Article by MARIA ROSSIDOU & TINOS LASONOS in 1991
THE FIRST ATTILA WAS WEARING FOUSTANELLA
For years prevailing political opinion in Cyprus has been aspiring to present the Cyprus problem as a consequence of the war of 1974 and the Greek Cypriots as “innocent victims”.
All the Greek Cypriot political parties project the Cyprus problem as the result of the Turkish expansionism as a problem of invasion, occupation and liberation.
In order to strengthen the myth of “innocent victim” they systematically cultivate their impression that “in the past we used to live in peace with our Turkish Cypriot brethren”. They systematically cultivate “historical amnesia”.
ONE STEP TOWARDS:
The Greek Cypriot domination over the Turkish Cypriots begins with the transition from English occupation to independence. The objective of the Greek Cypriot ruling class was the enforce itself upon the Turkish Cypriots and to monopolise the control of the newly established state. Makarios was celebrating independence as “one step towards ENOSIS.
With the union of Cyprus with Greece as a strategic objective the Greek Cypriot bourgeoisie try to side track the restrictions of the constitution, a constitution which they had just signed, and that they were projecting, but at the same time taking all the necessary measures to prove it was inapplicable.
The economic superiority of the Greek Cypriots over the Turkish Cypriots was shattering. The magnitude of the economic inequality can be seen from the exports of which the Greek Cypriots controlled 99.5% and the Turkish Cypriots a meagre 0.5%.
Greek Cypriot Turkish Cypriot
Agriculture 87.4% 12.6%
Industry 91.8% 6.1%
Imports 91.6% 3.9%
Exports 99.5% 0.5%
Comparative elements of production and commerce between Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots- were the period 1962-1963.
The Greek Cypriot ruling class, however, wanted absolute political control as well.
On the basis of their economic superiority, the Greek Cypriot ruling class put into motion a process of revision of the constitution, often trampling upon it against the Turkish Cypriots such as not applying the separate municipalities clauses of the constitution, the 70:30 ratio in the public service and the attempts to do away with the right of veto of the Turkish Cypriots.
This procedure culminated with the proposals of Makarios for constitutional amendments in the fall of 1963, which became known as the “13 points”.
MASSACRES:
Against all the reactions of the Turkish Cypriots, the Greek Cypriots proceeded unilaterally to apply all these amendments step by step.
Since the Turkish Cypriots objections were thwarted in the political arena, the conflict escalates in the military arena. The Greek Cypriot armed forces let loose a sweeping attack against Hundreds of Turkish Cypriots who were scattered all over the island. Hundreds of Turkish Cypriots were massacred or remained unaccounted for. Tens of thousands of them were forced to be enclave and confined in 4% of the area of Cyprus, which is an area less than that of occupied by the British Bases.
The Turkish Cypriots constituted 18% of the population.
With the expulsion of the Turkish Cypriots from the governmental authority, the Greek Cypriot bourgeoisie de-facto abolished the Zurich regime. All these, naturally, were not for correcting “the negative points” of the constitutional but were intended to pre3pare the ground for ENOSIS-union with Greece.
LIFE CONTINUES:
The statement by Makarios after the Turks were enclave is characteristic.
“Probably very shortly we shall come to an agreement or to an impasse. Of course I prefer the present situation to a bad solution. Already we have an all-Greek government on the island. The Turks do not take part in the government. For this reason, I believe, we should not be hasty.”
With the same motive and even more cynically Makarios declares in February 1967:
“The Turks today are in a very disadvantageous position. They are in concentration camps, which they have established. But how long for will this situation last? Can it last forever? May be the time will not bother them, but may be they are fed up with this situation. For us life goes on. The same cannot be said for those who do not practice any profession but sit continuously with their fingers on the trigger. What kind of a new generation of Turks will be created in Cyprus when everything in the hands of Greeks? For how long will they endure? May be they will endure, I cannot responsibly say that in 3,5,10 months the Turks ask for themselves to surrender, I do not however, exclude this sort of ending. Their morale is very low. When they go to Turkey we do not expect them back. So far we have not allowed Turkish students to come back with the excuse that they were in Turkey and were undergoing military training.”
WAR AND PEACE:
From 1963 onwards the Greek Cypriots ruling class exercises a continuous economic and political blockades with the objective of forcing the enslaved Turkish Cypriots to succumb to its terms.
Here is how Tassos Papadopoulos, the then minister of labour, describes in August 1964 the situation in which the Turkish Cypriots were, and the expectations of the Greek Cypriots:
There is high level of unemployment amongst the Turkish Cypriots. Characteristically it is said that there is no activity in the so-called “Turkish Area” with the exception of “Bel-Cola” (soft drink bottling factory). The whole of the Turkish Cypriot labour force remains inactive”. The Turkish workers have received heavy blow. Normally the Greek employers employ approximately 80% of the Turkish labour forced. The Turkish workers and the Turkish community in general have suffered great privation and have been forced to depend on humanitarian aid for their existence. The net result of this compulsory inactivity will be felt later on. Because inactivity is the source of loss of moral and will be the cause of a general economic, moral and psychological collapse. When Cyprus joins the Greek state Cyprus will offer considerably in this area to the whole Greek society. (He then was talking about social insurance scheme).
FAIT ACCOMPLIS:
The ground for the following military operations was prepared with the establishment of the National Guard in 1964 and the arrival of the Greek army Division.
In 1967 the National Guard soaked in blood the two villages of Kophinou and Ayios Theodoros by indiscriminately slaughtering the Turkish Cypriots with the excuse that they obstructed the functions of the Greek Cypriot police-that is its patrols. The separation of the population and the refugees “as a fait accompli of violence” existed prior to 1974. The only ones responsible for these is none other than the Greek Cypriot bourgeoisie who today is clamouring for human rights and that the fait accompli of invasion.
The period that ensues finds the Greeks in accord that they should settle their accounts with the Turkish Cypriots once and for all. The disagreement between Makarios and Grivas that was expressed after 1967 as regards the strategy of achieving their common objective meant in no way a change in the miserable conditions under which the Turkish Cypriots were living.
War is a continuation of politics by means of force. The Turkish invasion that followed the 1974 coup was nothing less than a hot continuation of the conflict amongst the capitalistic interests of the Greek and Turkish Cypriots, and of Greece and Turkey. That the Greek Cypriot bourgeoisie did not come out as winners in this latest war, that is time they were not the ones to fire the first shot, does not in any way minimise their responsibility for the new barbarity of 1974.
The mass massacre of the Turkish Cypriots of Tokhni village, for example, makes it no less a massacre because the Greek Cypriots lost the war. The Greek Cypriot propaganda presents the flight of the Turkish Cypriots to the North as a result of “enforced removal”. This is no more than just another of lies. The mass flights of the Turkish Cypriots to the North were a flight from insecurity.
Many Greek Cypriot speculators transported Turkish Cypriots to North Cyprus in return for a reward. In most cases this reward was the property left behind by these fleeing families in the “free areas”.
INTERNATIONALISM:
The whole characteristic of struggle and war is reactionary from all angles.
In time of “war” and in time of “peace” the price of this struggle is always paid by those who have nothing to share amongst themselves, the Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot labourers, sometimes a s supplies for their guns, sometimes with their sacrifices forced upon them by the capitalists (reduction) in wages, “contributions” for defence etc.) So as to strengthen the economy and their armoury. In this struggle of the two bourgeoisies the revolutionaries cannot support the privileges of any nation, much less their own.
According to Lenin, the duty of the revolutionaries is to support the right to self-determination of nations who are oppressed or those who are threatened by oppression by their own bourgeoisie.
The Greek Cypriot progressives must show it over and over again that the problem is not a national issue but one of classes.
A consistent international policy will make the labourers of the one side to stop viewing the labourers of the other side as enemies, and their own bourgeoisie, their real enemies, as allies.
For this reason we must denounce at every opportunity the “exploits” of our own bourgeoisie before and after 74. We must uncover the hypocrisy of the Greek Cypriot bourgeoisie, which on the one hand speaks of “peaceful ways of solving the problem” but supports the dispatching to Cyprus a Greek Army Division; who speaks of rapprochement but spends millions for its armaments, and who persecutes the few Turkish Cypriots who live in the south, forcing them into the ghetto.
We must also denounce the aggressive attitude of the Greek Cypriots bourgeoisie, who are currently imposing economic and social isolation on the Turkish Cypriots just as they did during the period when we had a “purely Greek government on the island”.
This does not any way mean that we support the Denktash regime; neither does it mean that we support the division or the federation; the one or the other bourgeoisie solution. Neither can we say indifferent to the plots of our own bourgeoisie who try to impose their own solution. The free and democratic reunion of Cyprus, also foresees the right to secession.
As Greek Cypriot internationalists we are struggling against “our own” bourgeoisie, which refuses to accept the right of the Turkish Cypriots to have their own state.
We are against our own bourgeoisie and their efforts to force the Greek and Turkish Cypriot people and labourers to kill each other again.
We must, by all means make all the efforts to exclude the real prospect of a new war which will again bring destruction and misery upon the two working classes. For this reason we must intensify the class struggle on both sides of the border. With our own struggle against nationalism and our own ruling class, we shall give our solidarity message to the Turkish Cypriot labourers. To achieve a sincere rapprochement, without preconditions, with the Turkish Cypriots, we must distance ourselves from our middle class hypocrisy, which after 1974 baptised the crimes as “the mistakes of the past”. These are the same people who today declare that they are searching for “a just and viable solution to the Cyprus problem”. But who could trust them?
Article Courtesy Of ATCANEWS :
http://www.atcanews.org