Category: Cyprus/TRNC

Türkiye’s intervention Cyprus Letter to Congresswomen Nicole Malliotakis

Nicole Malliotakis
United States House of Representatives
266 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515

Subject: Response to Your Remarks on Cyprus and the Republic of Türkiye

Dear Congresswoman Malliotakis,

I am writing to express my deep concern and disappointment regarding your recent remarks made during the 51st anniversary commemoration of Türkiye’s 1974 intervention in Cyprus, during which you referred to it as an “illegal occupation.” Your characterization of this complex historical event, along with your continued advocacy for the removal of Turkish troops, reflects a pattern of selective historical narrative that disregards international law, factual accuracy, and the lived experiences of Turkish Cypriots.

As an elected official representing a diverse constituency including a large Turkish American,, and Muslims from across Staten Island and Brooklyn. I urge you to approach such sensitive matters with greater care, integrity, and an appreciation for the full historical context.

Türkiye’s 1974 Intervention: A Legal Action Under the Treaty of Guarantee

Türkiye’s intervention in Cyprus was not an invasion, nor was it illegal. It was carried out under the 1960 Treaty of Guarantee an internationally binding agreement signed by Türkiye, Greece, and the United Kingdom. The treaty grants each guarantor nation the right to intervene unilaterally in Cyprus if the constitutional order or security of either community is under threat.

In July 1974, a Greek-orchestrated coup in Cyprus aimed to annex the island to Greece, violently deposing the legitimate government. Türkiye, in accordance with its treaty rights, intervened to prevent this annexation and to protect the Turkish Cypriot population, which had already endured years of discrimination, political marginalization, and ethnic violence. This intervention was not only lawful but necessary. The Athens Court of Appeals (Decision No. 2658/79, dated March 21, 1979) itself confirmed that it was the coup—not Türkiye’s response—that constituted the illegal action. Also, Archbishop Makarios III, the first President of the Republic of Cyprus, made several significant statements following the events of July 1974. After surviving the coup d’état orchestrated by the Greek military junta and EOKA-B, he fled to London and later addressed the United Nations. he also acknowledged that the coup in Cyprus was a Greek invasion not a Turkish invasion:  Here is a key excerpt from Archbishop Makarios’ statement to the United Nations Security Council on July 19, 1974 one day before Türkiye’s intervention:

“It is a paradox, indeed, that the President of Cyprus is addressing the Security Council in his capacity as the head of a state which is a victim of aggression not by a foreign power, but by a country which claims to be a brother nation…”

“What is happening in Cyprus is a clear invasion, through military force, by Greece… The coup was an invasion, and from its first moment it was an act of aggression and occupation.”

This statement is important because Makarios labeled the Greek-led coup as an “invasion,” thereby creating an argument though indirect that Türkiye’s response was not the initial act of aggression, but rather a reaction to Greek Invasion of the Island.  The fact of the matter is In terms of the 1960 Treaty of Guarantee, while Makarios did not publicly recognize the Turkish intervention as “legal,” the treaty itself is key to understanding Türkiye’s justification. The Treaty of Guarantee (signed by the United Kingdom, Greece, Türkiye, and Cyprus) gave the guarantor powers the right to intervene unilaterally to restore the constitutional order if it were disrupted.

Archbishop Makarios did  explicitly endorse the Turkish intervention, his recognition of the coup as an invasion by Greece lends credence to Türkiye’s legal justification under the Treaty of Guarantee. Thus, the 1974 Turkish operation cannot accurately be labeled as an “invasion”

The Turkish Peace Forces in Northern Cyprus continue to serve a vital function in deterring future violence and safeguarding the security of Turkish Cypriots. Their presence is not a political occupation it is a security imperative based on tragic historical realities.

British Troops in Cyprus: Also a Guarantor Presence, If the presence of Turkish forces is a concern, I would respectfully ask why there is no similar objection to the continued presence of British troops on the island. The United Kingdom, like Türkiye, is a Guarantor Power and maintains sovereign military bases in Cyprus. Are these forces also to be labeled an “occupation,” or is this designation applied selectively for political convenience?

The 2004 Annan Plan: A Missed Opportunity for Peace

In your remarks, you called for reunification. However, in the 2004 United Nations–backed Annan Plan referendum, 65% of Turkish Cypriots voted in favor of reunification, while 85% of Greek Cypriots rejected it. Then–President of the Republic of Cyprus, Tassos Papadopoulos, openly urged Greek Cypriots to vote “No.” Reunification was not blocked by Türkiye or Turkish Cypriots, but by the Greek Cypriot leadership. If peace and unity are the goals, this crucial fact must be part of the conversation.

Recognition of the Republic of Türkiye

It is also concerning that you continue to use the outdated term “Turkey,” rather than the official name “Türkiye,” which has been recognized by the United Nations and many international bodies. Respecting a country’s chosen name is a basic tenet of diplomacy and decency. As a Member of Congress, you have a duty to model such respect in both speech and writing.

The Strategic Importance of U.S.–Türkiye Relations

Türkiye remains one of the United States’ most critical allies in NATO. It possesses the alliance’s second-largest military and serves as a geopolitical bridge to Central Asia, the Caucasus, the Balkans, the Black Sea, and the Middle East. As former  U.S. Ambassador Jeff Flake recently reaffirmed the vital role that Türkiye plays in American defense strategy, economic cooperation, and diplomatic outreach.  Efforts to weaken U.S.–Türkiye relations do not serve the national interest. Rather, they empower adversaries and compromise regional stability.

A Call for Leadership, Not Division

Congresswoman, it is my hope that you will choose to lead with fairness and inclusivity, rather than division and partisanship. As a representative of all New Yorkers, you have a responsibility to serve your full constituency, including Turkish Americans, Turkish Cypriots, and other minority communities who contribute daily to the richness of our city and our nation.

Your message only justifies and intensifies the hateful feelings that have been instilled in them through childhood; frankly, you are engaging in tactics favored by groups such as the Ku Klux Klan.

You were elected to uphold the principles of truth, justice, and equality—not to amplify the narratives of foreign nationalisms at the expense of American unity and international diplomacy.

History remembers those who choose wisdom over prejudice, truth over propaganda, and peace over provocation. I sincerely hope you will reflect on these matters and approach them in a more balanced, factual, and constructive manner moving forward.

Respectfully,

Ibrahim Kurtulus
Dongan Hills

July 21, 2025
Response to Your Remarks on Cyprus and the Republic of Türkiye

Michael Tannousis Assembly member
11 Maplewood Place
Staten Island, NY 10306

July 20, 2025

Subject: Response to Your Remarks on Cyprus and the Republic of Türkiye

Dear Assemblyman Michael Tannousis

I write to express my deep disappointment and concern regarding your recent remarks during the 51st anniversary commemoration of Türkiye’s 1974 intervention in Cyprus, in which you referred to it as an “illegal occupation.” Your characterization of these events overlooks key historical facts, disregards international law, and marginalizes the lived experiences of Turkish Cypriots. As an elected representative of a diverse constituency that includes many Turkish Americans and Muslims across Staten Island and Brooklyn, I urge you to engage with this issue in a manner that reflects historical truth, legal accuracy, and diplomatic fairness.

Türkiye’s 1974 Intervention: A Legal and Necessary Action

Contrary to your statement, Türkiye’s intervention in Cyprus was not an “invasion” nor illegal. It was undertaken in accordance with the 1960 Treaty of Guarantee, a binding international agreement signed by the Republic of Cyprus, Türkiye, Greece, and the United Kingdom. The Treaty clearly permits any of the Guarantor Powers to act unilaterally to restore the constitutional order in Cyprus should it be disrupted. In July 1974, the democratically elected President of Cyprus, Archbishop Makarios III, was overthrown in a Greek-backed coup aimed at unifying the island with Greece. This act of aggression executed by the Greek military junta and the EOKA-B paramilitary group triggered Türkiye’s legal and justified intervention to prevent annexation and protect the Turkish Cypriot population, which had endured years of ethnic violence and political exclusion.

The Athens Court of Appeals (Decision No. 2658/79) concluded that it was indeed the coup—not Türkiye’s military response that was illegal.

Furthermore, Archbishop Makarios himself, in a statement to the United Nations Security Council on July 19, 1974, one day before Türkiye intervened, described the coup as an act of aggression:

“It is a paradox, indeed, that the President of Cyprus is addressing the Security Council in his capacity as the head of a state which is a victim of aggression not by a foreign power, but by a country which claims to be a brother nation… What is happening in Cyprus is a clear invasion, through military force, by Greece… The coup was an invasion, and from its first moment it was an act of aggression and occupation.”

The acknowledgment by Archbishop Makarios then head of state of Cyprus that the 1974 coup was orchestrated by Greece provides significant legal and moral support to Türkiye’s position. His admission affirms that it was the Greek-backed coup, not Türkiye’s response, that constituted an act of aggression. Türkiye’s intervention, therefore, was a lawful and treaty based action taken in response to an imminent threat, not an invasion. This is a fact that could stand up in any impartial international court of law.

Michael, as a legal professional, if you genuinely believe that Türkiye’s intervention qualifies as an “invasion,” I respectfully encourage you to bring your case and any supporting evidence before the International Court of Justice.

If your claims are valid, it would be a landmark victory for the Greek and Greek Cypriot cause, and you may well be honored for your efforts with statues worldwide . In fact, I would be willing to personally underwrite all associated legal expenses for such a case to be presented at the international level. Let the law not selective political rhetoric be the judge.

Turkish Peace Forces: A Security Imperative, Not an Occupation

The continued presence of Turkish Peace Forces in Northern Cyprus is not a political occupation. It is a security necessity grounded in the tragic history of ethnic cleansing and violence against Turkish Cypriots. Their presence has served as a deterrent to further conflict and ensured the safety of an entire community that had once been pushed to the brink of annihilation.

British Military Presence: A Selective Argument , If the presence of foreign troops on Cyprus is a concern, then the longstanding presence of British military forces, including the sovereign bases of Akrotiri and Dhekelia, must also be addressed. The United Kingdom is, like Türkiye, a Guarantor Power. Yet no similar outrage is expressed over British forces. Why is the label “occupation” applied only to Türkiye’s presence and not to the UK’s? This selective rhetoric undermines objectivity and weakens the legitimacy of any call for fairness.

The 2004 Annan Plan: A Missed Opportunity by Greek Cypriots . The 2004 Annan Plan, supported by the United Nations and the international community, was overwhelmingly accepted by 65% of Turkish Cypriots while 85% of Greek Cypriots rejected it. Then President Tassos Papadopoulos publicly urged the Greek Cypriot population to vote “No.” Reunification was not rejected by Türkiye or Turkish Cypriots, but by the very leaders you now align with in rhetoric.

Recognition of “Türkiye” and Respect in Diplomacy

I also noted many times your continued use of the outdated term “Turkey” in official communication. The nation has formally adopted the name “Republic of Türkiye,” which has been recognized by the United Nations and numerous international bodies. Addressing countries by their chosen names is a basic element of diplomatic respect and cultural decency. As a Member of Congress, this should be reflected in both your speech and writing.

Efforts to mischaracterize Türkiye’s actions or alienate its role in Cyprus only serve to embolden adversaries and weaken American influence in the region.

A Call for Leadership Rooted in Truth, Not Division . Micheal, I respectfully urge you to rise above partisan rhetoric and historical revisionism. Your comments risk deepening wounds, empowering ethnic bias, and misinforming the public. As an elected leader, your responsibility is to all New Yorkers including Turkish Americans and Turkish Cypriots who have long contributed to the strength and diversity of this city and this nation. Your message only justifies and intensifies the hateful feelings as you are engaging in tactics favored by groups such as the Ku Klux Klan.

Frankly, the sentiments expressed in your remarks echo the type of hostility and historical distortion often used by hate-based movements. Leadership should build bridges, not justify inherited animosity.

History will remember those who uphold truth over political convenience, diplomacy over hostility, and fairness over propaganda. I sincerely hope you will reflect on the facts presented and engage with this issue more responsibly moving forward.

Respectfully,
Ibrahim Kurtulus

July 21, 2025
CYPRUS: Greek Cypriot Politicians need to leave their fantasy world

CYPRUS MAIL
25.01.2015

Our View: Our politicians need to leave their fantasy world

DELUSIONS and myths have always been the currency of Cyprus political life, which took a divorce from reality from the day the Republic was established. Ever since, our politicians have been operating in a fantasy world of their own making, a world in which a tiny and powerless country (now also bankrupt) with the population of a mid-size town is a major political player, capable of imposing its own agenda on the world stage.

This may sound like the script for a political satire or a comedy show but in Cyprus it is for real and despite the catastrophes it has brought upon the country over the decades the delusions of grandeur and lack of a sense of perspective still reigns supreme. The politicians, urged on by a media suffering from the same delusions, make all types of pronouncements that are based on a series of irrational assumptions the main one being that all states are equal irrespective of their military and economic power.

No matter how many times this assumption has been as a fallacy by hard facts the politicians still adhere to it, as if the world had to operate in the way they imagine rather than in the way it does. Archbishop Makarios set the agenda when at the height of the Cold War he believed he could punish lack of US support for his brinkmanship, by strengthening relations with the Soviet Union and taking Cyprus into the Soviet-controlled Non-Aligned Movement, instead of NATO to which all guarantor countries belonged. Events of 1974 were the direct result of Makarios’ folly and his delusions of grandeur.

But nothing was learned and Cypriot leaders continued to grossly overestimate their power and ability to influence events. For instance, there was the fiasco of the S300 missiles, which cost the taxpayer in excess of 200 million pounds, when then President Clerides thought he would redress the imbalance of power with Turkey by deploying ballistic missiles. They were never deployed because the Turks had threatened to take them out if they had been. The Papadopoulos presidency believed it could achieve with diplomatic means what Clerides had failed to with military means. After deceiving our EU partners over the Annan plan, he tried to use membership of the Union to put pressure on Turkey, but achieved nothing.

There are countless examples of this folly and no matter how many times we were cut down to size, politicians still labour under the illusion that they can play international power games and impose their wishes on Turkey, the EU and rest of the international community. How many times in the last year have we heard Papadopoulos junior, Omirou and Lillikas calling for a new strategy in the national problem because the talks were futile? But would a new strategy make Cyprus a bigger and more powerful country that would be able to achieve the objectives of deluded politicians?

Whatever strategy we adopt Turkey would continue to have overwhelming military, economic and diplomatic superiority which are what count. It would carry on violating our EEZ, because we have no practical way of stopping its ships, and continue its military occupation of the north because we have no practical way kicking her troops out. This is the harsh reality – however unjust and unfair – that we should accept.

Nor will any third country help Cyprus defend its sovereign rights as the politicians have been claiming. In the last few months the above-mentioned party leaders have been arguing that we should strengthen relations with Russia as if this would make any difference to our extremely weak position. The latest folly is the proposal to offer Russia military facilities at a time when there is a major stand-off between Moscow and the West which included our EU partners. The idea that Russia would jeopardise its trade relations with Turkey, worth tens of billions of dollars per year and the potential of selling it vast quantities of natural gas, for the sake of helping Cyprus, is as unreal as the talk of the new strategy.

Our politicians need to leave the fantasy world they have been residing and in before they cause even more harm to the country. The only way of avoiding future instability and cashing in on what hydrocarbon deposits we may have is by returning to the talks and reaching an agreement with the Turks. The settlement might not be as just and fair as we would like, because in the world of reality and hard facts we are in a very weak position, which we do not have the power to change either now or in the foreseeable future.

Kufi Seydali

Comment by John Mavro

An excellent CM view which perfectly describes the absolutely tragic, depressing and catastrophic state of affairs we find ourselves in.

With one major exception: the writer is being extremely charitable, almost naive, to refer to the protagonists of these disasters as “politicians”. Since this term implies some degree of intelligence and thinking ability.
A better description for these corrupt idiots would that of a “curse”.
Successive curses, not imposed upon us by anyone, but brought upon by our immaturity, moral bankruptcy and ultimately infinite stupidity.
Since we never learn from our mistakes, from the 1950’s onward, and keep electing these stupid, anachronistic and narrow minded nationalistic peasants into power. Who then dutifully perpetuate the disasters of their predecessors as if this is our only way forward.
And perhaps there maybe a hidden agenda in their muddled, delusional and non-visionary thinking. Lunacy in reality.
Which is nothing more than to bring about a two state solution. To establish an ethnically cleansed, church approved “Hellenistic” nation which is totally isolated from our perceived perpetual enemies, the Turks- be it TCs or mainland Turks.
And given their inherent dishonesty, cowardice and aversion to taking responsibility for their actions, they wish to “achieve” this final destruction not thrugh their direct actions but by having it imposed upon them by the international community. Thus achieving their goal without “political cost” to themselves.
There cannot be any other explanation for their irrational, delusional and dishonest behavior.
And most tragic of all is that they are very close to achieving their goal. De jure partition.
Without any land adjustments, concessions from the other side or compensation. And to hell with the 200,000 or so refugees created by these same “politicians” and their cowardly actions.
Some simple advice to our alleged “president”. Acknowledge reality, accept we are in an extremely weak position and unconditionally return to these “negotiations”. And negotiate a loose federation in exchange for land adjustments. We may then gain something.
For if he does not, in 2018 little Nicholas, as the latest addition to this long list of curses will achieve his “vision”.
When the international community recognizes two states- without any land adjustments or gains for our side.
It is as obvious and clear as that to all thinking individuals with some common sense.
Which given his “performance” so far, clearly excludes the idiot that passes as our “president” who much prefers to travel the world and stay away as much as he can from this dysfunctional, cursed banana republic to avoid confronting the numerous problems facing us.
We do have the ” leaders” we deserve. Since we always put them into these positions where they have brought us untold destruction and even death.

Comment by Ozay Mehmet

Delighted to see this as Op-Ed article…summarizing comments and views of some of us in these pages, in exact words…Fantasy-world, myths….It shows that, at least the editors, are reading our comments.
The important point, of course, is your call for Mr. A to return to the negotiating table, unconditionally, soonest and make the best deal possible with the Turks…About the only thing I disagree in the article is your implication that it will be a “bad” or “humiliating” deal because of the weakness of GC side.
On the contrary I believe it will be honorable and fair deal because the Turks, especially Ankara, is driven by realism…not vengeance. Both sides, Turks and Greeks, have never before needed each other more….owing to regional and global conflicts…
Lets hope your wise words will be heeded…without delay.

The essence of a GC-TC deal, brokered thru Eide, must be Land-for-Peace….TCs to return 5%+ [ including Varosha/Maras] in return for 50-50 ownership of a brand new United Cuprus…or Agreed Loose Confederation, legitimizing the existing two-states, both within EU, with an agreed border adjustment.

January 25, 2015
CYPRUS: Greek Cypriot Leader Anastasiades meets Kerry in Davos

CYPRUS MAIL
24.01.2015

US State Secretary John Kerry with Anastasiades

The USA is trying to create the conditions necessary to restart reunification talks, which stalled after Turkey sent a research vessel inside Cyprus’ exclusive economic zone prompting President Nicos Anastasiades to abandon the negotiating table, the government said on Friday.

Anastasiades discussed the developments in the Cyprus problem with US State Secretary John Kerry on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum at Davos.

During the 45-minute meeting, the president briefed Kerry about his decision to pull out of talks while Turkey continued to threaten, and violate Cyprus’ sovereign rights.

According to an official statement, Kerry reiterated the US position concerning the Republic’s right to exploit the natural resources inside its EEZ.

“He also noted that the US is working to create the conditions necessary for the resumption of substantive talks on the Cyprus problem,” the government spokesman said.

Anastasiades lashed out at the UN and the USA last week, following the publication of UNSG Ban Ki-moon’s UNFICYP report, which the president described as an effort to force his return to the negotiating table while Turkey continued to violate Cyprus’ sovereign rights.

In an interview with private Mega television, Anastasiades said he had received promises from Ban, Kerry, and US Vice President Joe Biden, the Russian foreign minister and even Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan, that Turkey was ready to go ahead with talks at the start of October as agreed.

On top of that, the ambassador of a big power – he did not name – had told him that before the start of the talks, Turkey was going to lift the embargo on Cyprus-flagged vessels.

Instead, five days later Turkey dispatched Barbaros to carry out seismic surveys inside Cyprus’ EEZ, he said.
“It is the first time I say it, but patience has its limits.”

Anastasiades said he would not “bow, under any circumstances, and be dragged into talks under threat or blackmail”.

On Friday, Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said natural gas found around Cyprus would go through Turkey if there is peace on the island, state broadcaster CyBC reported.

The Turkish prime minister was speaking to businessmen at Davos. Davutoglu said Turkey aimed to become an energy hub and have pipelines from neighbouring countries go through its territory.

It also emerged that Anastasiades will be visiting Egypt on March 15, at the invitation of Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, who is also attending the Davos forum.

Kufi Seydali

Comment by Ozay Mehmet:

Mr. Anastasiades is a ‘dead-man-walking’ though he doesn’t realize it….His hydrocarbon “walkout” [ so loudly applauded by Super-Patriots] was an act of political suicide….The essence of Cyprus Problem is SOVEREINGTY SHARING….That is how the UN from the outset in 1963/4 saw it, that is how the problem has been managed ever since….Now, suddenly Mr. A is going around, using the hydrocarbon issue…trying to settle the Cyprus Problem outside the negotiating room.. arguing in futility that Sovereignty belong all to Greek Cypriots.That is why he can’t find anyone to agree or support him.
The moral: (1) You can fool some people all the time….you cannot fool all people all the time!
(2) Rise again…come back….go to the negotiating table unconditionally.

January 24, 2015
Cyprus and the myth of Humpty Dumpty

CYPRUS MAIL

01.01.2015

Dervish Eroglu & Nicos Anastasiades with UN in between

By Gavin Jones

WHEN we were children, many of us were brought up with and inspired by the magical tales of the Greek myths which were dominated by such characters as Hercules with his 12 labors, Jason searching for the Golden Fleece, Perseus battling the multi-headed Gorgon Medusa and a host of other wonderful adventures. In all probability, at an early age these stories gave us the impetus to take up reading as a worthwhile pursuit and helped us to fire our imagination and open our eyes to the many wonders and possibilities that surrounded us.

In the modern Hellenic world, the propensity for myth-making and exaggeration is very much alive and well and ever more so in its eastern outpost, Cyprus. Hardly a day goes by when some Minister or worthy announces that some fantastical project or discovery will soon come to pass and that the island’s current woes will be a distant memory: gas extraction; LNG terminal; pipelines to Egypt, Israel, Greece and all points of the compass; hubs for medical tourism, port facilities and other such ‘hubs’; tourist resorts complete with seaplane facilities; Chinese trade exhibition hall; Qatari hotel, apartment and shopping mall; the overall recovery of the economy and the upward trend of the banking sector. The list is endless.
We then come to the long running national issue, more commonly known as the Cyprus Problem. Of all the fables that have been bandied about over the decades, those concerning this issue must surely take pride of place as it’s been the most prolific in terms of wishful thinking and myth generation as we enter 2015.

In the wake of the general consensus between Makarios and Denktash over 35 years ago that the island should become a bizonal, bi-communal federation, what has been achieved since? Absolutely nothing. Apart, that is, from plenty of mud-slinging and yet more myth-making. Greek Cypriot politicians have implored the refugees to remain strong as a solution would soon be forthcoming. The Church reinforced this view. In addition, the retort ‘All refugees to their homes’ is another cruel fallacy along with the inference that those refugees resorting to the Immovable Property Commission in the north were as good as traitors to the ‘patriotic’ cause.

The reality is that successive Greek Cypriot governments and politicians have made it abundantly clear that they’ve never been serious about a settlement and have merely gone through the motions for both domestic and international consumption. As for occasional references by these same politicians that the Turkish Cypriots are their ‘brothers’, this is fanciful in the extreme and ranks as insincerity in its crudest form.

That other great folklore that’s often quoted is that Greek and Turkish Cypriots lived in perfect harmony with one another and that any discord was encouraged and fomented by perfidious Albion during the EOKA struggle years. Television programes such as Biz/Emeis foster this idea with octogenarian Cypriots recalling how each community used to visit one another’s houses and attended their respective religious festivals together.

All well and good but the reality was rather different. The village in the Karpas peninsula where my mother and grandmother were born was mixed and while there was no open hostility between the two communities, by and large they led very separate existences. To reinforce this reality, there was no intermarriage (There were exceptions but these were extremely rare occurrences).
The modus operandi of the Legislative Council confirms the above. This body was set up by the British colonial administration with the express aim of allowing a certain degree of involvement in the running of the island by the ‘natives’.

In the 1920s and early 1930s, there were 12 GC elected members, of whom my grandfather was one, and 3 TC members. Unsurprisingly, each community as often as not voted along partisan lines. Furthermore, my grandfather who was a passionate advocate of ENOSIS, Union with Greece, often clashed with his TC colleagues in the Council as they stated that Turkey had a much better claim on Cyprus. (These exchanges are there in black and white via the Cyrus Research Centre publication, ‘Texts and Studies of the History of Cyprus’. The nearest equivalent would be Hansard which publishes the daily goings-on in the British parliament).

In conclusion, the social and political differences between the two principal communities have existed since time immemorial and those who currently govern the island continue to ignore them and pursue the myth that Humpty Dumpty, barring one or two adjustments, can politically be put back together again and return to his former status and position on the wall. In the context of Cyprus, the reality is that there were always two such characters who fell off it. And even if their respective shells are indeed put back together again, ultimately they’re more likely to be sitting at opposite ends of the same wall rather than side by side – if not on two different walls.

Kufi Seydali

January 1, 2015
ERDOGAN: Oil deal in Iraq should be example for Cyprus

REUTERS Photo

The recent internal agreement between Baghdad and Erbil should set an example for sharing potential energy resources off Cyprus, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has said, vowing that Turkey will never abandon the rights of Turkish Cypriots in the Eastern Mediterranean.

“We played a leading role in the mechanism that made the deal between Baghdad and Erbil possible. In the end, we came to a point where everyone is satisfied. We hold the same understanding for Cyprus. I believe the success of our energy diplomacy in Iraq will be repeated in Cyprus as well,” Erdoğan said in an address late Dec. 10, on the occasion of the 60th anniversary of the founding of the Turkish Petroleum Corporation (TPAO).

A recent deal between the central and regional governments of Iraq removed legal obstacles in front of the Iraqi Kurdistan Regional Government’s (KRG) marketing of its oil via Turkey. It also cleared the way for intensified energy cooperation between Ankara and Baghdad.

However, the situation in the Eastern Mediterranean is more complicated than in Iraq, as Greek Cyprus is recognized as the sole sovereign state by the international community. When Greek Cyprus recently issued licenses to foreign companies to launch oil exploration off the island, Turkey sent its seismic vessel Barbaros to do its own drilling. It also deployed a warship to the region to monitor Greek Cypriot moves.

Erdoğan reiterated that Turkey will not remain above the fray on developments off Cyprus.

“We will continue our work in the region unless Greece and the Greek Cypriot Administration take our warnings seriously. As with all work that takes place in Cypriot exclusive economic zones, Turkish Cypriots have equal rights by law. I want to express that we will defend their rights until the end,” he said, stressing that Turkey’s position on the issue is to find a resolution based in international law.

Fresh drilling in Western Black Sea

Erdoğan also said Turkey plans to carry out its own oil explorations by domestic-made seismic vessels and oil platforms, and said the first vessel will be launched into the sea in one month.

“In January, we will launch new drilling operations in the Western Black Sea region. There may be a need for a local drilling platform; we are capable of building this platform in our shipyards. I want to herald this. If need be, we can build a $1 billion-worth platform using 100 percent national resources,” he said.

Speaking on the recent deal between Russia and Turkey on the construction of a new pipeline to carry Russian gas to Europe via Turkey through a gas terminal to be stationed on the Greek border, Erdoğan said building energy cooperation with Russia is a “win-win” situation. He also underlined that the project can be begin only after the finalization of the agreement.
December/11/2014

Küfi Seydali

December 11, 2014