www.talkcyprus.org

[David Carter]

Greetings to all

Work is going ahead to build The British Cyprus Memorial to remember the 372 British military personnel who died in Cyprus between 1955 and 1959.

The Memorial will be erected in the old British Cemetery in Kyrenia. The aim is to unveil it in time for Remembrance Sunday 2009. Part of the work involves tidying up the cemetery

Given the requirement of public accessibility, the old British cemetery in Kyrenia is a fitting site for a fixed memorial.

Established in 1878 when the British first arrived in Cyprus, it is the last resting place of the only VC buried on the island: Sgt Samuel McGaw of the Black Watch, whose grave lies beside four other members of his regiment who also died in that first year of 1878.

Among the others are those of two British major-generals who served on the island in the years thereafter — Sir Courtenay Manifold (d. 1957) and Sir Charlton Spinks (d. 1959) — as well as that of a wartime governor and commander-in-chief of the island, Sir William Battershill (1959). These were all distinguished servants of the Crown who died in the same years as those remembered on the memorial.

There are other graves with a strong military connections, among them a DSO and another with both the MC and the Croix de Guerre. Taken together, the graves in the old British cemetery give added dignity to the memorial, a final chapter in a long story.

For full details of the project - and the key figures involved - please have a look at:

http://www.parliamentarybrief.com/britcyp/index.php/default

or the Cyprus section of Britain's Small Wars on the web at

www.britains-smallwars.com

Best wishes to all
David (Carter)

[stavrizatz]

Quote: Why build a memorial?
The obligation of remembrance for the 372 British who died on active service in Cyprus between April 1 1955 and April 18 1959 — the majority of them aged 21 or under — is in accord with the long tradition of so doing, but it is of particular importance in this instance because, through political circumstance, their graves have been largely locked away from public sight for some 34 years.

Sir, why is it our obligation as Cypriots to have a memorial in our own country of the service men "may god bless them" of the colonial power which suppressed our country for 81 years. Don't get me wrong, the young service men did nothing wrong and suddly lost their lives, but I am wondering in what spirit will the memorial be built. If it will be build in spirit of forgiveness and rememberance then I am for it, if it build to remind Cypriots that Cyprus was at once under the British rule then I am afraid i will not funcy such idea.

[David Carter]

The British Memorial in Kyrenia is what it is - to remember those mainly young British soldiers, the majority National Service conscripts, who lost their lives in a bitter conflict. Every uniformed soldier deserves to be remembered - and their deaths as a symbol to strive for future peace. This Memorial, in particular, is not intended as a political statement in any way. Politicians make wars, not soldiers. These young men, I'm sure, would have wished, too, for a free and peaceful Cyprus.

Respect
David (Carter)

[stavrizatz]

Also, David I have to say that the second site
www.britains-smallwars.com is very educational, very interesting to see the prespective of British on the war.

However I find it sad that still after 50 years the aim is to justify the presence of British colonies globally which assumes that it was Britain's right to use formulas to break down the people and split public opinion so as to maintain power. Sorry but other than educational I find it absolutely disgraceful.

[David Carter]

My section of BSW tries to give the soldiers' points of view and report their experiences. It is not intended to justify or not justify Imperial Britain, but to add to the history of the times. As it happens, it has proved a useful resource by academics in Athens and South Cyprus. Or so they have told me when they've asked my help to further their research. That assistance has been given readily by me and many of those who served in Cyprus. Unfortunately, when the academics asked former EOKA members to respond to my questions, the latter refused, despite my assurances their answers would be published as given.

None of us at BSW wishes anything less than a peaceful settlement to the Cyprus 'problem'. I, for one, have a deep fondness of the Island and the Cypriot people as whole, especially those I've met in the country villages over the past 30 plus years.

Once again, I want to stress it would be sad if any one were to try to turn the Memorial Project into political issue. Haven't the authorities of the Republic of Cyprus honored its fallen? Turkish Cypriots have done the same for theirs. We want to do the same for ours in the land where they died.

Kind regards
David (Carter)

[stavrizatz]

Quote: As it happens, it has proved a useful resource by academics in Athens and South Cyprus.
What do you mean by south Cyprus? Anyway the website is very useful indeed with many facts and information about the liberation struggle and I used it many times.

David Carter wrote: My section of BSW tries to give the soldiers' points of view and report their experiences. It is not intended to justify or not justify Imperial Britain, but to add to the history of the times.
Sorry, but if your intention was to record history, truly as it happened you would at least be objective with the terms used. You 've extensily used the term terrorist at the time that EOKA was not involved in a single terrorist attack! In contrast the Greek Cypriot war veterans mention only what suits them in order to maintain their hero status. The material in the Greek Cypriot text books about EOKA and BSW in my opinion are both propaganda material of the two sides. I am disappointed because as a young Cypriot I cannot find a reliable source for the struggle and I need to compare and contrust in order to find answers.


David Carter wrote: None of us at BSW wishes anything less than a peaceful settlement to the Cyprus 'problem'. I, for one, have a deep fondness of the Island and the Cypriot people as whole, especially those I've met in the country villages over the past 30 plus years.
Thanks mr. Courter for whishing us a peaceful settlement but I didn't critisice you for that. I critisised the propaganda in BSW website about the EOKA anticolonial revolt.

David Carter wrote: Once again, I want to stress it would be sad if any one were to try to turn the Memorial Project into political issue. Haven't the authorities of the Republic of Cyprus honored its fallen? Turkish Cypriots have done the same for theirs. We want to do the same for ours in the land where they died.
Sorry mr Carter, I am just mentioning this, to let you know how it looks from a Cypriot point of view. Well the way I see is like the apparteid building a memorial for those fallen in South Africa, the Nazis build a memorial for those fallen in WW2 in Israel, or IRA build a memorial in London also for those fallen!

I wish one day memorials will serve humanity and not ethnicity. In Cyprus Greek Cypriots build their own memorials blaming the Brits and the Turks, Turkish Cypriots also build their own blaming the Greeks and I assume this war memorial will blame the terrorists!

[David Carter]

I use the term 'South Cyprus' to distinguish it from 'North Cyprus' simply to describe the facts on the ground.

And, no, the Memorial, I stress again, will not be a political statement or put blame on any one.

As for some of your other comments, you and I must disagree, some of which have little basis in fact.

Eoka was a terrorist organization and conducted terrorist acts, led by a man who had terrorized Greeks on the mainland before he returned to Cyprus to continue to fulfill his ambitions. British Forces, for the greater part, never behaved like Nazis or white South African security services.

I believe, as many Cypriots do, that Eoka was the cause and starting point for today's division of the Island.

As I said before, the Memorial will not be a political statement, will not glorify war and will simply remember ordinary young men who did what their country expected of them, rightly or wrongly. In other times, they may have partied with Cypriots of their age. A few did, in fact.

As Dr Spok once said, live long and prosper - and delight in the fact you've not had to pick up arms.

David

[repulsewarrior]

my only hope is that the memorial will be moved to its rightful place.

as a suggestion the "Cyprus 'problem'" is defined as the Cyprus Problem by the UN because the issue is a matter so important to Humanity that it is given this label. if we are unable here, to express tolerance, if Mankind cannot have this satisfaction, having given Cypriots the precious gift of Freewill, intolerance wins, and we fail the fallen soldiers who died for us (in the Great War) with the hope that never again would we fight each other, but real enemies: Hunger, Disease, Ignorance.

Lest We Forget.

[repulsewarrior]

regretfully, EOKA, as i understand, from his brother and wife, was formed by Grivas to counter the administration which allowed their troops to demonstrate something less than total discipline; especially because his admiration for Britain, British troops was so high. (His original complaints to them, toward what he personnally witnessed were ignored)

regretfully, the interlocutors always had dividing the island in mind, even (close to) a hundred years before the struggle for liberation. EOKA only served to drive these players to a table where the Treaty of Zurich was signed.

Turkey on the otherhand still struggles with the Treaty of Lausanne, like in so many other cases, signed by her and later dismissed as unfair. It explains a lot about the actions she has taken since then and the lack of recognition for anything Cypriot.

[David Carter]

Without wanting to insult the person who sent the last message, but that explanation of why Grivas started the Eoka coflict is BS, a very large load of BS. Either that or a very clever bit of humor.

Have a nice day
David

[stavrizatz]

David Carter wrote: As I said before, the Memorial will not be a political statement, will not glorify war and will simply remember ordinary young men who did what their country expected of them, rightly or wrongly. In other times, they may have partied with Cypriots of their age. A few did, in fact.

If it wouldn't glorify war or is used as political statement then if there is a good enough reason for the families of those who fallen to build such memoial it's a good enough reason for me too. That was my only concern, but now I have your word mr. Carter.


Quote: Eoka was a terrorist organization and conducted terrorist acts, led by a man who had terrorized Greeks on the mainland before he returned to Cyprus to continue to fulfill his ambitions.
In the website British Small Wars you talk in detail on how every british person died. Almost everyone killed by EOKA fighters was assassined or killed in a battle and almost all the civilians were somehow connected to the Brittish forces. Going through the deaths one by one you can realise there was not a single terrorist attack by EOKA. The reason you the poemies were calling EOKA a terrorist org was to split the public opinion against EOKA and that is why the British occupiers recruited Turkish Cypriot police to face EOKA. British have turned the Turks against the Greek just like the pakistanies against the indians or the jews against the palestinians. Divide and Rule the dirty British strategy which fueled partition. Britains crimes against humanity are recorded and we the Cypriots shall never forget. I don't blame you for insisting that EOKA was a terrorist org, it is the 'playing victim syndrome'. The British and the west have always been the saints, they were only fighting the terrorists! Just like now they are fighting the terrorist in Iraq where half a million civilians died. WHO ARE THE REAL TERRORISTS.

Quote: British Forces, for the greater part, never behaved like Nazis or white South African security services.

I am not comparing the British to the Nazis, neither examining who has been the worst. The fact that the British colonised Cyprus and the refused to hand it to the people, instead they heavily taxed them and took advantage of Cyprus natural resources without giving anything back. Colonisation was/is a crime against humanity. For this reason the emotions that the jews have aginast the Nazis or the black south african against aparteid are not very different to emotions that the greeks have against the British colonialist in Cyprus.


Quote: I believe, as many Cypriots do, that Eoka was the cause and starting point for today's division of the Island.

No Doubt, perhaps EOKA was a mistake, but we judge that now knowing how history unfolded. Those couldn't predict the future and after all avenues of peaceful settlement were exausted with the British saying that they will 'never' leave Cyprus, those men had no option but an armed struggle for freedom. The starting point of today's division was the British policy, everything else followed almost naturally according to british plans.

I hope you are not offended for the heavy critisism against your country, but that is how I see the Anglo-americans not as individuals but as countries.

[David Carter]

Wow! I could counter most of your arguments, good sir, point by point, but to do that properly I would wish to 'prove' each, by giving chapter and verse from official documents and, frankly, I'm long past my prime and time for me is precious as I have many more interests to pursue.

Suffice to say that Britain offered Cyprus step-by-step independence several times before Eoka raised its head.

I would agree with you, however, that Britain did not invest properly in the Island since she acquired it from the Ottomans in 1878, although she did improve many conditions.

Where she failed most of all, in my opinion, was not introducing an educational system that was free from mainland Greek and Turkish interests that developed ethnic nationalism rather than a Cypriot identity and loyalty to their home land - Cyprus. More effort should have been applied by the British to make the two main communities act in common cause.

If there are other readers with views on the debate that's started here, I'd welcome reading them, although I have no desire to open old wounds and can't promise to respond to each message.

Meantime, I wish you well
David

[stavrizatz]

David Carter wrote: Wow! I could counter most of your arguments, good sir, point by point, but to do that properly I would wish to 'prove' each, by giving chapter and verse from official documents and, frankly, I'm long past my prime and time for me is precious as I have many more interests to pursue.

Suffice to say that Britain offered Cyprus step-by-step independence several times before Eoka raised its head.

I would agree with you, however, that Britain did not invest properly in the Island since she acquired it from the Ottomans in 1878, although she did improve many conditions.

Where she failed most of all, in my opinion, was not introducing an educational system that was free from mainland Greek and Turkish interests that developed ethnic nationalism rather than a Cypriot identity and loyalty to their home land - Cyprus. More effort should have been applied by the British to make the two main communities act in common cause.

If there are other readers with views on the debate that's started here, I'd welcome reading them, although I have no desire to open old wounds and can't promise to respond to each message.

Meantime, I wish you well
David

I can understand that it is lenghthy spending time on internet forums discussing never ending issues, so I can understand where you are coming from. If you ever come to Cyprus, please visit the peace centre, it would be my pleasure to meat you, or if I am not there to meat the president of the centre.

Just a short point I want to make about your reply, the way I see it and the reason I speak this way is because in my point of view no one but the dwellers of a land have the right to make decisions about the future of the place, so as simple as that Britain had no right to be in Cyprus, no right to offer any settlement and there is no justification for Britian's colonisation, no matter how good the British were to the Cypriots. As for step-to-step independence, it was what the British wanted for Cyprus, not what the Cypriots wanted for Cyprus and when the extreme majority of the native population signed for reunion of Cyprus with Greece, Britain had no right to offer anything else.

[David Carter]

If I am ever able to visit Cyprus again, I would welcome meeting you at the Peace Center. The weighty matters that have been raised would be far better discussed face-to-face, sipping a couple of Three King brandies after a good meal in the evening at a gathering of friends. While I doubt we'd reach any decisive conclusion, I am certain we would find we had more in common than that which may appear to divide us.

Just a couple of points: humanity wouldn't have stepped out of Africa if there hadn't been occupations of other lands. Greeks, Romans, Huns, Britons, Spaniards et all have at some time or the other been both occupied and been occupiers.

On the subject of enosis and the referendum organized by the Cyprus Orthodox Church, two years after Cyprus was offered a path to independence, even the most dedicated Hellenic nationalist would reluctantly admit, it took no account of the feelings or wishes of 20 per cent of the population.

Had the referendum not been arranged by the Church, the results may have been somewhat different than the 99 per cent vote in favor of union with Greece.

Nor did the organizers warn the Greek Cypriots that their standard of living, though low, would be even lower were they to have become part of Greece and come under the jurisdiction of the instable Athens government. And what role, if any, would the Ethnarch have played under the new arrangements?

The Latins had marginalized the Cypriot Church during their rule. The Turks restored it. The Brits tolerated it, but would the left-wing circles in Greece have accepted its right-wing philosophy, as advocated by the likes of Grivas and his X organization?

Till the next time
Best wishes
David

[stavrizatz]

David Carter wrote: If I am ever able to visit Cyprus again, I would welcome meeting you at the Peace Center. The weighty matters that have been raised would be far better discussed face-to-face, sipping a couple of Three King brandies after a good meal in the evening at a gathering of friends. While I doubt we'd reach any decisive conclusion, I am certain we would find we had more in common than that which may appear to divide us.

So you like 3 kings Brandy, nice, what about some cypriot souvlakia and seftalia!

Quote: Just a couple of points: humanity wouldn't have stepped out of Africa if there hadn't been occupations of other lands. Greeks, Romans, Huns, Britons, Spaniards et all have at some time or the other been both occupied and been occupiers.
Certainly, but I hope you don't mean by saying that, there is no hope for the future because countries will continue to occupy each other over and over again. The evil always triumphs at first and always at the end is defeated.



David Carter wrote: On the subject of enosis and the referendum organized by the Cyprus Orthodox Church, two years after Cyprus was offered a path to independence, even the most dedicated Hellenic nationalist would reluctantly admit, it took no account of the feelings or wishes of 20 per cent of the population.

Had the referendum not been arranged by the Church, the results may have been somewhat different than the 99 per cent vote in favor of union with Greece.

Nor did the organizers warn the Greek Cypriots that their standard of living, though low, would be even lower were they to have become part of Greece and come under the jurisdiction of the instable Athens government. And what role, if any, would the Ethnarch have played under the new arrangements?

The Latins had marginalized the Cypriot Church during their rule. The Turks restored it. The Brits tolerated it, but would the left-wing circles in Greece have accepted its right-wing philosophy, as advocated by the likes of Grivas and his X organization?

Till the next time
Best wishes
David

Well I've heared many reasons why not enosis and why independence. Today perhaps the most common view of enosis is the aspiration of greek cypriots to unite with greece was a nationalist policy, I hear that and many interesting and often quite creative reasoning why not enosis. It has nothing to do with whether if Greece was a third world country or if it was communist. The referentum may or may not have been done by the church, Grivas may or may not have been a fascist. There was one thing that the numerous occupiers of cyprus did not manage to change, that is the hellenic character of the island (the greeks who may have also been the occupiers of Cyprus at one point). From 1831 when greece became independent Cypriots just like other islanders such as the Cretans the Aegeans, the Dodekanese or the Ionians, they all tried to free their islands from the ottomans and unite with the mainland. The fact that Cyprus changed owners and never got liberated, it did not make cyprus less Greek than other Greek islands. Some Greek territory was liberated, some was not eg Constantinople, Smyrna and Pontus and other places are still in dispute, eg Cyprus.

Enosis was what the majority o cypriots wanted, no matter how good or bad enosis was, it was the choice of the natives. After all majorities have rights too.