down Turkey's weaker army and thus incorporate Cyprus and recover a number of small islands still in Turkish possession. But they didn't take into account one essential detail - Kissinger's views. He wanted no inter-Nato war at all. A humiliated Turkey would become anti-American and might join the Soviet Union as it happened during Kemal's first years. A humiliated and anti-American Greece was a lesser evil. When humiliated the Greeks tended to start a civil strife rather than unite to turn against a foreign wrong-doer. Besides, Kissinger like Churchill had no sentimental idea of the Hellenic world, its antiquity, ideals. He was pramatic.

By allowing Turkey to rob part of CyprusTurkey could be made permanently dependent on America as in view of a pending Greek revenge Turkey out of fear would have to look for American protection to stop the Greeks. This considerations led Kissinger to blackmail and silence Greece when the invasion became a fact in July 1974. The small Cypriote National Guard was fighting alone a lost battle against superior Turkish militarists equipped with modern American tanks and planes.

Also napalm the Turks used extensively came conveniently from the generous American friend. Greece remained paralyzed by America at this moment of disaster for Hellenism . She could do nothing to help the Hellenes in Cyprus. As a rection to this betrayal the Greeks temporalily left NATO and brought about the fall of Ioannidis' regime. Turkey remained America's "friend" which didn't prevent it from becoming more and more Islamic and eventually hardly friendly to her former benefactor. A new strategic ally against Greece seems to the Islamic world. In Greece and Cyprus there is still bitterness and hatred of America . But this time it is not just some misguided leftist fanatics that are to blame. In this case America is to blame for allying herself actively with an Islamic nation to ruin a European nation of unique cultural value. It was inexcusable duplicity, Susan. But it happened this way, alas.

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".