What?  There was an invasion and the United States was not at fault?

Kidding; just kidding. 

Let's keep it civil.

At the risk of repeating myself from another forum, there were perceived vital interests at stake.

What do you know, Turkey acted upon those.

Yes, America's equivalent would be MEXICO ............................or.........................perha ps.................................. CUBA - NOT IRAQ-

sorry NO comparison. and I dont remember reading anything about hundreds of thousands of Cypriot civilians slaughtered or starved with impunity.

A better comparison would perhaps be Spain vs the Incas.

Well Mamikon this topic has been discussed out the wazoo in the past. Many a great flame war it has seen. So here is my non partial (as far as I can make it) short summation on your question.

Three main powers were guarantures of the Cypriot state. GB, Greece and Turkey. Independence was granted in 1960. Later movements for the partition or whole addition of Cyprus to Greece led to Turkish incursions.The ethnicities were struggling for political viability which led to ethnic strife and violence. The 1974 Turkish armed mission was a response to constitutional and civil viloations against the Turkish Cypriots.

Originally posted by OSMANLI I hope that this topic is still open by tomorow. I have coursework to do at the moment. But be patiant all, i will explain all tomorow straight from the Cypriots mouth.

Oh, no!!!! 

Tell me where  in constitution mention that any of the guaranture power has the right to invate in  Cyprus ?

Except the mentioned countries forget to mention and the USA.The role of the United States (actually Kissinger)  during that period of Cyprish history is still being debated by historians and political scientists. The State Department felt that a solution to the Cyprus problem lay in agreement between Athens and Ankara and “as long as the Greeks and Turks are unable to agree about Cyprus  they will be unable to agree on anything else.”

But as usual the equal distance in an schedule  invasion has only one victim. The Cyprish people and not the politics.

As about the schedule is known that in  a farewell party for the departing Public Affairs Officer Robert Wozniak at the beginning of May 1974, Sampson, who had been drinking heavily, talked about the previous abortive attacks on Makarios and said to the guests who were at his table, “This time we will get him. It’s going to be sooner than you think.” When the statement was repeated to another U.S. diplomat present, David Grimland, he shrugged. “Ignore it,” he said. “We get such reports every week.”

The United States opposed any idea of renegotiating the Zurich-London agreements, suggested on some occasions, considering such an act as an invitation to the Soviet Union to meddle in the Cyprus  problem. The risks included the future of the British sovereign bases on the island and of the general orientation of Makarios and his government as well as of the influence of AKEL, the quasi-communist and biggest political party in Cyprus. Suggestions have been put that the United States was not opposed to any coup that could result in the overthrow of the archbishop-president and that it ignored reports of various plots by the Athens junta duly reported by Makarios to the U.S. embassy in Nicosia. The degree of involvement of the CIA with the plotters is yet to be properly documented.

This is in short the scope of the  illegal invation and occupation of one UN country to another.

The Turkish internvention was a legitimate and a lawful act which was in full accordance with the treaty of the guarantee, which gave all three guarantator states Greece, Turkey and UK the right to act in case the constitutional order in the Republic was threatened. But the treaty of guarantee did not give Turkey the right to partition the island.

The intervention was absolutely legal and in full accordance with international law, it was the fact that Turkey did not choose to restore order but instead partitioned the island that cannot be justified.

The right of "intervention" that is provided for by the treaties of Zurich and London does not explicitly involve the use of force or the invation and as you said the occupation. Treaty of Guarantee provided for consultations between the guarantor powers and only if concerted action were to prove impossible, did the Treaty of Guarantee reserve for each of the guarantor powers the right to act unilaterally with the exclusive aim of restoring constitutional order. And the violation of this Treauty was the cause of the Turkish conviction by the UN.The Turkish invasion and its aftermath dislocated about one fourth of the island’s inhabitants (Greeks and Turks), paralyzed its economy and thwarted all ambitious plans.

I think, when we look at Cyprus, we automatically assume that the Turks (the larger, more populous country) were the aggressors and the Greeks the victims. Like most political conflicts, the context is much richer in detail.

There were probably all sorts of reasons for the Turks to have intervened, not the least of which was Ankara's treaty right (with Greece and the UK) to prevent Enosis (union of Cyprus with Greece).

What I have often thought interesting was the feeling among some Turkish and Turkish Cypriot leaders that the ethnic Turkish population on the island was or could be in physical danger. Rauf Denktas, the former president of the TRNC, used to say that there would be "no more Cretes" -- referencing the elimination of the Turkish population on that island after 1897. Denktas was a master politician and so was skillful at using speech to convince others. But that reference to Crete is not widely understood outside Turkish circles, and so he was appealing to a feeling of threat that already exists within that community.

Turks will arugue and argue about how the invasion was justified, but there is no justafication of the pseudo state established in the north by ethnically cleansing the island

- There is no military junta in Cyprus.

-There is no military junta in Greece.

The choice to establish a colony in the north is clear because turkey did not try to restore order, but simply establish a colony and settle its own people in the north, and refuses to remove occupation troops.

Even after there was peacetalks at the table the turkish army continued to absorb even more land even when a rough border was established.

Makarios choose eventually not to support enosis and thats why he was overthrown.

America also thought he was sympethetic to communists and a junta would for surely prevent any communist takeover. He was called the Castro the of the mediterranean. Then when turkey invaded Cyprus america new this forsurely would also remove any communist threat to the island and why they did not intervene.

I think the saddest part of the Cyprus saga is that America could not stop Nato members from fighting for each other, and that this occupation lives on today

I like it. I'm not quite sure I agree with it, but I definitely think it's interesting as a compromise position.

Whoa, there's a thread about this somewhere; you know, what with the applying labels. Granted Makarios was a supporter of Enosis, and granted that he was possibly more devoted to his role as ethnarch than to his role as Arch-bishop (not Cardinal). Don't quite know if I'd be as harsh on him as you though, but hey, your choice/freedom of opinion and what not .

-Akolouthos, Pig-Dog

In 1960, the last year for which there was an official census for the entire population of Cyprus, the island was home to 573,566 people. Official estimates held that there were 441,568 Greek Cypriots, 3,627 Armenians, 2,706 Maronites (in the future these two groups were to be counted as part of the Greek Cypriot community, according to the terms of the constitution of 1960), 103,822 Turkish Cypriots, and 24,408 others (mostly foreigners). According to government statistics, 81.14 percent of Cypriots in 1960, were Greek Cypriot (including Armenians and Maronites) and 18.86 percent were Turkish Cypriot. Republic of Cyprus statistics estimated the 1988 population of the whole island at 687,500, and that of the government-controlled area at 562,700. It was estimated that the island's population consisted of 550,400 (80.1 percent) Greek Cypriots (including 6,300 Armenians and Maronites), 128,200 (18.6 percent) Turkish Cypriots, and 8,900 (1.3 percent) who belonged to other groups (mainly British). Cypriot population estimates were often controversial, because they could have significant bearing on political settlements. Thus, population figures from the "Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus" differed markedly from those of the Republic of Cyprus.

Maju your a joker, not even Greek Cypriots claim that Turkish Cypriots were 8% i take it that it was an uneducated guess.

Since there seems to be many who on this forum that are not so familiar lets go over the basic and fundemental points (instead of going in circles like the many other evil Turk/evil Greek arguements)

Firstly there main ethnic groups involved in the Cyprus conflict are Greek, Turks, Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriots respectfully.

History of the conflicts in Cyprus

Arrival of the Turks

The Turkish population first arrived in Cyprus after the Ottoman Empire took the island from Latin Venetian (Not Greek). I will not go into detail since we already have a topic on Ottoman Cyprus.

http://allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=7323&PN=3 - http://allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=7323&PN= 3

British Occupation

On the 4 June 1878, under the Cyprus convention. Cyprus would be adminstered by the British in return for an alliance against the growing Russian threat. In 1914 Cyprus was formally annexed as a British Crown colony.

The British occupation saw the begning of oppresion towards the Turkish Cypriots. Many Turkish Cypriots at the thought of being under kafir (non-Muslim) rule emigrated to modern day Turkey. As soon as the British came into power they relieved the Muslim Turks of their administrative duties and replaced their position with British and even Greek and Armenian Cypriots. Thus the balance of power went to the Christians. Another way in which the Britsh sought to bring about an inbalance of power towards the Christians (ethnicities were often refered to by their religion in those times) was by settling Greeks from Greece to Cyprus.
With such an increace in the Greek poputlation the ENOSIS movement (union with Greece) gained momentem.

An example of discrimination against the Turkish Cypriots is the case of 27 May 1912. Greeks repeatedly attacked on Turkish parts of Limassol, stormed the mosques; beat and killed the Turks in shops and at the fair; destroyed and plundered Turkish properties All in the name of ENOSIS. The mob cheered "long live Greece... Long live ENOSIS" thus showing no resenment.
The barbaric act of the ENOSIS movement was so bad that it pressed the British to call for reinforcements from Egypt.

These attacks are should not be taken as a surprise since the Greek Cypriot population at the time was tought rasist propaganda from a young age as mentioned by as stated by Canon F.D. Newham, 1902 that Greek Cypriot children were taught songs with lyrics such as; "Forward, follow the drum that LEADS US AGAINST TURKS"

In 1950 the the AKEL organisation restarted the ENOSIS movement. In 1955 Archbishop Makarios after returning from New York met with General Grivas to form the terrorist organisation EOKA. Intially there activities were aimed at the British (although if the truth be told initially more Greek Cyp. died). In 1957 EOKA started a wave of attacks on Britains, Greeks and Turks. As a defencive measure the Turkish Cyp. created the group 'Volkan', later known as T.M.T.

Cyprus Rupublic

In 1960 Cyprus became an independent state. Unfortunately this did not stop discriminative behaviour towards the Turks. At first this discrimination was political, on 21 December 63' this all changed. The result of the attacks of 1963-1964 is the destruction of 103 Turkish villages and over a thousand houses and shops. Over 25,000 Turkish Cypriots, almost one fourth of the total Turkish Cypriot people were uprooted from their homes and had become refugees. Thus the republic of Cyprus lasted only for mere 3 years in a state of non-violance.

Peace operation-Cyprus 74'

"Turkish women were raped, children were shot in the street and the Turkish quarter of Limassol was burnt out by the (Greek) National Guard."The Times, 23 July 1974

The problems kepts continuaing, so on the 10 November 1969, Turkey's premier Süleyman Demiral stated "the Cyprus problem is a national problem".

Above:"They will come, one day they will come...Turkey will come to save us"

On the 15 July 1974 the Cypriot national guard led by Greek mainland officers staged a coup, with the aim of speeding up the ENOSIS prosess. This led again to much bloodshed. This event is a FACT. Even Makarios said the it was "invasion of the island by Greece". On 16 of June, Ecevit asked the British to join  Turkey in enforcing the Treaty of Guarantee. The British declined. The Turkish Cypriot refugees were confined to only 3% of Cyprus in awfull conditions.

WIth massacre of Turks continuing Ecevit could no longer wait, so he ordered for the Cyprus Peace Operation. Which started on the 20 July 1974. The Turkish troops arrived at Girne.
In order to never allow such horrible acts from happening again the Turkish peace oppearation created a state for the Turkish Cypriots on the north of the island. At first it was the 'Turkish Federated State of Cyprus'.

Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus

On the 15.11.1983 the 'Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus' (TRNC) was established. Thus proving to the world that Turkey did not have ambitions to conquer the island of CYprus (although they had the means to) and even when they secured the Northen Cyprus the allowed them to have their independence. Unfortunately the international community does not recongnise the TRNC thus has put embargoes on them.

There are those that claim that the TRNC leaders are puppets of Turkey. This however is pure ignorance those that know about Turkish Cypriot politics will know that the Primeminister Soyer and esp. the President Talat can by no means be accused of such an accusation.

Republic of South Cyprus

At the recent referendom the SOuth Cyprus government told his people to vote no (oxi) to the UN Annan Plan. They also are totaly against the recognition of the TRNC or of the lifting of the embargoes.

In fact the RSC is even calling for immigrants to come to Cyprus, since under the law of RSC all civilians become Greek Cypriot.

The breakdown of "GREEK CYPRIOT SETTLERS" in this electoral list of 500,000 is approximately as follows:

Ponthus Greek Cypriots: 60,000 - 70,000

Citizens of the former Soviet Republic: 30,000

Christians who escaped from Lebanon: 15,000 - 20,000

Immigrants from Greece: 100,000

Asylum seeker Kurds: 2,500 - 3,000

Asylum seeker citizens from third countries: 9,500

Total "Greek Cypriot Settlers": approximately 230,000

Ofcourse this is not the business of the TRNC, however one must point out the irony due to the fact that the RSC is actually complining that TURKS from Turkey are coming to the TRNC. Upon which they are even allowing for mass settlers from a totally diffrent ethnicity.

"Praise be to Allah for saving my people from ethnic cleansing"

http://www.muminturk.kk5.org - www.muminturk.kk5.org

Grivas and his mans murdered too many Turks. Makarios broke the constutution against Turks. Greeks wanted Enosis which means joining Greece. So Turks gone to Cyprus ass the guaranter of the island legally.

Turkish soldiers in north, Greek soldiers (from Greece) in south. So why everybody thinks we are the only invaders???

Replies to the above arguments can be found by Hellen posters,including me, in the 27 topics about the spedific issue.

Concerning murders,there were atrocities by BOTH sides.

For Turkey's and Cyprussian Turk's safe

Thanks, mamikon.

Closed.