 |
| Should we apologise for past demenours???? |
| Yes as it is the way forward. |
|
66% |
[ 14 ] |
| No i don't think so. |
|
9% |
[ 2 ] |
| They got what they deserved and its better this way. |
|
14% |
[ 3 ] |
| I don't care |
|
9% |
[ 2 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 21 |
|
| Author |
Message |
zan
Warnings : 2
Mukhtar/is
Joined: 31 Dec 2005
Posts: 962
|
|
| Kifeas wrote: |
| zan wrote: |
| Quote: |
Denktash is at least 10 years older than Papadopoulos.
I said that Papadopoulos did not decide on anyone's murder, neither alone nor as a member of a committee for this purpose. I wonder why you implied the above “cleverish” insinuation, since nowhere I indicated that he may have done so as part of a joined committee, but to the contrary I said that such decisions were made by Grivas and /or his area commanders. Papadopoulos was not an area commander, nor was he a member in the fighting ranks of Eoka. Papadopoulos was engaged in a non-armed auxiliary association of Eoka, responsible for the preparation and circulation of propaganda material. |
I have been googling all night trying to find any articles or pictures where Papadopoulos was marching through the streets protesting against these murders, but to no avail. Oh! I forgot he was far too busy doing his paper round delivering news papers and propaganda leaflets. I wonder if he was into graffiti as well.
How many divisions will be claimed for this thing called EOKA.
EOKA-A
EOKA-B
Propagandists
Tea- lady
Issuer of first warnings
Issuer of second warning
Executioner
Leader
If we carry on like this there will be no one to blame. Eh! Kifeas  |
Zan, unfortunatelly I only respond to posts of people possesing a certain IQ level an above. |
I am honored.
Be sure to keep that blue beret handy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Cyprus rules!
Mukhtar/is
Joined: 11 Jun 2006
Posts: 668
|
|
Hi, EOKA definitely had an extremist element to it, a 'sinister side', but as I've said before, the majority that supported, fought for EOKA, did so because they saw it as a struggle for their freedom, when it had been made perfectly clear by the British that Cyprus should'nt expect be be decolonized any time soon. I agree with kifeas, that on a political level it was perhaps the wrong route to take, but I think many people felt they had no choice, as the Greek Cypriots, as far as I know, had been asking for their self-determination rights, in the form of Enosis, sinse the British came to the Island. In fact, they were seen, by the vast Majority of Greek Cypriots, as people who would grant them these rights, something which, in my opinion, they were falsely led to believe.
"I think it only natural that the Cypriot people, who are of Greek decent, should regard their incorporation with what may be called their mother country as an ideal to be earnestly, devoutly and fervently cherished. Such a feeling is an example of the patriotic devotion which so nobly characterizes the Greek nation.....I say that the views which have been put forward are views that His Majesty's Government do not refuse to regard with respect."
The above quote was said by Winston Churchill, who visited the Island in 1907 as Colonial Secretary, after he was approached with the idea of Enosis. During WW2 the British also issued recruiting posters, in the blue and white Hellenic colours, urging young Greek Cypriots to "Fight for Greece and Freedom". Many thousands did so, forming the Cypriot regiment of the British Army.
There are extremists within every community, organization etc, and this minority of extremist EOKA members went on to 'taint' the name of EOKA with there actions. EOKA B, well that was a different story...
Although, again I could be wrong...  |
|
| Back to top |
|
erolz
Site Admin
Joined: 11 Aug 2005
Posts: 4195
Location: Kyrenia / Girne
|
|
| Cyprus rules! wrote: |
Hi, EOKA definitely had an extremist element to it, a 'sinister side', but as I've said before, the majority that supported, fought for EOKA, did so because they saw it as a struggle for their freedom, when it had been made perfectly clear by the British that Cyprus should'nt expect be be decolonized any time soon. I agree with kifeas, that on a political level it was perhaps the wrong route to take, but I think many people felt they had no choice, as the Greek Cypriots, as far as I know, had been asking for their self-determination rights, in the form of Enosis, sinse the British came to the Island. In fact, they were seen, by the vast Majority of Greek Cypriots, as people who would grant them these rights, something which, in my opinion, they were falsely led to believe.
"I think it only natural that the Cypriot people, who are of Greek decent, should regard their incorporation with what may be called their mother country as an ideal to be earnestly, devoutly and fervently cherished. Such a feeling is an example of the patriotic devotion which so nobly characterizes the Greek nation.....I say that the views which have been put forward are views that His Majesty's Government do not refuse to regard with respect."
The above quote was said by Winston Churchill, who visited the Island in 1907 as Colonial Secretary, after he was approached with the idea of Enosis. |
He (churchill) went to say that Britain also respected the views of the Moslem Cypriots and that British Occupation should not lead to the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire or to impairing the sovereignty of the Sultan; but this second, balancing half of the statement is rarely mentioned.
| Cyprus rules! wrote: |
During WW2 the British also issued recruiting posters, in the blue and white Hellenic colours, urging young Greek Cypriots to "Fight for Greece and Freedom". Many thousands did so, forming the Cypriot regiment of the British Army. |
As did many Turkish Cypriot also fight for the allies - and they did not expect the reward for this to have been union of Cyprus to Greece.
The fact remains that by the 50's it was clear that independence was a much more realistically achievable goal than ENOSIS and also clear that Greek Cypriot leadership of the time knew this. Again have a look at what the Akritas plan said in this regard and consider the fact that Makarios accepted independence (all be it as a route to the much harder to achieve enosis). If what the Greek Cypriot people really wanted (or the elite leaderships) was to end British rule then independence was the rational and sensible goal to peruse. The fact that they continued to pursue ENOSIS with such fervor both before the 60's agreements and after them to me undermines this idea that what they _really_ wanted was the end of british rule and independence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
zan
Warnings : 2
Mukhtar/is
Joined: 31 Dec 2005
Posts: 962
|
|
| Quote: |
| There are extremists within every community, organization etc, and this minority of extremist EOKA members went on to 'taint' the name of EOKA with there actions. EOKA B, well that was a different story... |
There was no "tainting " of EOKA. You have to understand that ENOSIS was what the Turkish Cypriots were against and history has proved to Makarios and the rest of us that that is what has caused all this trouble. We are not talking about a "few bad men that "Tainted" an honourable cause but about many bad men chasing an unattainable and wholly immoral and unconstitutional ENOSIS. ENOSIS was wrong and the entire means of trying to achieve it was wrong and this included the saintly EOKA. |
|
| Back to top |
|
cypezokyli
Ministerial
Joined: 20 Dec 2005
Posts: 2344
|
|
| Cyprus rules! wrote: |
I agree with kifeas, that on a political level it was perhaps the wrong route to take, but I think many people felt they had no choice, as the Greek Cypriots, as far as I know, had been asking for their self-determination rights, in the form of Enosis, sinse the British came to the Island. In fact, they were seen, by the vast Majority of Greek Cypriots, as people who would grant them these rights, something which, in my opinion, they were falsely led to believe.
|
what came under the term "enosis" didnot always have the same meaning or the same roots. "enosis" was at different times abused by the political and church elite to achieve different aims.
it was used at least twice during the election of a cypriot archibishop. the one was trying to accuse the other that he was a "moderate" (traitor) in order to win elections.
the church lost significant status after the british came, and as consequence it turned against them.
it was used even more extensively after akel won 4 out of 6 city mayors in the mid-1940s. the term enosis started also meaning "anti.communism". this also continued during the eoka struggle...and after that... (in a very absurd way , the british also supported Greek Cypriot anti-communist - (inevitably) nationalist moovements in order to weaken the communist thread in cyprus! )
akel also wanted enosis (most of the time  ), but apparently they were reffering to a different kind of enosis compared to the one the church wanted.
some years earlier, the root of enosis demonstrations were new taxes by the british authorities. so a purely economic problem (or a class one - as an old school of thought would argue) , became an ethnic problem.
often the Greek Cypriot leadership made demands to the british of economic measures , constitutional structure and social reforms - as well as demand for enosis. too often all the other were at the forefront of demands towards the british occupation. it is only after the end of the 1940s that the purpose of the Greek Cypriots became "enosis and only enosis".
later on , enosis -meant also anti-imperialism.
later on the motives of those using the term "enosis" especially after 1968 (EOKA B) , were most probably those ex-eoka members who got no reward (goverment job) for their patriotism (ou peri hrimaton ton agona pioumettha ) . a classic example is the bishop of kyrenia - who was constantly critising makarios. well apparently makarios didnot allow him to strike a deal with a british company to sell them a small island outside kyrenia. ofcource it was only natural for him as a Greek Cypriot to demand his right of self-determination , wasnt it ?
ofcource, some people (especially students who were easily manipulated, and went out in the streets to demonstrate) did carry illussions ...but we can forgive those people, cant we ?
the sentence : "it was only natural for Greek Cypriots to demand enosis" needs some serious questioning |
|
| Back to top |
|
Cyprus rules!
Mukhtar/is
Joined: 11 Jun 2006
Posts: 668
|
|
Hi, No I completely understand that Enosis wasn't as simple as people make it out to be. I always believe that the idea in essence wasn't handled correctly. To be honest with you, I don't think anybody really new what they wanted. As the Gala Plaza report says enosis was great as cause to rally behind when it came to defeating the British, but on a pratical level, people really didn't know what they wanted out of enosis. ( It's quite strange that Cyprus has always had large communist following, yet EOKA, whos leadership were, well 'anti-communist', had support of the majority. I don't know, maybe people supported enosis, but instead of waitng around they felt they had no choice but to fight....I'm not sure..)
| Quote: |
It is true that among them, as among many people in Greece, the word and the thought of Enosis have a highly emotional quality: it serves to some as a symbol of Pan-Hellenistic ideals, to others as the battle-cry of the resistance against colonial rule, and in the worst times of the present crisis it seemed like a banner under which the Greek-Cypriot community as a whole found their rallying-point. But as a practical step in the political evolution of Cyprus it has struck me, in discussions with a wide range of Greek-Cypriot opinion, as having a much less united and imperative driving force behind it.
139. This may be in part because there have been few precise indications of the form which Enosis should take and of the economic, social and political consequences which would flow from it. I understand Enosis to mean in its literal sense the complete absorption of Cyprus into Greece, but I would hesitate to say that this is what every Greek-Cypriot favouring it intends it to mean.
(Gala Plaza report)
Whereas EOKA (1955-59) were seen by the majority of the Greek Cypriots as anti-colonialist freedom fighters, the EOKA-B did not have the overwhelming support of the Greek Cypriot population, who where skeptical over the organisation's involvement with the unpopular Greek dictatorship.[citation needed] They did not want to swap their newly found independence for direct rule from Athens. The organisations unpopularity increased after attacks on Greek Cypriot socialists and supporters of independence, while public outrage followed the murder of government minister Polycarpos Georgadis and a botched assassination attempt on Makarios.
Enosis
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The word Ένωσις (enosis) is Greek for union. During the time when Great Britain ruled Cyprus (1878 - 1960), and since Cypriot independence, the word has referred to a proposed union in which Cyprus would become a part of Greece, see Modern history of Cyprus for detailed description.
In 1864 the British had previously ceded the Ionian islands, which they had administered for fifty years, to the new Kingdom of Greece, and this was taken by supporters of enosis as a precedent for the cession of Hellenic territories to Greece after a period of British administration.
The movement for enosis gained ground in the 1940s and 1950s. In 1954, at the instigation of Greek Cypriot communal leader Archbishop Makarios III, Greece raised the issue of self-determination for Cyprus at the United Nations, with a view to a Cypriot plebiscite on the island's future which, it was widely supposed, would result in a vote for enosis.
In 1955, the controversial guerrilla movement EOKA was formed in Cyprus in support of enosis. However, sensitive negotiations between Greece, Turkey and the United Kingdom resulted in a fragile independence for Cyprus in 1960, and the Republic of Cyprus was set up as a partnership state between the Greek Cypriot, Turkish Cypriot, Armenian Cypriot, and Marionite Cypriot population. However, by December 1963, the partnership state dissolved into intercommunal violence.
and while its main target was the British military, the EOKA...(The majority).... as assassinating pro-British Cypriots, informants, Progressive Party of Working People (a communist organization), Taksim (Turkish Cypriot supporters of partition), and members of the Turkish Cypriot insurgent organization, the Turkish Resistance Organization. (The minority, sinister, nationalist side)
(My Italics)
I took the above quotes form the Gala Plaza report and Wikepedia. |
As to the idea of Enosis, back in the day ( ), the idea of enosis was a perfectly legitimate form of self-determination, the people that supported it were not supporting something illegal. And, as I've said before, when you look at the history of the whole area (modern day Greece and Turkey), it makes perfect sense why people wanted some form of union with Greece. a country that was slowly coming together. I think people tend to forget the history before the 1950's. It confuses me when people say, Enosis meant the complete annihilation of the Turkish Cypriots, because that doesn't fit with what I've observed. I know that Churchill also said that he took the opinions of the Turkish Cypriot community into account, but after what he said, can you blame people for thinking that eventually there wishes would be 'granted'? My Grandfather was arrested (falsely) for being a member of EOKA, and held without a trial for months, he supported the 'fight against the British', because all he wanted was Freedom, that's all. And for the ordinary people, Freedom I guess came hand in hand with 'enosis'. He didn't want the annihilation of the Turkish Cypriots, and he didn't hate the British, in fact he often talks fondly of an officer who treated him very well, for him, the officers were just doing their Job. Even though he supported the original EOKA, he was firmly against EOKA B. During my time, I have met many Greek Cypriots (shocking I know) and their ideas are similar to my Grandfathers, I truly believe that the Majority feel the same way he does. They just want Cyprus whole again, fairly!
I still believe that on a political level EOKA wasn't the best idea, and that the Majority wanted their Independence, I also still believe that the opinions of the Turkish Cypriots were never taken into account, how they might feel about the future of Cyprus, and that more of an effort should have been made to bring the two communities together, to fight for a common cause, as much as possible, and by this I mean communicating with each other (something that doesn't come too Natural to us Cypriots:P), for the Greek Cypriot leadership to explain the idea of enosis properly, for example (Although I guess that would have been difficult as, as far as I can tell they didn't know exactly what they wanted anyway...   ). And, more importantly I also still believe that EOKA, as an organization definitely did have a sinister side. its 'shady' side, people with extreme views, who talked about traitors, who didn't have any difficulty killing someone they thought was against them, a sign of insecurity I believe...Something my Grandad and many of his Greek Cypriot compatriots didn't support! |
|
| Back to top |
|
erolz
Site Admin
Joined: 11 Aug 2005
Posts: 4195
Location: Kyrenia / Girne
|
|
| Cyprus rules! wrote: |
| , the idea of enosis was a perfectly legitimate form of self-determination, the people that supported it were not supporting something illegal. |
Enosis was not 'illegal' but (to my mind at least) it was/is a most bizarre expression of CYPRIOT self determination because it meant in effect subsuming CYPRIOT self determination into GREEK self determination. That is the cypriot people would no longer have any separate self determination after enosis - all there would be would be the self determination of the entire greek people - which is not the same as self determination of the cypriot people. In short the expression of cypriot self determination expressed by Greek Cypriot as enosis was an desire to loose (sperate) cypriot self determination. That to me is as I say a bizarre notion indeed as an expression of ones self determination.
I would also point out that a right to self determination does not mean a people can have or do anything they want (esp regardless of the effects on others). It does not even guarantee a right to succession for example from an existing state. So I think there is some doubt as to if the right to self determination includes a right to give up that self determination, which is what enosis would have entailed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Dhavlos
Warnings : 1
Site Admin
Joined: 13 Aug 2005
Posts: 4697
Location: Birmingham
|
|
Erol, i think what you fail to see here, is people didnt see themselves as Cypriots then, they were just greeks and turks in their eyes, so being part of greece would have been 'natural'.
They considered themselves (rightly or wrongly) as a part of greece, not different to the peleponese, halkidiki or other greek islands. For them, being part of greece was not 'subjugating' power from one 'ruler' to another, but merely the incorporation into something that was 'natural' to them, and therefore self determination, as part of the greek nation.
erolz, from what i read, that is something you dont see to grasp. Yes we are and were cypriots, but the people at teh time felt tehy were greek(btw, im only speaking about Greek Cypriots here) so to be part of greece was self determination, rather than transfering power.
with hindsight, you are correct, it would have been just transfering power from one ruler to another, but at the time, it was not seen like that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Mete
Warnings : 3
Deputy
Joined: 16 Aug 2005
Posts: 1150
Location: Boston
|
|
| Quote: |
Enosis was not 'illegal' but (to my mind at least) it was/is a most bizarre expression of CYPRIOT self determination because it meant in effect subsuming CYPRIOT self determination into GREEK self determination.
|
Not if CYPRIOT=GREEK to these people. Today, nobody really uses the term Cretian as an ethnic/political term. It's more like a geographical term and nobody talks about Cretian self determination and how they gave their own self-determination to be part of Greece. I'm sure the term Cypriot and Cypriot self determination would have been the same if Greek Cypriots achieved Enosis. So Enosis expressed as a form of self determination is not that bizarre and I don't blame Greek Cypriots for it. I blame Greek Cypriots for the tactics used for Enosis and I also blame them to completely ignore the wishes of a distinctly unique minority. |
|
| Back to top |
|
repulsewarrior
Deputy
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Posts: 1735
Location: Canada
|
|
| As a newsgatherer in 1980, I asked many Cypriots what they thought ENOSIS meant. All said, union with Greece. However when asked if they wanted Greek money, postal service etc. they said no. This implies their identity to Hellinism was profound but their desire to have self determination was even more important to them. Confused and unfocused the population was continually motivated by their leaders to promote their connection to the "motherland". |
|
| Back to top |
|
Cyprus rules!
Mukhtar/is
Joined: 11 Jun 2006
Posts: 668
|
|
| erolz wrote: |
| Cyprus rules! wrote: |
| , the idea of enosis was a perfectly legitimate form of self-determination, the people that supported it were not supporting something illegal. |
Enosis was not 'illegal' but (to my mind at least) it was/is a most bizarre expression of CYPRIOT self determination because it meant in effect subsuming CYPRIOT self determination into GREEK self determination. That is the cypriot people would no longer have any separate self determination after enosis - all there would be would be the self determination of the entire greek people - which is not the same as self determination of the cypriot people. In short the expression of cypriot self determination expressed by Greek Cypriot as enosis was an desire to loose (sperate) cypriot self determination. That to me is as I say a bizarre notion indeed as an expression of ones self determination.
I would also point out that a right to self determination does not mean a people can have or do anything they want (esp regardless of the effects on others). It does not even guarantee a right to succession for example from an existing state. So I think there is some doubt as to if the right to self determination includes a right to give up that self determination, which is what enosis would have entailed. |
Hi erolz, I completely understand what you mean, today it certainly does seem bizarre that the Greek Cypriots, in effect wanted to almost 'give up' their uniqueness and power and become part of Greece, but I think we have to look at the history of Modern day Greece and Cyprus, and there connection with each other and try to understand why that generation saw enosis as the natuaral thing to do . During the Greek Independence struggle, for example, Cypriots had helped, and suffered for the cause, as well as that many other regions/Islands that had a Greek Numerical Majority were slowly, slowly joining this new country, (It's important to note that many of these places also had numerically smaller Turkish minorities, and also a certain uniqueness to them , I mean many of today's 'Greek Islands' speak in a different dialect to the mainland Greeks, just like Cypriots)
| Quote: |
| The Greek Cypriot language is an idiom (sometimes falsely, or in non-linguistic context, labeled as 'dialect') distinct from the formal Greek language (note that different idioms exist on many of the Greek islands) as it is spoken in mainland Greece. |
(Wikipedia)
People also fought for Greece during the WW2, etc. I don't personally agree with the idea, I don't really think it was the right path, something which the majority of Cypriots agree with, but when I take all of the above into account I can almost certainly understand why the ordinary people during that period thought enosis was the way forward for Cyprus, why wouldn't they? Enosis was a legitimate aspiration, but unfortunately it was an aspiration that tended to exclude non Greek Cypriots (well the way it was handles certainly did!). When I think of what might have happened if all Cypriots had a common cause, and fought for that common cause , ie complete Independence, It saddens me, but today we are left with what we are left with, and we have to move on and find a fair solution, people have waited long enough....
Another thing about EOKA (sorry ), I Cypriots that at that time, it was the only organization that was seen actually doing something to free Cyprus, I think people were fed up with all the 'teasing' that had happened in the past, they wanted a Free country where they could make their own decisions, and as EOKA was fighting for that, many people supported them...I mean I'm pretty sure that all the sinister acts carried out by the minority to certain people must have been 'hushed up' to a certain extent...although I could be wrong... |
|
| Back to top |
|
Mete
Warnings : 3
Deputy
Joined: 16 Aug 2005
Posts: 1150
Location: Boston
|
|
| Quote: |
People also fought for Greece during the WW2, etc. I don't personally agree with the idea, I don't really think it was the right path, something which the majority of Cypriots agree with,
|
Cypriots did not fight for Greece in the WW2 per say. They fought for the British and there were some Turkish Cypriots who also fought alongside with Greek Cypriots. |
|
| Back to top |
|
erolz
Site Admin
Joined: 11 Aug 2005
Posts: 4195
Location: Kyrenia / Girne
|
|
| Dhavlos wrote: |
Erol, i think what you fail to see here, is people didnt see themselves as Cypriots then, they were just greeks and turks in their eyes, so being part of greece would have been 'natural'.
They considered themselves (rightly or wrongly) as a part of greece, not different to the peleponese, halkidiki or other greek islands. For them, being part of greece was not 'subjugating' power from one 'ruler' to another, but merely the incorporation into something that was 'natural' to them, and therefore self determination, as part of the greek nation.
erolz, from what i read, that is something you dont see to grasp. Yes we are and were cypriots, but the people at teh time felt tehy were greek(btw, im only speaking about Greek Cypriots here) so to be part of greece was self determination, rather than transfering power.
with hindsight, you are correct, it would have been just transfering power from one ruler to another, but at the time, it was not seen like that. |
And to mete really. Look I understand what you are saying Dhavlos (and mete) but the fact remains that enosis was persued in the 50's as an expression of _cypriot_ self determination and not as one of an expression of Greek self determination. The (Greek Cypriot) people may not have seen any distinction but the elite's and leadership did. They pursued it in the name of Cypriot self determination because they knew internationally that to try and pursue it in the name of a unified greek expression of self determination would fail. To me there is still an inherent bizarreness to have pursued an expression of cypriot self determination (and for the leaders this is what they were telling the world they were doing - expressing CYPRIOT self determination) that took the form of ending Cypriot self determination. This bizarreness would not have been there if Makarios was telling the world he was pursuing enosis as an expression of Greek self determination - but he knew (and many Cypriots I suspect) knew that this would never work with the British or the rest of the world. To have pursued enosis as an expression of Greek self determination would have required arguing that a Greek living in athens had a valid and equal right to determine the future of all Cypriots and Cyprus but the Turkish Cypriot community that actually lived there had no effective say in this (nor any mainland Turk for that matter). That would never had gained any support internationally and thus the leadership very specifically did not pursue it in the name of Greek self determination but in the name of Cypriot self determination. |
|
| Back to top |
|
stavrizatz
Mukhtar/is
Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 910
Location: Australia / Lefkosia
|
|
Well this goes around and around
... self-determination I guess is the will of a group of people in an specific area to live freely and decide the future of the place. Self-determination is purely democratic and in the case of Cyprus self-determination is what Cypriots want and wanted at the time. At that time it was clearly Enosis. If there was no 'Enosis' the options were no better.
Cyprus Indepency was proven a huge failure as it only lasted really 3 years. Brittish strategy was "divide and rule" and that is why they offered Cyprus Independency. Cyprus a tiny island in the mediterranean unable to defent its rights and yes there are still two Brittish bases in Cyprus and no-one complains because the focus of the conflict is the bi-communal conflict. I believe the British developed this conflict in the first place so as to be able to rule Cyprus easier. "Divide and rule" succeeded, Cyprus suffers in my opinion because Cyprus failed to unite with Greece.
I agree Erolz that democracy is not always fair for the reason that the majority rules and minorities might suffer. The desirable balance sometimes does not exists.
F*** I wish there were no borders so as not to have such arguments. |
|
| Back to top |
|
erolz
Site Admin
Joined: 11 Aug 2005
Posts: 4195
Location: Kyrenia / Girne
|
|
| stavrizatz wrote: |
| ... self-determination I guess is the will of a group of people in an specific area to live freely and decide the future of the place. Self-determination is purely democratic and in the case of Cyprus self-determination is what Cypriots want and wanted at the time. At that time it was clearly Enosis. If there was no 'Enosis' the options were no better. |
The idea that self determination gave and gives a Greek Cypriot numerical majority in cyprus a right to impose it's will on the Turkish Cypriot community against their will is just a gross perversion of what self determination means in both it's spirit and letter. A cypriot 'voice' that respresent only the will of the Greek Cypriot community can not be considered the voice of the cypriot people as a whole - it is what it is the voice of the Greek Cypriot community alone. The degree to which a unitary cypriot voice genuinely represents the cypriot peple as a whole is directly related to how much that voice is the result of considering all cypriots views - if it is represents just the views of one community alone with no consideration for the other it is not a cypriot voice but one communites voice alone.
http://www.talkcyprus.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=62233#62233
| stavrizatz wrote: |
Cyprus Indepency was proven a huge failure as it only lasted really 3 years. Brittish strategy was "divide and rule" and that is why they offered Cyprus Independency. Cyprus a tiny island in the mediterranean unable to defent its rights and yes there are still two Brittish bases in Cyprus and no-one complains because the focus of the conflict is the bi-communal conflict. I believe the British developed this conflict in the first place so as to be able to rule Cyprus easier. "Divide and rule" succeeded, Cyprus suffers in my opinion because Cyprus failed to unite with Greece. |
Nothing divided the two cypriot communities more than the Greek Cypriot communities desire to replace a British colonial rule with a Greek one and their determination to impose this on the Turkish Cypriot community with the Turkish Cypriot community having no right or say about this fundamental aspect of their lives their future and their homeland.
| stavrizatz wrote: |
I agree Erolz that democracy is not always fair for the reason that the majority rules and minorities might suffer. The desirable balance sometimes does not exists. |
Have a look here for why I think your idea of 'democracy' is in fact a perversion of what democracy means.
http://www.talkcyprus.org/forum/cms_view_article.php?aid=3 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
 
 
Link Partners
3046 Attacks blocked
|
Register 
Log in 
Album 
Home 
