Bizantium and ottomans

 turkey and greece 1913-1922

 cyprus problem

 aegean  borders

 lets talk about all....

first question: CYPRUS

what rhe best solution? REUNIFICATION and indepedent state? OR

                                   PARTISION between  greece and turkey?

And also the Turkish army slaughtered many Greek Cypriots. Please do not make a stab at one side then quickly retreatt back to peace talk. Don;t say anything about it then.

Cheers

Not only during the junta regime. Turks suffered during 1963-1974 period.

I am also thinking that the reunification would be the best solution. But Turks and Greek should be very very careful. We should have very good relations and we have to understand that this would be our biggest interests.

My fears about the unification is related with the map below. Cyprus is stuated in a very strategical position and "some circles" may want to create a social tension there to come into the islands. In that case Greeks and Turks would be only idiots and will become a puppet in their country named Cyprus. 

The pipelines would be a very strategic  tools and they would be vital especially for Russia. "Some circles" who want to control oil, natural gas routs and so that Russia will be around there.

This is very very dangerous. We (Greeks and Turks) should be careful about the situation and see the facts. Nationalistic approaches to the issue can nothing more than a manipulation.

Reunification or partition? I think the first one may be the good option but the "solution" should be based on realities that would prevent any clashes in the future. (In fact I am not so sure about it.) Eventhough I do not have any sympathy to Papadopoulos he may be right about his concerns. Otherwise todays' solution would become very serious problem in the future. We have seen many "created social clashes" in history and today. 

We have to come together and talk about the issue by taking into consideration the "energy issue".   

I agree Alparslan, the re-unification idea is a good idea.  But the reality of it is that they would end up being someone's puppets and possible clashes would start again by outside instigation(spelling?).

 PARTISION OF CYPRUS BETWEEN GREECE AND TURKEY BASED ON POPULATIONS PERCENTUALS:  TO GREECE 82%---- TO TURKEY 18%  .  THE BEST SOLUTION I THINK..

WHAT DO U THINK?

I LOOK THE SITUATION THAT IT IS TODAY

TODAY GREEKCYPRIOTS R THE 82% AND TURKCYPRIOTS R 18%...

U SAY THAT BOTH SHOULD KEEP WHAT THEY HAVE.... BUT NOBODY WANT THIS....ITS IMPOSSIBLE THE TODAY SITUATION

FOR THAT I PROPONE   A DIVISION  BASED ON POPULATIONS PERCENTUALS, LIKE TODAY THEY ARE..

All it would take is for Turkey to recognize the Republic of (Southern) Cypress and for Greece to recognize the Republic of Northern Cypress.

NOT EXIST REPUBLIC OF NORTHEN CYPRUS

EXIST ONLY 1 CYPRUS REPUBLIC , MEMBER OF U.N AND OF EUROPEAN UNIONE

NORTHERN CYPRUS REPUBLIC ITS CALLED ONLY FROM TURKEY THE INVADED  AREA..

WE NEED A NEW PLAN SOLUTION

that s true

Yes, because if you really are in America, No one calls it Southern Cyprus government. AMerica ONLY recognizes ONE Greek CYpriot government, and reguards the north as a rebel government, which also is illegally on E.U. land. ANd why does Cyprus need Turkey to recognize it? Its the side making the money, not the other way around..

Just kinda curious of how you present Cyprus, to be the "Southern" government, when there is only one.

I hope there were better and civilized Cypriots than you. Otherwise it would be understood that you will not understand dialog, talking and negotiations and nothing has changed since 40 years.

They are washing your brains aren't they? Just look at why Turkey intervened the island.

http://www.tcn-cy.freeuk.com/Tcn42.htm - http://www.tcn-cy.freeuk.com/Tcn42.htm

Just look at what you did..........

How did you think that we will not intervene the island. Even if we wouldn't have the right to intervene according to international treaties we would do it.

You are raised like this.  http://www.stonesoup.com/art2/cyprus2/cyprus3.html - http://www.stonesoup.com/art2/cyprus2/cyprus3.html

Stone Soup Museum of Children’s Art

International Collection

Cypriots Captured by Turkish Troops

Alkis Alkiviades, age 10

5th Class Primary School, Paphos

Linocut

Stone Soup Museum Collection

Just look at this children art of 10 years of age!!

How do you plan to live together? By raising up child as enemies of Turks and distorting the truths?

I am in favor of unification but I have severe worries about Greek Cypriots because of their education system. 

Konstantinope 1955,Turkish banners <Bugun maliniz,yarin kafaniz>,<Dun seker bayrami,bugun kurban bayrami>.

6-7 September 1955

4,340 Hellenic stores were destroyed

2,600 Christian houses were destroyed

73 churches were destroyed

26 Hellenic schools were destroyed

110 Hellenic restaurants were destroyed

21 Hellenic factories were destroyed

27 Hellenic pharmacies were destroyed

3 Hellenic newspapers were destroyed

14 September,the English reporter Noel barber,writes,in the British newspaper "Daily mail":"The priest of the Geni Mahala church,after he was undressed,he was tied at a truck which was rounding him with the Turkish crowd spiting on him".

Ismet Inonu of the political opposition declares on the headquarters of the Laical partie:"It's good that our partie was not involved in the events,but those demonstrations were a very well organized national act and useful to cleanse our country from the Hellenic element,which is a nightmare"

"The Turk is the only master in his country.Those who are not pure Turks have one right in this country:The right to be servants,the right to be slaves."-Turkish minister of justice.Newspaper Milliet,September 30,1930. 

On the 20th of September,1975, in a special 35 page Survey section of the influential English magazine, The Economist, it was written : "Turkish charges that the Moslem population in Western Thrace is harried by the Greek authorities are gross exaggerations. In 1923 there were 300,000 Greeks living in Constantinople and 110,000 Turks living in Thrace. Today, there are 15,000 Greeks living in Istanbul and 120,000 Turks in Thrace. The Greeks ask, with some justification, which country has been putting the pressure on which minority". (Survey-15).

1st Report of the European Commission of Human Rights Turkey's invasion in Cyprus and aftermath (20 JULY 1974 - 18 MAY 1976)

Part of the Introduction

After overruling Turkey's objection the Commission of Human Rights considered: "the evidence before the Commission and the facts established on the basis of this evidence cannot be seen as presenting a view of the events and incidents complained of mainly from the Greek Cypriot side. The Commission observes in this connection that: - certain events and incidents referred to in the applications are in great part a matter of public knowledge. In particular, the massive movement of population from the northern to the southern part of Cyprus after 20 July,1974 is an indisputable fact which, as such, calls for no particular investigation; the Commission has based its findings in part on reports of other international organizations, in particular the United Nations; - the witnesses heard by the Commission's Delegation in Cyprus testified, with little exception, with a restraint and objectivity that gave credibility to their testimony; some of them confirmed a number of statements in the Particulars of the Applications about which they could not have had any direct knowledge; - in the evaluation of the evidence before it, the Commission has refrained from drawing any conclusions from the fact that the respondent Government, despite every opportunity being offered to them, failed to make any statements, or to proposed counterevidence on the applicant Government's allegations". (Report, p.31)

KillingsRelevant Article of the European Convention on Human Rights:

Displacement of persons (Creating refugees)Relevant Article of the European Convention on Human Rights:

" No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment..." (Article 3)

Turkish troops were responsible for wholesale and repeated rapes of women of ALL AGES from 12 to 71, sometimes to such an extent that the victims suffered haemorrages or became mental wrecks. In some areas, enforced prostitution was practiced, all women and girls of a village been collected and put into separate rooms in empty houses where they were raped repeatedly. In certain cases members of the same family were repeatedly raped, some of them in front of their own children. In other cases women were brutally raped in public. Rapes were on many occasions accompanied by brutalities such as violent biting of the victims causing severe wounding, banging their heads on the floor and wringing their throats almost to the point OF suffocation. In some cases attempts at rape were followed by the stabbing or killing of the victims. Victims included pregnant and mentally retarted women.

Turkey's defense:

No answer was given to these charges and Turkey boycotted the Commission's proceedings once her jurisdictional objection was rejected.

Commission's verdict:

" The evidence shows that rapes were committed by Turkish soldiers and at least in two cases even by Turkish officers, and this NOT ONLY in some isolated cases of indiscipline. It has not been shown that the Turkish authorities took adequate measures to prevent this happening or that they generally took any disciplinary measures following such incidents. The Commission therefore considers that the non-prevention of the said acts is imputable to Turkey under the Convention.

The Commission, by 12 Votes against one, finds that the incidents of rape described in the above cases and regarded as established constitute "inhuman treatment" in the sense of Art.3 of the Convention, which is imputable to Turkey" (Report, paras. 373-4)

Torture and inhuman treatmentRelevant Article of the European Convention on Human Rights:

" No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment..." (Article 3)

Charges laid against Turkey:

Hundreds of persons, including children, women and elderly people, were the victims of systematic torture and SAVAGE and humiliating treatment during their detention by the Turkish army. They were beaten; sometimes to the extent of being incapacitated. Many were subjected to tortures such as whipping, breaking of the teeth, knocking their heads on the wall, beating with electrified clubs, extinction of cigarettes on their skin, jumping and stepping on their chest and hands, pouring dirty liquids on them, piercing them with bayonets etc. Many of these detainees were ill-treated to such an extent that they became mental and physical wrecks. Among the persons so treated were those deported to and imprisoned in Turkey (of whom most were civilians). During their transportation and detention they were savagely ill-treated, being wounded, beaten, kicked, whipped, blindfolded, handfettered punched to the extent of bleeding, etc. These brutalities reached their climax after the cease fire agreements and resolutions of the U. N. Security Council calling for an end to hostilities. In fact most of these acts were committed when Turkish armed forces were not engaged in any war activities. More than 1,000 statements obtained from witnesses described their ill-treatment. Such statements showed a pattern of behaviour by the Turkish forces, proving that the atrocities were deliberate tactics which the invading forces were to follow. The aim was to terrorise, destroy and eradicate the Greek population of the Turkish occupied area so that it would be vacant to move in Turks, thus creating an area populated virtually only by Turks.

Turkey's defense:

No answer was given to these charges and Turkey boycotted the Commission's proceedings once her jurisdictional objection was rejected.

Commission's verdict:

" The Commission by twelve votes against one,concludes that prisoners were in a number of cases physically ill-treated by injuries and at least in one case the death of the victim. By their severity they constitute "inhuman treatment" and thus violations of Art.3, for which Turkey is responsible under the Convention.

The Commission by twelve votes against one, concluded that the withholding of an adequate supply of food and drinking water and of adequate medical treatment from Greek Cypriot prisoners held at Adana and detainees in the northern area of Cyprus, with the exception of Pavlides Garage & Saray prison, again constitutes, in the cases considered as established and in the conditions described, "inhuman treatment" and thus a violation of Art.3, for which Turkey is responsible under the Convention" (Report, pp.165-166) The Commission did not find sufficient evidence that prisoners held in these two locations in the Turkish sector of Nicosia were guarded by Turkish soldiers - as opposed to Turkish-officered Turkish Cypriot "forces" (para. 308)

"The evidence obtained established that, in a considerable number of cases prisoners were severely beaten or otherwise physically ill-treated by Turkish soldiers" (Report, para.393) The Commission, by twelve votes against one,concludes that the written statements submitted by the applicant Government constitute indications of ill-treatment by Turkish soldiers of persons not in detention" (Report, p.166)

Deprivation of possessions, looting and wanton destructionRelevant Article of the European Convention on Human Rights:

"Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions. No one shall be deprived of his possessions..." (Article 1 of Protocol No.1)

Charge laid against Turkey:

Greek Cypriots were deprived of their possessions either by eviction or by seizure of movable property and its subsequent removal by Turkish soldiers, or by conditions making abandonment of home and property the only wise course as life and limb were at risk from the Turkish army. When privately owned land & houses belonging to Greek Cypriots in the Turkish occupied areas came under Turkey's control,most of this was distributed to Turkish Cypriots and to Turks brought from Turkey to settle in those areas. To preclude any Greek Cypriots from reclaiming their possessions,Turkish authorities forcibly prevented their return and continued to expel most remaining Greek Cypriots. In various official statements the Turkish Government made it clear that Turkey was organizing marketing of all agricultural production in the occupied area. The same applied to tourism and Turkey took over all Greek Cypriot manufacturing industry. Goods already manufactured & agricultural produce ready for marketing were shipped abroad in Turkish vessels. In addition, the Turkish Army systematically looted houses and business premises belonging to Greek Cypriots. Even properties of those Greek Cypriots who had remained in the Turkish occupied army part not escape this fate. Most loot was loaded into Turkish army vehicles & buses seized from Greek Cypriots, and a substantial part, including vehicles, animals, household goods,and building equipment, was transported by Turkish naval vessels to the mainland. The Turkish Army also engaged in wanton destruction. Turkish soldiers attempted to burn down all buildings along "the green line" in Nicosia, and orchards and crops belonging to Greek Cypriots were set on fire after cessation of hostilities. Witnesses also described breaking of doors and windows of houses, the smashing of furniture icons, candles and other church property and killing of animals. The destruction of Christian & Hellenic monuments was a significant feature of Turkey's occupation. Religious property was a particular target in an attempt to destroy the cultural identity of the occupied area. Not only were religious items & church equipment smashed, set on fire or looted, but most Greek Orthodox churches not converted into mosques were vandalized. Mosaics and even frescos were either defaced or removed. This occurred in military zones under control of the Turkish Army and from which Turkish Cypriots were excluded. Even archaeological museums and sites did not escape vandalisation and initial looting.

Turkey's defense:

No answer was given to these charges and Turkey boycotted the Commission's proceedings once her jurisdictional objection was rejected.

Commission's verdict:

"The Commission accepted that the 170,000 Greek Cypriots displaced from the occupied area had left behind their movable & immovable possessions and referred to "the established fact that these displaced persons are allowed to return to their homes in the north, and thus to property left there" (Report para.471)

The Commission went on to find "proof of taking and occupation of houses and land by Turkish Cypriots and Turks from the mainland, both military personnel and civilians" (Report para. 472) Moreover the Commission accepted " testimony as proving beyond reasonable doubt that looting and robbery on an extensive scale by Turkish troops and Turkish Cypriots have taken place... As regards such deprivations of possessions by Turkish Cypriots, the Commission considers that, insofar as the persons committing them were acting under the direct order or authority of the Turkish forces of which there is evidence, the deprivation must equally be imputed to Turkey under the Convention..."

The Commission, by 12 votes against one, finds it established that there has been deprivation of possesions of Greek Cypriots on a large scale, the exact extent of which could not be determined. This deprivation must be imputed to Turkey under the Convention and it has not been shown that any of these interferences were necessary for any of the purposes mentioned in Article 1 of Protocol No.1" (Report, paras 472-486)

DiscriminationRelevant Article of the European Convention on Human Rights:

"The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in this Convention shall be secured without discrimination on any ground such... as race, ... language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority... or other status" (Article 14)

Charge laid against Turkey:

The acts of the Turkish Army were exclusively directed against the Greek Cypriot community with the object of destroying and, eradicating the Greek population of the Turkish occupied area so as to move therein Turks, thereby artificially creating a Turkish populated area. All Turkey's atrocities were directed against Greek Cypriots (though some foreign subjects who happened to be or have property in the Turkish occupied area were also affected by some such acts e.g. looting and wanton destruction of property).

Turkish defense:

No answer was given to these charges and Turkey boycotted the Commissions proceedings once her jurisdictional objection had been rejected.

Commission's Verdict:

" The Commission has found violations of a number of Articles of the Convention. It notes that the acts violating the Convention were exclusively directed against members of one of the two communities in Cyprus, namely the Greek Cypriot community. The Commission concludes by eleven votes to three that Turkey has thus failed to secure the rights and freedoms set forth in these Articles without discrimination on the grounds of ethnic origin, race and religion as required by Art.14 of the Convention (Report, para. 503)

No remedyRelevant Article of the European Convention on Human Rights:

" Everyone whose rights and freedoms as set forth in this Convention are violated shall have an effective remedy..." (Article 13)

Charge laid against Turkey:

None of the victims of the ruthless and evil deeds by Turkish State organs and her Armed Forces was ever given any opportunity to vindicate his rights before an authority or tribunal as provided by Articles 6 and 13 of the Convention. Persons under Turkish control were not even permitted to talk without Turkish supervision to the International Red Cross. In short, no effective remedy of any kind was afforded either in the Turkish occupied area or in Turkey itself in respect of Turkish atrocities.

Turkish defense:

In its jurisdictional objection, Turkey argued that remedies were availale before the competent judicial authorities in Turkey or before the military courts of the Turkish forces in Cyprus.

Commission's findings:

The Commission held that such remedies had not been shown to be "practicable and normally functioning". Nor had it been established that such complaints could be effectively handled. (Admissibility Report, at p. 22 of the Report). The Commission at the hearing on the merits reiterated that it had found no evidence that effective and suficient remedies were available. (Report, paras. 499-501)

2nd Report of the European Commission of Human Rights Turkey's invasion in Cyprus and aftermath (19 MAY 1976 -to 10 February 1083)

New population expulsions, Turkish colonization, aggravated and continuing violations

Cyprus, as a state concerned in proceedings under the Convention is not at liberty to publish any Report by the Commission on the merits (final factual findings) until such time as the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe decides on publication. Accordingly, final factual findings, if any, by the Commission cannot be set out here. Nonetheless Cyprus charges against Turkey can be disclosed as these were published in October 1978 by the Commission after it had declared Cyprus' application admissible, i.e. that it would fully investigate and that Turkey had to answer a prima facie case made out by Cyprus.

Turkey's Objections

Turkey, as in the earlier applications, raised every conceivable technical objection to the Commission's jurisdiction. In particular it claimed that no application could be considered because:

-Turkey did not recognize the government of Cyprus

Commissions ruling:

The Government of the Republic was internationally recognized, but in any event to allow Turkey to avoid enforcement of the Convention "by asserting that they do not recognize the Government..would defeat the purpose of the Convention" (Admissibility Report, The Law, para. 13).

Commission's Ruling:

Turkey's jurisdiction in Cyprus could not be excluded by asserting that such an entity "allegedly exercised jurisdiction". It was the presence of Turkish Armed Forces, operating solely under direction of the Turkish Government and acting as "authorized agents of Turkey", which prevented the Government of the Republic of Cyprus from exercising jurisdiction in the occupied area, and Turkey was responsible for her Army's actions (Ibid., paras. 23-25).

In November 1983 the Commission announced that it had adopted its Report. According to Article 31.1 of the Convention this Report would have been

"on the facts and stating its opinion as to whether the facts found disclose a breach by the State concerned of its obligations under the Convention".

The substance underlying the proceedings n Cyprus vs. Turkey (Third Application).

Missing personsRelevant articles of the European Convention on Human Rights:

The Commission, having found it established in three cases, and having found sufficient indications in an indefinite number of cases, that Greek Cypriots who are still missing were unlawfully deprived of their liberty, in Turkish custody in 1974, noting that Turkey has failed to account for the fate of these persons, concludes by 16 votes against one that Turkey has violated Article 5 of the Convention.

Displacement of persons and separation of familiesRelevant article of the European Convention of Human Rights:

"Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence". (Article 8)

Charge laid against Turkey:

The Turkish army sealed off the demarcation line running across the island and known as the green line in Nicosia. They physically prevented about 190,000 displaced Greek Cypriots (now including children born as refugees) from returning to their homes, and continued this policy without remission for a decade, thus aggravating earlier Turkish violations of refugees' rights for which the Commission had as long ago as 1976 condemned Turkey.

Turkey's continuing failure to allow families who had fled across the line to be reunited with their remaining relatives in the occupied area was an aggravating factor.

Condition for the 8,000 Greek Cypriots who remained in the occupied area in 1976 (mainly in Karpasia) were so harsh that between 1976 and 1979, about 7,000 were forced to sign applications to leave after suffering violence, threats, curfews, looting, forced labor, refusal of medical facilities and denial of secondary education. Most of the violence and harassment was effected through Anatolian settlers. Those Greek Cypriots who remained in the occupied area were often separated from their children: in order to receive an adequate education, children had to be sent in the free area and were not permitted by Turkey to return unless they formally acknowledged Turkish jurisdiction over Cyprus.

Turkey's defense:

At the admissibility stage, Turkey put forward jurisdictional objections. It should be borne in mind that Turkey's attitude, manifested in the first two applications, was to refuse to participate in Commission proceedings -in default of her procedural obligations under the Convention- once her jurisdictional objections were overruled. Turkey did not appear at the oral hearing in March 1983.

Commission's verdict:

The Commission concludes by thirteen votes against one that, by the refusal to allow the return of more than 170,000 Greek Cypriot refugees to their homes in the north Cyprus, Turkey violated and was continuing to violate Article 8 of the Convention in all these cases.

The Commission concludes by twelve votes against one that, by the eviction of Greek Cypriots from houses, including their own homes, by their transportation to other places within the north of Cyprus, or by the deportation across the demarcation line, Turkey has equally violates Article 8 of the Convention.

The Commission concludes by thirteen votes against one that, by the refusal to allow the return to their homes in the north of Cyprus to several thousand Greek Cypriots who had been transferred to the south under inter-communal agreements, Turkey violated, and was continuing to violate Article 8 of the Convention in all these cases.

The Commission concludes by fourteen votes against one with one abstention that, by the separation of Greek Cypriot families brought about by measures of displacement in a substantial number of cases, Turkey has again violated Article 8 of the Convention

Deprivation of possessionsRelevant article of the European Convention of Human Rights:

"Every natural person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of the possession. No one shall be deprived of his possessions..." (Protocol No. 1 Article 1)

Charge laid against Turkey:

The Greek Cypriot refugees who had been driven from their homes or had fled at the time of Turkey's invasion or soon thereafter continued to be deprived of their property by the Turkish Armed Forces' refusal to allow them to return. Under Turkey's direction there was now a consolidation of informal seizures. The Turkish Cypriot puppet authorities purported in 1977 to pass a so-called "Law to Provide for the Housing and Distribution of Land and Property of Equal Value" and amended this in 1982 to give semi-permanent definitive certificates of possession to Turkish settlers (including soldiers of the occupation force) and Turkish Cypriots who had been handed Greek Cypriots property.

Wholly new deprivations occurred in respect of the 7,000 Greek Cypriots (mainly from the Karpass) who, under duress, were compelled to leave their homes and possessions and to move to the free area.

More wanton destruction of cultural objects, especially of Greek Orthodox churches and religious treasures, also occurred. Remaining antiquities were discovered to be "saleable" and found their way via Turkish hands to international dealers. Turkish Cypriots wrote about destruction, pillage, theft, smuggling, and plunder.

Turkey's defense:

At the admissibility stage, Turkey put forward jurisdictional objections. It should be borne in mind that Turkey's attitude, manifested in the first two applications, was to refuse to participate in Commission proceedings -in default of her procedural obligations under the Convention- once her jurisdictional objections were overruled. Turkey did not appear at the oral hearing in March 1983.

Commission's verdict:

The Commission by twelve votes against one, finds it established that there has been deprivation of possessions of Greek Cypriots on a large scale, the exact extent of which could not be determined. This deprivation must be imputed to Turkey under the Convention and it has not been shown that any of these interferences were necessary for any of the purposes mentioned in Article 1 of Protocol 1. The Commission concludes that this provision has been violated by Turkey.

DiscriminationRelevant article of the European Convention of Human Rights:

"The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in this Convention shall be secured without discrimination on any ground such as race... religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority... or other status". (Article 14)

Charge laid against Turkey:

Most of Turkey's violations were directed against members of one community only, namely the Greek Cypriot community, because of their ethnic origin, race and religion. Turkey's aim was to eliminate all traces of Greek civilization and to set up a demographically homogeneous ethnically Turkish and Muslim state in the occupied area. In another context this would be condemned as apartheid or cultural genocide.

Turkey's defense:

At the admissibility stage, Turkey put forward jurisdictional objections. It should be borne in mind that Turkey's attitude, manifested in the first two applications, was to refuse to participate in Commission proceedings -in default of her procedural obligations under the Convention- once her jurisdictional objections were overruled. Turkey did not appear at the oral hearing in March 1983.

Commission's verdict:

Having found violations of a number of Articles of the Convention, the Commission notes that the acts violating the Convention were exclusively directed against members of one of two communities in Cyprus, namely the Greek Cypriot community. It concludes by eleven votes to three that Turkey has thus failed to secure the rights and freedoms set forth in these Articles without discrimination on the grounds of ethnic origin, race, religion as required by Article 14 of the Convention.

No remediesRelevant article of the European Convention on Human Rights:

"Everyone whose rights and freedom... are violated shall have an effective remedy..." (Article 13)

Charge laid against Turkey:

In respect of new and continuing violations from May 1976 onwards no effective remedy was provided by Turkey, whether in her own courts or those of the area she occupied. Indeed, in the occupied area Turk's puppet regime had purported to enact "Constitution", depriving Greek Cypriots of virtually all human rights and conferring "constitutional protection" in respect of many rights only on Turks.

Turkey's defense:

At the admissibility stage, Turkey put forward jurisdictional objections. It should be borne in mind that Turkey's attitude, manifested in the first two applications, was to refuse to participate in Commission proceedings -in default of her procedural obligations under the Convention- once her jurisdictional objections were overruled. Turkey did not appear at the oral hearing in March 1983.

Commission's verdict:

The Commission by thirteen votes against one and with two abstentions, has found no evidence that effective remedies, as required by Article 13 of the Convention, were in fact available.

The Commission, by twelve votes against two abstentions, further concludes that the alleged restrictions of movement outside the built-up area of villages in the north Cyprus would fall within the scope of Article 2 of Protocol No. 4, not ratifiedby either Cyprus or Turkey, rather within the scope of Article 5 of the Convention. It is therefore unable to find a violation of Article 5 insofar as the restrictions imposed on Greek Cypriots in order to prevent them from moving freely outside villages in the north of Cyprus are imputable to Turkey.

. Detention centers

The Commission, by thirteen votes against one, concludes that, by the confinement of more than two thousand Greek Cypriots to detention centers established in schools and churches at Voni, Gypsou and Morphou, Turkey has violated Article 5(1) of the Convention.

The Commission, by thirteen votes against one, further concludes that, by the confinement of Greek Cypriots to private houses in Gypsou and Morphou, where they were kept under similar circumstances as in the detention centers, Turkey has equally violated Article 5(1).

The Commission, by ten votes against two with two abstentions, finally concludes that, by the confinement of Greek Cypriots to the Kyrenia Dome Hotel after 14 August 1974, Turkey has violated Article 5(1).

. Prisoners and detainees

The Commission, by thirteen votes against one, concludes that the detention of Greek Cypriot military personnel in Turkey was not in conformity with Article 5(1) of the Convention.

The Commission, by thirteen votes against one, concludes that the detention of Greek Cypriot civilians in Turkey was equally not in conformity with Article 5(1).

Considering that it was unable to establish the imputability to Turkey under the Convention of the detention of 146 Greek Cypriots at Saray prison and Pavlides Garage in the Turkish sector of Nicosia, the Commission, by ten votes against two abstentions, does not consider itself called upon to express an opinion as to the conformity with Article 5 of the detention of Greek Cypriot prisoners in the north of Cyprus.

The Commission by fourteen votes against none, with two abstentions, has not found it necessary to examine the question of a breach of Article 5 with regard to persons accorded the status of prisoners of war.

The Commission by seven votes against six with three abstentions, decided not to consider as a separate issue the effect of detention on the exercise of the right to respect for one's private and family life and home (Article 8 of the Convention).

Deprivation of life

The Commission, by fourteen votes against one, considers that the evidence before it constitutes very strong indications of violations of Article 2 of the Convention by Turkey in a substantial number of cases. The Commission restricted the taking of evidence to a hearing of a limited number of representative witnesses and the Delegation, during the period fixed for the hearing of witnesses, heard eye-witnesses only concerning the incident of Elia. The evidence obtained for this incident establishes the killing of twelve civilians near Elia by Turkish soldiers commanded by an officer contrary to Article 2.

In view of the very detailed material before it on other killings alleged by the applicant Government, the Commission by fourteen votes against one, concludes from the whole evidence that killings happened on a larger scale that in Elia.

There is nothing to show that any of these deprivations of life were justified under paras. (1) or (2) of Article 2.

Ill-treatment

The Commission, by twelve votes against one, finds that the incidents of rape described in the cases referred to and regarded as established constitute "inhuman treatment" and thus violations of Article 3, for which Turkey is responsible under the Convention.

The Commission, by twelve votes against one, concludes that prisoners were in a number of cases physically ill-treated by Turkish soldiers. These acts of ill-treatment caused considerable injuries and at least in one case the death of the victim. By their severity they constitute "inhuman treatment" and thus violations of Article 3, for which Turkey is responsible under the Convention.

The Commission, by twelve votes against one, concludes that the withholding of an adequate supply of food and drinking water and of adequate medical treatment from Greek Cypriot prisoners held at Adana and detainees in the northern area of Cyprus, with the exception of Pavlides Garage and Saray prison, again constitutes, in the cases considered as established and in the conditions described, "inhuman treatment", and thus a violation of Article 3, for which Turkey is responsible under the Convention.

3rd Report of the European Commission of Human Rights Turkey's invasion in Cyprus and aftermath

(11 February 1983 to date)

Currently continuing violations of human rights in Cyprus

Continuing Breaches

Unremitting refusal to allow 180,000 Greek Cypriot refugees to return to the occupied area and to allow any displaced Turkish Cypriots to return to the Government-controlled area.

Deprivation of homes and properties

In May 1985 the puppet regime in the Turkish occupied area purported to introduce a "Constitution", Article 159 of which expropriated all immovable property belonging to Greek Cypriots displaced by Turkey, much of this property being taken for the use of the Turkish Army. In September 1986, the Turkish settler and Cypriot coalition "Government", announcing their program, declared that in place of definitive possession certificates they would now start giving title deeds conferring full ownership on those who had earlier been allocated Greek Cypriot-owned land.

New Breaches

Turkey's puppet regime has repeatedly threatened, with an increasing intensity in 1986, to settle the as yet unoccupied Varosha area of Famagusta with Turks, instead of returning it to its 35,000 lawful inhabitants, the Greek Cypriot refugees of Varosha. (Mr Ecevit declared that Varosha could never be returned, Ankara Radio, 7.25.1986).

Threats to occupy the free area

Threats that the Turkish army will occupy the southern part of Cyprus, which is under control of the Government of the Republic, are leaked by the Turkish Government and Army to Turkey's major newspapers.

10.5.2001

Press release issued by the Registrar

JUDGMENT IN THE CASE OF CYPRUS v. TURKEY

In a Grand Chamber judgment delivered at Strasbourg on 10 May 2001 in the case of Cyprus v. Turkey (application no. 25781/94), the European Court of Human Rights held, by sixteen votes to one, that the matters complained of by Cyprus in its application entailed Turkey’s responsibility under the European Convention on Human Rights.

The Court held that there had been the following 14 violations of the Convention (see http://www.mit.edu/~petros/echr2001.htm - Decision of the Court for details):

• a continuing violation of Article 2 (right to life) of the Convention concerning the failure of the authorities of the respondent State to conduct an effective investigation into the whereabouts and fate of Greek-Cypriot missing persons who disappeared in life-threatening circumstances;

• a continuing violation of Article 5 (right to liberty and security) concerning the failure of the Turkish authorities to conduct an effective investigation into the whereabouts and fate of the Greek-Cypriot missing persons in respect of whom there was an arguable claim that they were in Turkish custody at the time of their disappearance;

• a continuing violation of Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) in that the silence of the Turkish authorities in the face of the real concerns of the relatives attained a level of severity which could only be categorised as inhuman treatment.

Home and property of displaced persons

• a continuing violation of Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life, home and correspondence) concerning the refusal to allow the return of any Greek-Cypriot displaced persons to their homes in northern Cyprus;

• a continuing violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property) concerning the fact that Greek-Cypriot owners of property in northern Cyprus were being denied access to and control, use and enjoyment of their property as well as any compensation for the interference with their property rights;

• a violation of Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) concerning the failure to provide to Greek Cypriots not residing in northern Cyprus any remedies to contest interferences with their rights under Article 8 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.

The New York Times

"Since then the Turkish side has been pursuing total separation of the communities. Last year all ethnic Turks were allowed to go north in exchange for promises that the ethnic Greeks in the Turkish area would be given free movement, better schools and more medical care. In addition, the Turkish side promised to allow the United Nations to set up posts in the north and provide the Greeks with moral and material support.

The Turkish side, keeping few of its promises, persisted in putiing pressure on the remaining ethnic Greeks to leave. As a result a steady trickle of departures has become a flood. Abouy 30 Greeks go south every day".

Steven V. Roberts, "The New York Times", 1.11.1976.

Warning me with your biased dedication for the Greek side! Please, amuse me some more. You think there will be any solution with your kind of bargaining power. Blinded by ethnocentricity. Partitioning land in favor of some made up one-sided scheme is the best you could come up with.

Plus, aren't we talking about Cypress. Why do you have a need to bring in other historical arguements into the picture (Greece 1821)? I thought your data would be enough to support your supposed grand arguement already. Perhaps not. Oh well.

turkish kill greeks...... greeks kill turkish..... yes yes we know..

back in  reality plz.it is not my intension fight with my turkish friends here. I only want somebody ( or all )  help me to find a solution acceptable from both sides

because a solution must  be acceptable from both , greeks and turkish or turkish and greeks

stop fight plz... we r in 2005

 i propone  partision besed on populations percentuals .

what u propone?

Listen boys. Explaining to you all gets repetitive. You may have looked up my post from last month regarding this subject in the the topic - "What if Cyprus belonged to Greece". It was taken off this forum due to what is precisely going on here. So I will not participate with such beligerence. See, I tell you what I think and you don't like it.

Pay close attention to my answers. Ionian's question was already answered by me. Decipher it yourselves. Ionian's desire for partition based on population caught my eye because it totally denies rights of one side. Well you could pull the wool over anyone who did not know enough. But I'm a wolf thats been around. I could provoke if need be. There  is no need to. You guys are doing a wonderful job of getting wound up all by yourselves. I also advise you Mr. Spartacus that blatant topic changing does not create reasonable discussion. Its all blabber. If I were to get sidetracked with every aversion and changed topic, this could go on for a long time.

Do you deny Mr Seko that you precisely told:If Greeks had been succesful in c leansing the Turks without being asked to say it?This statement is highly provoking.You want a reasonable discussion?Then put aside the "If Greeks been succesfull in cleansing the Turks" and words like that.Am i clear now?And all are we talking about is taken from this topic not from others.I will not tolerate any stupid nationalistic statements again from both sides.Ok,strategos?Be more polite if you want others to be polite with you.This is an objective history forum,so your behaviour is not only insulting  the Hellenic side but also the forum itself.If you continue in this way you will get banned and i do not think you want that.If you want to reply to this statement do it on PM.

Mr. Spartacus there is a difference between you and us (Seko and me).

We are showing facts but you show only words. You are talking about European organizations which you are a member of it. They are based and mean nothing for me.

It is nice to see Greeks like Ionian so that we may be hopeful for future.

Regarding the Cyprus issue, I would support with all my heart a dynamic military operation to kick both British and Turkish troops out of the island. I am realistic enough to know that only a slight percentage of modern Greeks would be willing to support such a radical but just struggle.

So, as an alternative, I support the partition option. A Cypriot friend of mine knows very well the situation of the island and he is aware that there are HUGE distinctions between the two communities. No matter what liberal Greeks and cunning Turks claim, that is that we have many things in common, I believe that our cultural, religious and lingual differences are too great to overcome and live in harmony.

For instance, the situation in Northern Ireland is still a problem for British administration. Imagine that the two communities, who have everything in common except their Christian dogma (imagine, not religion, but dogma!) don't miss the chance to express their disgust towards each other.

And believe me, I consider a territory of the UK to be much more appropriate to host two communties with a past of hatred and antagonism. If a plan of mutual respect and tolerance cannot succeed in Britain, I am 100 % sure that in a land inhabited by a large Greek majority and a Turkish minority it will lead to conflict.

After all, even the official UN plan to unify the island was a joke. Not only would Turkey's troops remain in the island, but the National Guard would be abolished! Moreover, the Greek community was obliged to compensate Turks and construct luxurious housing complexes for them. There are more outrageous paragraphs that I am not aware of and I really prefer not to hear of of them.

Now, regarding some American involvement in this conversation, I would really like to point out that a multicultural society is a utopia and American initiatives to impose such worldwide are at least hypocritical. I attended high school in California and I know pretty well that American society has many faces. The existence of African American and Hispanic ghettos in the States remains mainly thanks to those communities' de jure choice to live that way, considering that they suffer discrimination (very often falsely).

Believe me American fellows, if you can't handle racial tensions inside your borders, don't judge so easily people from other cultural backgrounds who might know their own worries better than you.

till now: 4 turks vote  for reunification,  1 vote for partision

             4 greeks vote for partision....

              reunification  vs partision 4-5....

             the question  it s what  form of partision? help plz

yes im agree.

for that i propone  82% to greece.......18% to turkey

in my poll cyprus, reunification or partision] u can see  the map .. give a look and tell me what do u think

what u propone for solution?

do u think annan plan was good solution?   i think was bad for alls.. turks and greeks.

It is not important what we want. The Turkish and Greek Cypriots should decide about it. But I wish this would lead a permenant peace on the island. This is the most important thing.

So far Turkish and Greek Cypriots were in favor for unification. As a result we should also support their wishes. 

I'm a Turkish working woman and a mother.I'm 50 years old. All my life I've thought about peace between two nations. I have many friends in Greece. All of you may bring out many papers/documents/essays/articles/political analysis, or what's so ever. Good for both sides ! Let everyone spill whatever they have in their pockets..Then what ??? What about your children ?/ Is that what you're all going to TEACH your children ?? So that they can carry out the flag of HATE ?? So that they can carry this flag throughout the generations ?? Is that how everyone proves that they're human/men/women?? Isn't there any way out ??

I think , all of you in this forum , please STOP and THINK for a few minutes what kind of future you want your children to have ?? That's all I want to say at this point. History and Politics of course is very important..But, if you don't give yourselves a chance, there won't be any history or politics left..

What are the solutions ?? This is the QUESTION !

He is angry again

It seems like there are some negative news about Turkey in Greece.

What is wrong now?

Well Spartacus, I can see that you didn't get my point. You're repeating the same old rhetoric which has been told for years..The same stories..No solution..You're just spreading animosity ..and you know what you're not really achieving anyting..But I'm not that hopeless, because I know there people out there you would like to have good dialogues. I've met many people young and old who share the same ideals..At least, that's one positive thing..Culturally and economically there is a lot happenning between the countries . We want any effort for peace..On my part, whether it's talking to people or sharing common things ..Also there are many intellectuals, writers, poets, artists, composers,business people, students, or common people on both sides making a great EFFORT to overcome this problem. We are in this together, no apart! You have to understand this.

Now, you're telling me that I Should tell the government, tell the army to do this & that/ or not to do this/that..Well, I see..So that's a solution you're offering ?

Your ideas, I'm sorry to say this, but are shallow, and do not contribute anything in this forum..You're just letting out your hatred here ..First of all. I'm just an ordinary citizen who is sincere in her thoughts..I'm not here to support any establishment on my part..But, you're mistaken on many issues..I can tell you that much..In Turkey people are more interested to make a decent living, to have a better education, to have better standards like the rest of the people in the EU. I'm not going to even argue about the politics , because we have a lot to say on that too..There's no such a thing in history or in politics that one side is always right..I leave that issue to the scholars/historians and to people who have a BROAD vision and to people who can make a JUST ANALYSIS of the situation..

You don't talk about any solutions.You just attack..

How about if we support a broad based understanding about history..Are we willing to support a move to change the history books which spread years of animosity and hate on both sides ?

Are we willing to have exchange programs for both, Greek &Turkish youths , so  they can come together and talk about their future ? I can go on and on..

Just a comment on some rare incidents which take place on the air/ or on the sea(military )There's no way we should support any of this, but please don't portray this as if it's the center of the problem..We can not be held responsible for such anti-peace actions. We should move forward..I denounce , as an ordinary citizen such animosity actions on my part, but you should do the same if there's an anti-democratic move on your part..

This is a long and a diffucult path..But there's hope. That's what I thought my daughter..and still continue to do so...Come on now !

Originally posted by MixcoatlToltecahtecuhtli That was the greatest post concerning the 'trans-Egeian uneasiness' ever . Those Greek-Turkish wars often remind me of a Belgian 'Suske and Wiske' comic. In that comic Jerom, one of the main characters, becomes friend with Kemal, from Turkey. But then Jerom gets a blow on the head. The blow mades him think he's a Greek. therefore Jerom and Kemal become bitter enemies, simply because of each others nationality. Without any doubt Greeks and Turks have done bad things to each other in the past, but if they keep on seeking revenge, retribution or simply want to be put in the right.  If they continue to go on like this, they'll never be able to live together peacefully.

Thank you ! At least I found some common sense here ! Let's get some good ideas in !

I suggest you read more carefully what i say and do not make so husty conclusions again.   

I don't think I attacked Hellas. I simply stated a non-Greek viewpoint that inevitably gets tossed into the realm of anti-Greek. I have tried to expose the tendency that there is an awful lot of denial and blaming going on. From both sides of the debate. It may seem as a provocation. Hence the sharp rebuttals each side has recieved. So, we could go on with the blame game or understand that emotional topics charge both sides with a heavy burden.  Yet to simply ignore a one sided viewpoint without a rebuttal leaves a foggy picture. Hence, another side of the story.

If I do represent a positon that brings out a strong response than so be it. Yet I will also identify the trickery of a loaded question and bring it out to light. I will not waiver from the topic nor throw out tangents not related to the topic. 

My position was in response to the above statement. The debate to accept the status quo as in the current population census or to acknowledge that those numbers have a historical foundation. My case is for partition. I brought out the crises of pre-1974 as a point that needs inclusion for any future agreement.

Yes my views are mostly pro Turkish and not only regarding issues pertaing to Greek-Turkish topics either. Due to the nature of the beast, one may only see them as being ant-Greek though. I might add that all of the Greek posters have pro Greek views. This is nothing new. No one is acting innocent here. We are choosing sides in a debate. If my debates are weak and I lack proper information regarding a topic I may even chose to praise the other side if and when I am shown to carry any misinformation.

My position was in response to the above statement. The debate to accept the status quo as in the current population census or to acknowledge that those numbers have a historical foundation. My case is for partition. I brought out the crises of pre-1974 as a point that needs inclusion for any future agreement.

The pro turkish view is not against the greeks.

Don't try to twist my posts.

 You think you do not have a anti-greek view, but your Pro-turkish view does and will conflict with the greek view, so no matter what you say, your always bias against the greek view.

I'm saying the two views usually have different goals and views, so they do not usually Have the same view, and on are opposite sides..

So for peace Greeks and Turks should have the same views?

I am not trying to twist your posts and i do not have a pro-Turkish view sincei'm an american living in turkey.The Turks(WE) have a complete neutral view and so you should check out the Greek side.You can even see it in the forum since you had a gif showing a dynamick operation to kick out the Turks from cyprus while the turks and i have nice pictures in our avatars.