The Greek Cypriots claim that the Cyprus problem was caused by the landing of Turkish troops in 1974 and that if only they would withdraw, the problem would be solved. This is a serious misconception, for the modern Cyprus question began in 1960 and the landing of Turkish troops was the consequence, not the cause, of the problem.
The Greek Cypriot journalist Aleccos Constantinides, writing in Alithia on 14.12.85 said that Greek Cypriot political parties "are acting as if the Cyprus problem began and ended in 1974. They refrain from talking about the previous coups. The first coup was not in 1974, but only a few years after we had attained our independence in 1960. Had it not been for the first coup there would not have been the 1974 coup." Moreover, there were two military actions in 1974; the first was by Greece on 15th July, which caused the second by Turkey on 20th July.
The inhabitants of Cyprus have no common language except English and no common religion; nor have they, except at the surface, any common culture. In March 1963 Archbishop Makarios said "The [Independence] Agreements have created a State, but not a Nation." (The Greek Cypriot Cyprus Mail 28.3.63). This being so, any approach to the Cyprus question which regards Cypriots as a nation is fundamentally flawed. "The famous Cypriot consciousness was invented and encouraged by the British in the 1920s." - Prodromos Prodromou The Guardian 30th January 1995
There are two peoples of Cyprus - the Turkish Cypriots numbering about 200,000 and the Greek Cypriots numbering about 500,000. The Turkish Cypriots are mainly Moslems and the Greek Cypriots are mainly adherents of the Greek Orthodox Church. Cyprus has never been part of the Greek state. It lies 40 miles from the coast of Turkey, and Turkish people have inhabited the island since the 12th century. Cyprus is 250 miles from the nearest Greek island (Rhodes), and Athens is 460 miles away.
The Cyprus question can be stated shortly as follows: The partnership republic formed in 1960 between the two peoples of Cyprus broke down in 1963. For the time being, Greek and Turkish Cypriots live apart. Does the future of Cyprus lie in a new political integration or in an arms length relationship based on willing and active co-operation between two peoples, each secure in its own sovereign territory and each with its own customs, traditions and identity?
No solution to the Cyprus problem will work unless it is freely accepted by the inhabitan
On 15th August 1996 The Daily Telegraph wrote "Turkish Cypriots have constitutional right on their side and understandably fear a renewal of persecution if the Turkish army withdraws. Almost nowhere in the world is there a lasting peace that is not based on people's rights to govern themselves."
Everyone who wishes Cyprus well prefers to look to the future but some commentators will readily use the events of 1974 to argue that the present state of affairs is unacceptable. They do not, however, go back before 20th July 1974, and refusal to consider the preceding 15 years means that important legal and political issues wrongly determined in favour of the Greek Cypriots remain undisturbed and remain a continuing source of tension between the former partners.
The most important of these issues is international acceptance of the Greek Cypriot regime as the government of all Cyprus and refusal to recognise the right of the Turkish Cypriots to establish their own state. It is, therefore, necessary to look in some detail at the reasons why the present situation has arisen and why, in consequence, both sides and particularly the less numerous Turkish Cypriots need reliable safeguards for their future.
One of the most remarkable features of the Cyprus question is the extent to which the
The consequence of this is that they have been able to extract one sided resolu
For more than thirty years, ever since the overthrow of the 1960 Agreement, the Turkish Cypriots and their government have been faced with one of the hardest tasks in the whole range of international affairs - how to get the world to change its mind after it has got hold of the wrong end of the stick and clung to it year after year.
CAUSES OF THE 1974 INTERVENTION
Britain decided to decolonise the island, and in the House of Commons on 19th December 1956 the Colonial Secretary, Alan Lennox-Boyd, pledged that "it will be the purpose of Her Majesty's Government to ensure that any exercise of self-determination should be effected in such a manner that the Turkish Cypriot community, no less than the Greek Cypriot community, shall in the special circumstances of Cyprus be given freedom to decide for themselves their future status."
Although by then the Greek Cypriots were more numerous, the Turkish Cypriots had lived in Cyprus as a distinct community for more than 400 years; and in exercise of their right of self-determination they were willing to join in forming a new Republic embracing the whole of the island (less the British sovereign bases) only if that basic fact of political life in Cyprus was formally recognised. The Turkish Cypriots would never have agreed to subject themselves to unlimited Greek Cypriot rule, and would have fought for their survival as a free people with whatever help they could get.
The alternatives were two separate states, a condominium, division of the island between Greece and Turkey, restoration to Turkey under the 1878 Lease, or continued British rule. The negotiations in Zurich and London preceding independence were long and difficult, but it was eventually agreed by way of compromise between all five participants - Britain, Greece, Turkey, the Turkish Cypriots, and the Greek Cypriots - that the new state would be a bi-communal Republic with a single territory but a unique Constitution which embodied an agreed political partnership between Greek and Turkish Cypriots, and which prohibited the political or economic union of Cyprus with any other State.
At the conclusion of the negotiations the Greek Cypriot leader, Archbishop Makarios, said "Sending cordial good wishes to all the Greeks and Turks of Cyprus, I greet with joy the Agreement reached and proclaim with confidence that this day will be the beginning of a new period of progress and prosperity for our country".
On 6th March 1959 President Eisenhower endorsed the agreement as "a victory for common sense" an "imaginative act of statesmanship," and "a splendid achievement." (US Dept. of State Bulletin p. 367).
In the first Presidential elections in Cyprus Mr. John Clerides (father of Glafcos Clerides) stood against Makarios on a platform of opposition to the 1960 Agreements and lost by a majority of two to one of the Greek Cypriot electorate.
The bi-communal structure was fundamental to the 1960 accords, on the basis of which the Republic of Cyprus achieved independence, and recognition as a sovereign state from the international community. Accordingly, from its very inception the Republic of Cyprus was never a unitary state in which there is only one electorate with a majority and minority. The two communities were political equals and each existed as a political entity, just as both large and small states exist within the structure of the European Union. They did not, however, have the same constitutional rights because the agreements took into account the fact that there were more Greek Cypriots than Turkish Cypriots.
The UN Secretary-General confirmed in 1992 (UN doc. S/24472) that sovereignty "emanates equally from both communities. One community cannot claim sovereignty over the other."
Knowing that they could not enforce the 1960 agreement themselves, the Turkish Cypriots would never have agreed to join the new Republic if the Greek Cypriots had not accepted a Treaty of Guarantee which gave Turkey a legal right to intervene, with troops if necessary. The parties to the Treaty were the United Kingdom, Turkey, Greece, and the Republic of Cyprus. Independence was formally granted on 16th August 1960.
The case of Cyprus is sui generis, for there is no other State in the world which came into being as a result of two politically equal peoples coming together by the exercise by each of its sovereign right of self-determination, to create a unique legal relationship, which was guaranteed by international treaty, to which each of them consented.
