Turks figured out that they invaded wrong geographic region of Cyprus

No hegemonic peace in Cyprus by Marios L. Evriviades

If NATO today trots out the principle of Ukraine’s territorial integrity and sovereignty to condemn Russia, how come it doesn't condemn Turkey when it comes to the territorial integrity and sovereignty that Cyprus is equally entitled to? Professor Marios L. Evriviades revisits the Turkish plan and analyzes where it went wrong.

Almost forty years to the date, the Turks finally figured out that they had invaded the wrong geographic region of Cyprus. Cyprus’s power wealth, its hydrocarbons, have been found to be located in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) off its southern shores and not in its northern ones, where the NATO-trained and US-supplied Turkish army attacked massively in 1974. Since then and for decades the Turks persistently and stubbornly insisted that whatever the Cyprus problem, it was permanently solved in 1974. These days they are not so sure. And they have turned peace advocates. Or so it seems.

The double irony is that if one were to believe Ankara’s 1974 propaganda, namely that they were not “invading” but that they were merely launching a “peacekeeping operation” to secure the safety of their coreligionists, who were allegedly under threat of instant massacre by their blood thirsty compatriots, then it was the southern part that they should have attacked in the first place! For it was in the southern districts of Limassol and Paphos that the vast majority of the allegedly threatened 100,000 or so Turkish Cypriots lived. They did not live in the Kyrenia district and the Karpass or Morphou regions, that were the targets of the 1974 attack by Turkey.

In fact the autochthonous Greek Cypriot population in the presently Turkish-army occupied part of Cyprus numbered close to 200,000 souls. This is a figure that is twice as large as the total number of Turkish Cypriots who, prior the 1974 invasion, were intermingled with the Greek Cypriots throughout the island but, significantly, constituting nowhere a regional majority (except in a very few villages) . And in July 1974, when the Athens junta- organised coup occurred against the legitimate government of the Republic, they were hardly under any threat, lest one of massacre (“genocide” is Ankara’s favorite term).

read more »

The First Forcible Change in European Borders Since World War II... Uh...NYET!

Forgotten Cyprus

Take a look at the warped media, here, from the Financial Times describing the Crimean referendum as a "divorce at gunpoint".  Okay.  So it's not a "peaceful and consensual" referendum akin to the one that will happen in Scotland, it says.  Alright.  "Instead, it is a figleaf for a forced territorial annexation – the first on the European landmass since the end of the Second World War."  That media talking point quote is a little different from what was previously their go-to line which was this quote: "the first forcible change in European borders since World War Two".  

The media is spreading misinformation.  They are talking as if there was no Turkish invasion of Cyprus, no occupation, no alteration of the island's identity by importing Turkish settlers, and no ethnic-cleansing. Nooo, it was all a bad dream.  I feel like I'm in the Twilight Zone... Do di do doo, do di do doo ♪ 

Speaking of going to war on trumped up pre-text...Here's Johnny! Just a few days ago, Turkish officials planned false-flag attacks to create pretext for war with its middle eastern neighbor.  I'm shocked!  Really... Honestly.  I truly am!

Angelina... hello (tap, tap) is this thing on?! Testing, one two...Hey, Angelina Jolie, come to Cyprus and urge action against the use of sexual violence as a war weapon!  How was this acceptable behavior?!

It seems now the West is looking to wean itself from Russian natural gas and one possible place they are looking is Cyprus and the natural resources located off its southern shores.  Europe is speaking with one voice right now regarding the unity of Ukraine.  What are the chances we see that same unity once the "urgent" upcoming Cyprus settlement talks begin?  Let us see what kind of demands they expect from the victim THIS time around.

Somebody wake me up... What a nightmare!

German MEP rails at his country's 'hypocrisy' over economic crisis

(theguardian) - German MEP rails at his country's 'hypocrisy' over economic crisis

"Look at the money-laundering that is taking place in Germany," he said. "It is well proved that up to €60bn is laundered in Germany every year. How can a country like Germany then accuse a small country like Cyprus of being nothing else than a criminal money-washing system and at the same time execute a whole economy within a fortnight just to send a message to German voters [in September's general election]?" he asked. "It is unbelievable!" » Read full article here.

All Eyes on Cyprus

Guten Morgen, my fellow bloggers.  I am alive and well and practicing my German… Has anyone heard any news about Cyprus these past few weeks? ;)

We, here, in the money laundering island are doing well, thank you for asking… Reading some of the articles in the warped media make it sound like the Russian Mafiosos have swarmed Cyprus.

I can understand how people may think this is a true representation because some of our EU partners have claimed that Russian funds were deposited and invested in Cyprus via illicit means, but it appears those very same governments are now enthusiastically spreading their arms wide open and encouraging relocation of these so called “illicit” funds into their own economies…  Shock… Shock, I say!

On a bright side of things – if you can call it that – people around the globe now know where Cyprus is on a map… am I right?!  Individuals from jewelers who follow the spot price of gold,  to educators to investors to politicians, have all been focusing in the events taking place on this island these past few weeks…

There was a “running joke” that if Turkey were to make a dash for more land or gas deposits located in the south of the island, people around the globe wouldn't even know where Cyprus is located, let alone hear it on the news, but all of that has changed now…

Cyprus had banking issues; the market reacted.  Cyprus planning to sell its gold reserve; gold prices drop.  It clearly goes to show that Cyprus is part of the global economy, and going forward, Ankara should be fully aware of that.

Instead of threatening, it should be extending a hand of reconciliation… instead of sending and reinforcing troops to the northern part of the island, it should comply with international laws and obligations.  While we now have the global media’s attention on this island now looking for the mob bosses digging holes to secure their illegal money, maybe some in the warped media can now actually report some real news like the next time a Turkish war plane flies over the Republic of Cyprus.  Hey, it could happen…

It goes without saying, these past few weeks have been trying times for Cyprus, however with the media conversing on this island seeking blood, instead saw people waited in line at banks in a civilized manner and there were no towns burned down… For shame!  I guess the media came down here for a holiday which is a good thing because we need the money…  And yes, our world renowned hospitality still exists.

In short, Cypriots survived and hold their heads high after the Turkish invasion… and we can do it again.

Abschied!  That is, “goodbye” in German, my fellow bloggers… I know… it sounds a lot like Ape shit.  Ha!

Barking up the wrong trees

Reuters Pictures

(Cyprus Weekly) - It’s all well and good for President Christofias and Turkish Cypriot leader Mehmet Ali Talat to plant olive trees in a symbolic, albeit tacky, ceremony at the UN headquarters yesterday.

The picture of the two leaders - and that of the UN envoy watering the two saplings to demonstrate that the world body wants to help the peace process along - will doubtless strike a chord as the international community looks for closure of the long-running dispute in Cyprus.

But no amount of tree planting will bring results on the ground. And it will take more than goodwill and cordial ties between the leaders of the two communities to reach a settlement that will be lasting, if it is both just and viable.

The Greek Cypriot side and this newspaper may sound like a stuck record. But, in the final analysis, it is Ankara that holds the key to peace. And it is Ankara that must be made to understand that it does not befit a country seeking a place in the European Union to occupy another country, a member of the very club it wants to join.

And this is where the European Commission has let us down. This is the body that proclaims its role to be the interests of the EU as a whole rather than the interests of individual member states.

Yet, when it came to assessing Turkey’s accession progress it opted to placate, rather than to tell an aspiring EU member that the least it could do is comply with what has been asked of it – such as recognising the Republic of Cyprus and opening its ports and airports to Cyprus traffic.

If the EU can look the other way when a country so blatantly ignores its rules, then why does it make such a big deal of its accession criteria?

No-one is naive enough to expect an all-out attack against Turkey. Many would argue that this would only be counter-productive, serving to alienate a country the EU and the US firmly believe best suits their interests to be inside the bloc, rather than harbouring grievances outside it.

But this policy will collapse unless Turkey is made to understand that it must earn its place in the EU. And this means adopting its principles – even to a country its does not recognise.

A World of Paradoxes

(Source: Cyprus Weekly) - In his address to the United Nations General Assembly last night President Christofias highlighted three paradoxes, all of them linked directly to the Turkish occupation of Cyprus:

1: That Turkey, though a member of the Security Council, does not recognize the Republic of Cyprus, a member state of the United Nations

2: That Turkey, though a member of the Security Council, maintains occupation troops on the territory of another member state of the UN and of the European Union.

3: That Turkey, though a member of the Security Council, undermines the unity and territorial integrity of Cyprus by promoting the creation of a second state in violation of Security Council Resolution 541, which branded the unilateral declaration of the breakaway Turkish Cypriot state null and void.

There is a fourth - very blatant - paradox that reflects directly on an international community prepared to look the other way as laws are flouted and human rights ignored.

The United Nations is supposed to represent the conscience of the world, while the Security Council is supposed to act in the name of international legality.

Turkey’s very presence on the Security Council is a reflection of how far the United Nations still has to go if its promises to build a just world are to be believed.

Granted, Turkey is not the only country that does not deserve a place on an international body purportedly brought together by a shared commitment to peace and justice.

Nor would treating it as a pariah state necessarily bring the desired results.

But surely the time has come the UN to take a long hard look at its members and – just like any club – remind its members that there are rules to the game that must be adhered to.

UN Security Council member Turkey would be a good place to start.

Below is the President's speech to the UN in its entirety:

Mr. President,

I wish to extend to you sincere congratulations on your election as President of the 64th session of the General Assembly of the United Nations and to also express appreciation for the excellent work done by your predecessor, Mr. Miguel d’ Escoto Brockmann.

I would also like to thank the Secretary-General for his comprehensive report on the work of the Organisation and to congratulate him for his initiative to convene the High-level Summit on Climate Change.

Since its independence, the Republic of Cyprus has been committed to multilateral diplomacy and the strengthening of the role of the United Nations.

World stability and welfare have been threatened by the recent global economic crisis. The crisis showed the weaknesses of our collective oversight systems. It is only through collective international action and not through economic nationalism that we can overcome such challenges. The same is true of action against disease and poverty, as well as the prevention of further damage to the environment, which affects the lives of us all.

The most important lesson to be learnt from the financial crisis is that the economy cannot be seen in isolation from the needs of society.

Despite the remarkable development of production forces, that could have secured decent living conditions for all, in many parts of the world people are still deprived of basic goods such as drinking water and health care, as well as access to education and work.

The magnitude of the financial crisis shows that it is a crisis of the system and of its most extreme manifestation- neo-liberalism and market lawlessness. In its present form, globalization is not the realization of the vision of philosophers and social revolutionaries for global brotherhood and prosperity for all. This is because globalization is driven by the pursuit of excessive profits. As a result, the rich are becoming richer and the poor poorer.

Mr. President,

More than half way to the 2015 deadline for the attainment of the Millennium Development Goals, the financial crisis is forcing states and institutions to re-assess global priorities. The UN is the most important international body able to tackle the effects of the global financial crisis, and to act collectively and effectively, to prevent their most dire consequences.

The world today is facing multiple challenges and threats: climate change, depletion of resources, human rights abuses, failure to protect vulnerable populations, increased regional and interstate conflict, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, pandemics.

From this podium we have heard the desperate voice of those who live on small island states, the despairing appeal of youth and the dramatic warnings of scientists about climate change. If we do not take measures now, we face the risk of extinction. We join our voice and lend our support to the proposals for taking concrete action. We must take measures now. Tomorrow will be too late. The December Meeting in Copenhagen must become a historic turning point towards addressing effectively catastrophic climate changes.

Mr. President,

Since its independence, the Republic of Cyprus has relied heavily on the principles of the United Nations in maintaining its independence, its sovereignty and its territorial integrity.

After the twin crime of a military coup and foreign invasion of Cyprus in 1974, when military force attempted to obliterate our statehood and violated the integrity of our state, the United Nations responded with a number of important resolutions, expressing the international community’s moral and legal support to the Republic of Cyprus.

The plethora of Security Council and General Assembly Resolutions on Cyprus provided my country with the necessary support to continue its struggle for a solution to its political problem, on the basis of those resolutions, the principles of the UN Charter and of international law.

Shortly after my election in office, I undertook the initiative to bring the stalemate to an end. As a result of that, we embarked a year ago, on the basis of the UN Security Council resolutions, and under the auspices of the Good Offices Mission of the Secretary–General, on intensive negotiations with the leader of the Turkish Cypriot community, Mr. Mehmet Ali Talat. Trusting the sincerity of Mr. Talat’s intentions, we have engaged in a common effort to bring an end to the division of our country.

We agreed that the process would be in the hands of the Cypriots without arbitration and artificial timetables.

Some progress has been achieved in the negotiations. But not such as to make us confident that we are close to a final solution to the Cyprus problem.

Our goal is the restoration of the sovereignty, territorial integrity, independence and unity of the Republic of Cyprus, the common homeland of Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots. It is also our goal to restore the human rights and basic freedoms of all citizens of the Republic of Cyprus regardless of their ethnic background.

We are committed to the evolution of the unitary state into a federal state consisting of two largely autonomous regions. One region will be administered by the Greek-Cypriot community and the other by the Turkish-Cypriot community. Given the fact that in Cyprus the population lived intermingled throughout the island, this constituted for us a great historical concession made by the late President Makarios to our Turkish Cypriot compatriots.

We remain true to this commitment. The United Federal Republic of Cyprus must safeguard the unity of the state and its institutions, as well as of the economy and the people.

Unfortunately, despite our common efforts, the Turkish Cypriot side, supported by Turkey, continues to present positions and proposals which lead us outside the framework of the United Nations Resolutions on Cyprus with regard to the termination of military occupation, the illegal possession of properties and the presence of settlers. Possible acceptance of these positions would lead to an acceptance of many of the consequences of the occupation and to violations of international Conventions on human rights, basic freedoms and the principles on which federations are built. It is clear that such a solution would be neither viable, nor functional, and would not ensure the continuing unity of the state and the country.

We sincerely hope that during the second round of negotiations, which has just started, there will be a reconsideration of Turkish positions, so that we can, as soon as possible, reach an agreed solution which we can then present to the people in separate simultaneous referenda.

This solution must be by the Cypriots, for the Cypriots. It is evident that we will not present the people with a solution originating from outside and neither can we accept arbitration and exercise of pressure through artificial timetables. These preconditions were agreed with the Secretary-General under whose auspices the negotiations are taking place. I would like to take this opportunity to thank once again the Secretary-General Mr. Ban Ki-moon for his Good Offices Mission and for the role of the United Nations as a facilitator in the negotiating process.

After the 1974 invasion and the occupation of 37% of the territory of the Republic of Cyprus, Turkey has become a key player for the solution of the Cyprus problem. The success of our efforts for a solution of the problem depends on Turkey’s political will and the policies it implements. It is not enough for the Turkish leadership to publicly state that it supports the negotiating process.

Turkey should contribute in a practical way to a solution of a bizonal, bicommunal federation with political equality as defined in the relevant Security Council resolutions. Instead Turkey pursues a confederal solution.

A good will measure on the part of Turkey would have been the implementation of SC Resolution 550 of 1984 which stipulates the transfer of the occupied ghost-town of Varoshia to the administration of the United Nations and the return of its legal inhabitants to their homes and properties. In addition, Turkey should proceed with the normalization of its relations with the Republic of Cyprus, as well as with its recognition as stipulated by the decisions of the European Union.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I ask you: Is it not a paradox for a country that is a member of the Security Council not to recognize the Republic of Cyprus, a member state of the United Nations, the European Union and of all international organizations?

Is it not a paradox for a member of the Security Council to maintain occupation troops for 35 years on the territory of another UN member state, and a member state of the European Union?

Is it not a paradox to undermine the unity and the territorial integrity of the Republic of Cyprus by promoting the creation of a second state on the island in violation of Security Council Resolution 541 of 1983 which unanimously condemns the illegal UDI, calling it null and void, and calls on all states to respect the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of the Republic of Cyprus?

Yes, it is a paradox and it is also illegal. In fact it is an anomaly! Cyprus has never sought nor wishes to have hostile relations with its neighbour, Turkey. But it is our responsibility to defend the independence, territorial integrity and sovereignty of our state.

Nevertheless, I would like from this august body to express my readiness to initiate dialogue with the Turkish leadership, in parallel to our negotiations with the Turkish Cypriot leader, to share ideas about the future, which would greatly enhance the chances of a positive outcome to the negotiations.

Cyprus has consistently supported the accession of Turkey to the European Union, in the belief that the whole adaptation process and Turkey’s eventual membership would benefit our neighbours, our region and us. However, this support is not unconditional. Turkey should fulfil its obligations towards the Republic of Cyprus as well as towards the European Union.

Mr. President,

I would like to state one more time that our Turkish Cypriot compatriots are equal citizens of the Republic of Cyprus, and that I personally will strive consistently for their rights and for finding their rightful place in all organs of the state.

My political roots are in the Progressive Peoples’ Movement of my country which always stood by the side of our Turkish Cypriot compatriots for peace and harmonious co-existence. Nevertheless, the rights of our Turkish Cypriot compatriots cannot be implemented at the expense of the rights of the bigger community, which is the Greek-Cypriot community. There must be mutual respect. I want to assure you that I will spare no effort in order to achieve a balanced and just solution which would restore the rights of the people as a whole.

We have all paid a heavy price - human, political and economic - and continue to pay a heavy price. The profits of lasting peace will be beneficial for the people of Cyprus, of Turkey and for the peoples of our region as a whole.

Real political leaders are not the ones who think of the next election but of the next generation. We have the responsibility to work together to achieve a lasting peace in our region.

I wish to the family of Nations a successful conclusion of the deliberations of the 64th Session of the General Assembly of the United Nations.

I thank you.

Lobbying Arm for the Turkish Government

I have received this email from the Cyprus Action Network of America and will post it verbatim:


cana@cyprusactionnetwork.org
reply-to cana@cyprusactionnetwork.org

date Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 1:55 AM
subject WASHINGTON POST COVERS TURKISH EMBASSY CORRUPTION AND MANIPULATION


WASHINGTON POST COVERS TURKISH EMBASSY CORRUPTION AND MANIPULATION
For Immediate Release: July 7, 2008

Contact: Nikolaos Taneris, New York, Tel. 1-917-699-9935


NEW YORK—The Washington Post reported in its Saturday edition on the ongoing corruption and manipulation of American scholarship by the Turkish government, Susan Kinzie’s article “Board Members Resign to Protest Chair’s Ousting Leader in Georgetown-Based Agency Encouraged Scholars to Research Mass Killing of Armenians” details the most recent scandal surrounding the ITS (Institute of Turkish Studies) founded with a $3 million dollar grant paid directly by the Turkish government.

Beginning in the 1980s, in response to the Congressional arms embargo of the 1970s following Turkey’s criminal military invasion of Cyprus, the Turkish Embassy in Washington DC, under the leadership of then Turkish Ambassador Sukru Elekdag, initiated a far flung campaign in America to whitewash Turkish criminal history. The practically non-existent ,apathetic community of Turks in America, was reorganized with the help of millions of dollars of funding-- buying high priced advisors to set up such Cyprus Invasion denying entities as the Washington DC-Based “American Friends of Turkey” the ATC (American Turkish Council) recently reorganized under the new name “Turkish Coalition of America” ,the ATAA (Assembly of Turkish American Associations) and the New York-New Jersey-Based FTAA (Federation of Turkish American Associations) whose job was to organize a “Turkish-American” parade to counter the decades long parade by Greek-Americans on New York’s Fifth Avenue.

The Parade like the funding of Turkish ‘academic’ institutes was set up for the dual purposes of Genocide denial and Cyprus Invasion denial. According to the Turkish Daily News ( May 21, 2007) “In the 1980s the parade was a platform where Turkish Americans tried to draw the attention of American public to some of Turkey's international conflicts such as those with Armenia and Greek Cyprus…The first official Turkish Day Parade in the city was held on April 23 1980. Those who attended that parade remember vividly that there were only two flags in the 150 people cortege. The FTAA could not get a permit for the parade in 1981 either. In 1982 however, with support from Ankara FTAA was able to get the permit to organize first official Turkish Day Parade. It was decided that the parade would take place on the weekend that is closest to May 19th,” (NOTE: May 19th is the day in 1919 that Turk leader Mustafa Kemal landed in Pontus to perpetrate the Pontian Genocide, In Turkey this is celebrated as “Turkish liberation day”)

Greek-American scholar Speros Vryonis wrote the first detailed academic study of Turkish government manipulation of American scholarship in his monumental work “The Turkish State and History: Clio Meets the Grey Wolf.” Vryonis documents the ITS (Institute of Turkish Studies) attempt to manipulate American scholarship, and in turn US public opinion, with the granting of monies to Genocide deniers, activities that question the objectivity of this group and its role in essentially lobbying on behalf of the Turkish Embassy.

Turkey has also bankrolled the establishment of endowed Chairs of Turkish Studies at various American universities, at least one such Chair, the endowed Chair of Turkish Studies at Portland State University , paid for directly by funding from the Turkish Embassy, is involved in actively producing Cyprus Invasion denial literature, and is home to the “Cyprus Peace Initiative”. The “Cyprus Peace Initiative” actively lobbied for the discredited, so-called Annan Plan, which made provisions that call for Turkish military to remain and intervene over all of Cyprus.

The Washington Post article follows on the heels of a long list of credible news outlets that have reported on Turkey’s false historical revisionism and the Turkish Embassy’s morally bankrupt attempts to present a distorted image of Turkey’s true face to the American public.


(Article is reproduced for Fair Use and Educational Purposes)


Board Members Resign to Protest Chair's Ousting
Leader in Georgetown-Based Agency Encouraged Scholars to Research Mass Killing of Armenians

By Susan Kinzie
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, July 5, 2008; B05



The issue that has roiled U.S.-Turkish relations in recent months -- how to characterize the mass killing of Armenians in 1915 -- has set off a dispute over politics and academic freedom at an institute housed at Georgetown University.

Several board members of the Institute of Turkish Studies have resigned this summer, protesting the ouster of a board chairman who wrote that scholars should research, rather than avoid, what he characterized as an Armenian genocide.

Within weeks of writing about the matter in late 2006, Binghamton University professor Donald Quataert resigned from the board of governors, saying the Turkish ambassador to the United States told him he had angered some political leaders in Ankara and that they had threatened to revoke the institute's funding.

After a prominent association of Middle Eastern scholars learned about it, they wrote a letter in May to the institute, the Turkish prime minister and other leaders asking that Quataert be reinstated and money for the institute be put in an irrevocable trust to avoid political influence.

The ambassador of the Republic of Turkey, H.E. Nabi Sensoy, denied that he had any role in Quataert's resignation. In a written statement, he said that claims that he urged Quataert to leave are unfounded and misleading.

The dispute shows the tensions between money and scholarship, and the impact language can have on historical understanding.

Hundreds of thousands of Armenians were killed when the Ottoman Empire collapsed after World War I. Armenians and Turks bitterly disagree over whether it was a campaign of genocide, or a civil war in which many Turks were also killed.

In the fall, when Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) championed a bill that would characterize the events of 1915 to 1917 as genocide, the Bush administration fought it and several former defense secretaries warned that Turkish leaders would limit U.S. access to a military base needed for the war in Iraq.

The Turkish studies institute, founded in 1983, is independent from Georgetown University, but Executive Director David Cuthell teaches a course there in exchange for space on campus.

Julie Green Bataille, a university spokeswoman, wrote in an e-mail, "we will review this matter consistent with the importance of academic freedom and the fact that the institute is independently funded and governed."

The institute's funding, a $3 million grant, is entirely from Turkey.

A few years ago, Quataert said, members of the board checked on what they thought was an irrevocable blind trust "and to our surprise it turned out to be a gift that could be revoked by the Turkish government."

Quataert, a professor of history, said the institute has funded good scholarship without political influence. The selection of which studies to support is done by a committee of academics on the associate board, he said, and approved by the board, which includes business and political leaders. Never once, he said, did he think a grant application was judged on anything other than its academic merits.

He also noted that during his time there, no one applied for grants that would have been controversial in Turkey. Asked if any of the research characterized the events as genocide, Cuthell said, "My gut is no. It's that third rail."

Roger Smith, professor emeritus of government at the College of William and Mary, questioned whether the nonprofit institute deserves its tax-exempt status if there is political influence -- and whether it is an undeclared lobbying arm for the Turkish government.

Cuthell said none of the institute's critics ever bothered to check the truth of Quataert's account with the institute: It does not lobby, Cuthell said, and "the allegations of academic freedom simply don't hold up."

The controversy began quietly in late 2006 with a review of historian Donald Bloxham's book, "The Great Game of Genocide." Quataert wrote that the slaughter of Armenians has been the elephant in the room of Ottoman studies. Despite his belief that the term "genocide" had become a distraction, he said the events met the United Nations definition of the word.

He sent a letter of resignation to members of the institute in December 2006, and one board member resigned.

But in the fall, around the same time that Congress was debating the Armenian question, Quataert was asked to speak at a conference about what had happened at the institute. He told members of the Middle Eastern Studies Association that the ambassador told him he must issue a retraction of his book review or step down -- or put funding for the institute in jeopardy.

His colleagues were shocked, said Laurie Brand, director of the school of international relations at the University of Southern California.

Ambassador Sensoy, who is honorary chairman of the institute's board, said in a statement this week, "Neither the Turkish Government nor I have ever placed any pressure upon the ITS, for such interference would have violated the principle of the academic freedom, which we uphold the most. The Turkish Government and I will be the first to defend ITS from any such pressure."

Since the May 27 letter from the scholars association was sent, several associate and full members of the board have left. Marcie Patton, Resat Kasaba and Kemal Silay resigned; Fatma Muge Gocek said she would resign, and Birol Yesilada said his primary reason for stepping down at this time is his health, but that he is concerned about the conflicting accounts of what had happened. "It's a very difficult line that scholars walk," Patton said, "especially post-9/11, especially because of the Iraq war."


========================
Cyprus Action Network of America (CANA)
2578 Broadway #132
New York, NY 10025
New York: Tel. 917-699-9935
Email: cana@cyprusactionnetwork.org
www.cyprusactionnetwork.org
========================


The Cyprus Action Network of America (CANA) is a grass-roots, not-for-profit movement created to support genuine self-determination and human rights for the people of Cyprus.

The reason why there is no solution to the Cyprus problem

I’ll tell you what the real reason is ... but, before I get into that ... let me first take the time to welcome back one of my warped media friends, you know who you are. Yea, I know I’ve taken a bit of a hiatus but I’m back much to your dismay! Well, maybe for a short period of time. A little tip from me to you...

Keep checking back at this site, you just may learn a thing or two.

Where was I, ohh yes, the reason why there is no solution to the Cyprus problem. Here 'tis:

There is no solution due to the fact that Turkey refuses to comply with UN resolutions, but also due to the international community's unwillingness or inability to impose them. I know what some of you are thinking--but Konstelion, Turkey is a NATO member and a strong reliable US ally. Nevertheless my friends, Turkey must be made to comply with international laws and obligations. That is the only way to resolve the Cyprus issue.

Negotiating with intransigents.

Check this video out and see the word games being played by Mr. Talat who in the video is being interviewed by a reporter. Cyprus, for example, has no refugees. That’s right, Mr. Talat stated that “They're not anymore refugees...” The warped media out there reading this should take note ... the politically correct term now is “displaced.”

Apparently, a lot of things are “not fair” in the breakaway North.

Why can’t our breakaway State have direct trade with the EU, it is not fair! Giving back a ghost town? Why that’s not fair! Let’s see, refugees forced to evacuate, their legal rights continue to be disregarded and Talat says “of course it is not fair to ask for Varosha (back).” Can you believe this hypocrisy? Even the reporter is taken aback by the interview, lowering his glasses to look at Mr. Talat as if to say ... are you for real?

Ever read stories coming out of the occupied North like--Why cant little Tunc Ozgurgun’s Turkish Cypriot football team play internationally? It is not fair! Silly articles written by silly folks. I’ll tell you what’s not fair ... using Varosha as a bargaining chip by Turkey and the Northern breakaway State as part of an overall settlement to the Cyprus problem. We are talking about thousands of lives who would like to return home!

When asked about sending the Turkish occupation troops back to Turkey; Mr. Talat is quick with his pre-rehearsed response. Why, it’s a matter of security. Security, yes, even at this very moment the Greek Cypriots have triangulated our location. You see, we fear their military. Are these logical responses by Mr. Talat? No? Well that’s why the Cyprus issue is not resolved today.

An enemy of Cyprus

Tuesday night’s televised press conference by President Papadopoulos has been met with angry reaction from the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Turkish Cypriot leadership—ok, so what else is new?

Turkey strongly criticized Mr. Papadopoulos who said in a televised press conference that the Turkish occupation army “was an enemy of Cyprus.”

More on that statement a bit later ... let's focus on the part of the press conference that I found interesting, shall we? The President stated that during his meeting last week with Mr. Talat ... the Turkish Cypriot leader actually revealed that a majority of Turkish Cypriots do not support a federal Cyprus, no kidding. Instead, they favor a two-state solution. Another statement that was made by the President which really surprised me was that Mr. Talat didn't even know that Cyprus is actually an EU net contributor. Mr. Papadopoulos stated that...

"He (Mr. Talat) did not know that Cyprus is among the few countries which is a net contributor, that is we give the EU more funds than we take."

Interesting indeed. Now, let’s get back to that statement by Mr. Papadopoulos where he referred to the Turkish army occupying Cyprus as an “enemy” and the subsequent predictable response from Ankara.

This is what the Turkish Foreign Ministry had to say:

“It must be remembered that the declaration of the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) as an enemy serves peace by no means. It is unacceptable that the TSK is turned into a target. Papadopoulos is supposed to understand that.”

The Turkish Foreign Ministry spokesman, Mr. Levent Bilman, went on to say that...

“It appears Papadopoulos forgot the fact that Turkey is a guarantor country on the island together with Greece and Britain and that the presence of the Turkish armed forces on the island legally stems from international agreements.”

Mr. Talat, who is a strong supporter of the TSK, parroted the Turkish Foreign Ministry by stating the main obstacle to a peaceful solution was the Greek Cypriot tendency to treat the Turkish troops stationed on the island as an occupation army. Honestly, an argument this weak and absurd doesn’t even deserve a response.

In a statement before his departure to New York to address the UN General Assembly, the President of the Cypriot Republic responded to the rhetoric coming out of Ankara by stating:

“Our view is well known, the presence of the Turkish occupation forces and the Turkish invasion, cannot be legally based on the Treaty of Guarantee, and their presence in Cyprus, is, in any case, illegal. We said that if Turkey believes otherwise, then it can appeal or agree to appeal to the International Court of Justice in The Hague.”

More on all this in the video below.

Take a look at this video which starts off with the Government Spokesman Vassilis Palmas reaction. The video also focuses in on the political leader of EDEK Mr. Yiannakis Omirou. Omirou’s response is priceless (ha).

Mr. Talat, the Annan Plan is Dead...

And there is no chance of resurrecting it.

Further more, all five United Nations Security Council permanent members have endorsed the July 8th agreement as the only process now on the table for a Cyprus settlement.

Why are you trying to dilute this agreement?

You state there is nothing in the July 8 agreement prohibiting time frames. Why all this sudden talk on time frames? For the past 14 months, you have done nothing but drag your feet with regard to the implementation of the agreement that was reached between you and Mr. Papadopoulos on the 8th of July during the Mission of Under-Secretary-General Ibrahim Gambari.

The president of the Republic has extended his hand and offered to meet again with you soon to proceed forward with the peace process. Why have you turned down this invitation?

(Cypriot media coverage below on the failed meeting)




From the Cyprus Weekly:

No breakthrough

Not clear when leaders will meet again

By Menelaos Hadjicostis

HOPES that the Papadopoulos-Talat talks would deliver a needed breakthrough putting the July 8 agreement on track faded as fast as it took to read a terse, three-sentence wrap-up statement pronouncing the process comatose.

It’s unclear when the two will meet again and indications are that the Turkish side wants to dilute the agreement and render it inert so that it can be supplanted by direct talks on a resurrected Annan Plan, Nicosia charged.

"Mr Talat wanted changes to the Gambari process. He wants immediate talks without the committees, or for the role of the committees to be limited to a purely technical level of listing the headings to be discussed," President Tassos Papadopoulos told reporters after the three-hour meeting.

The rationale behind the Nicosia-inspired, twin-track procedure (a.k.a. Gambari process) that both sides signed off on last year is to task committees with discussing day-to-day and core Cyprus issues so as to adequately prepare the ground for full-fledged negotiations.

Grapple

The two community leaders would get together periodically to grapple with major sticking points officials would point out.

But the Turkish Cypriot leader sought to "re-arrange" the agreement by setting a two-month deadline on committee talks thus "accelerating" what he said was an open-ended process that "would last 14 months, 14 years, or 140 years.

"We observed that there was no psychological preparedness for the opening of comprehensive negotiations," said Mehmet Ali Talat, who also wanted a reunification deal by the end of 2008.

"Our proposal was aimed at accelerating the July 8 process, disciplining it and turning it into a process that can yield results. How is this moving away from the July 8 process?"

Nicosia’s unequivocal reply was that comprehensive negotiations without due preparation free from time constraints are doomed to failure.

Such a failure could raise the spectre of permanent partition as the international community’s post-referendum disenchantment could coalesce into the belief that there can be no Cyprus settlement.

Papadopoulos said diminishing the role of the committees would "not have accelerated the process, but on the contrary, would have expedited the realisation that there is deadlock".

Strident

Papadopoulos rejected both the notion of open-ended talks dragging on indefinitely as well as setting time constraints to negotiations.

He said slapping a deadline on the process cannot guarantee there would be adequate preparation for substantial talks to take place on the leadership level.

"We’re not talking about discussions that would carry on indefinitely or over the long term, simply the course of discussions themselves would dictate the timetable," said Papadopoulos.

Government Spokesman Vassilis Palmas said Talat was so strident in his positions that he turned down a Papadopoulos invitation to meet again on Monday for another try at a deal.

Papadopoulos proposed an October date for another face-to-face sit-down but Talat was non-committal.

"We’ll make yet another effort to implement this process…the President of the Republic tried to convince Mr Talat to implement the agreement and Mr Talat tried every way to free himself from it," said Palmas.

Palmas said the Talat’s pitch for regular meetings with Papadopoulos intended to railroad the process back to directly negotiating the defunct Annan Plan, irrespective of whether the committees had marked progress.

"President Papadopoulos rejected carrying out negotiations based on the Annan plan as Mr Talat insinuated…the agreed-upon procedure is the July 8 process which foresees the basis for a settlement arising from the implementation of the agreement," said Palmas.

All five UN Security Council permanent members have endorsed July 8 as the only process now in play that could lead to full-fledged settlement negotiations.

Nicosia’s sees July 8 as a vehicle to shift the basis of a Cyprus settlement away from the Annan Plan that Greek Cypriots voted down for fear that it would put the entire island under Turkey’s thumb.

Unready

Analysts suggested this failure could mean Ankara is either unready or unwilling to get the ball rolling on Cyprus on the belief that continued stalemate won’t hurt its EU accession prospects.

The only glimmer of hope for resuscitating July 8 lies in the fact that both leaders agreed to keep the process going by meeting again.

"Mr Papadopoulos and Mr Talat held their discussion in a constructive atmosphere," said a sombre Moller, reading from a prepared statement.

"They agreed on the need for the earliest start of the process, and discussed other issues, leading to a comprehensive settlement. They agreed to continue their contact through the United Nations and to meet again when appropriate."

Despite a shared understanding of the need for "the earliest start," the obvious problem with that statement is when the two leaders would meet again. The vague "when appropriate" leaves the process hanging in the air for at least until late autumn.

Friendly Divorce

Take a look at this snippet from TDN:

President Klaus was also responsible for the friendly divorce of the Czechs and the Slovaks, which had been an artificial union for decades, in a peaceful manner. His easy answer to why there was no referendum on the partition was because the 5 million Slovaks would have voted for separation and the 10 million Czechs would have voted against it. This brings to Turkish minds the question of why there cannot be a peaceful divorce in Cyprus between the Greek and Turkish Cypriots following the Czech example.

Mr. Söylemez proposes an interesting question. I, for one, will lobby the government of RoC for a friendly divorce between the South and the ethnically cleansed land in the North. After all, the Czechs and the Slovaks had a friendly divorce, why can’t we do the same in Cyprus? Better yet, maybe Turkey can show the way by ceding its South-East to the Kurds. What do imaginative “Turkish minds” think about that option, Mr. Söylemez? Come on, lets all follow the Czech example!

Media Two Facedness

The European Union has agreed to unblock aid worth 139 million euros to the Turkish Cypriots, ending a two year dispute. This agreement could have been reached last year during Britain’s EU presidency but certain EU members insisted on linking the financial assistance with direct trade. The RoC government disagreed with this claiming that direct trade constitutes de facto recognition.

Lets recall how the press reacted back then when there was no agreement ... The money has been stuck in Brussels' coffers ever since, because the (Greek Cypriot) Republic of Cyprus, an EU member state since May 2004, has blocked the release of the funds. A statement like this or something similar was common when one read about this particular issue. Then of course followed by how the Greek Cypriots voted NO (oxi) to the Annan plan. Strong commentaries followed ... The audacity of the Greek Cypriots who make up only 700,000 people, do they not realize the Turkish Cypriots need these funds, how ohh how can they be punished when they voted YES to the Annan plan. SHAME! Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me!

Most of these articles that discuss the Cyprus issue will say, but Ankara says this and Ankara says that but never state what Nicosia’s view is on a given matter.

We don’t need to know what Ankara says, we only need to know the facts. Around the time when a few EU member States were pushing for linkage between financial assistance with direct trade, the news wires picked up a story on “balls to embargoes (their website),” a story about Turkish Cypriot Football players stripping off clothing in protest of the embargo. The organizer was quoted in the press as saying that the campaign is about human rights and not politics. Yes, the very same embargo that has helped spawn luxury villas and yachts dotted all over the North of the island. What am I going on about? It seems the Turks have already rejected the EU deal and only a handful of news agencies are reporting it. That's right, direct trade was not linked to the aid.

Does it meet their maximalist demands, it does not. Never the less, this is a compromise deal that is a benefit to the Turkish Cypriots. The money will fund projects to improve infrastructure and the economy in the North, is this not considered a benefit? The rejection also tells us that any possible future agreement on the Cypriot issue that does not contain the maximalist demands of the Turks and the authorities in the North, would be rejected outright. Here is an example of a press article being receptive to Turkish arguments. The Cyprus spin stops on this site ... Financial Times, step to the front line:

Turkey upset by EU deal on N Cyprus
By Daniel Dombey in Brussels and Vincent Boland in Ankara
Published: February 26 2006 18:49 | Last updated: February 26 2006 18:49

The European Union has agreed a controversial aid package for the Turkish Cypriot community in northern Cyprus, in a decision that has upset Turkey and threatens to complicate further Ankara’s negotiations to join the EU.

Is it controversial because the EU agreed to it or because the Turks find it unacceptable? I did not bother to read the rest of the article.

Slaves & EU’s Prestige

French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy is currently in Ankara to help revive stalled talks to reunite Cyprus. The Turkish daily Zaman today talks about the meeting Mr. Philippe Douste-Blazy had with his Turkish counterpart.

Speaking at a joint press conference following their meeting, Mr. Gul mentioned that he briefed Mr. Douste-Blazy on the new action plan for Cyprus. Mr. Gul also brought up the issue of direct trade between the EU and Northern Cyprus. The Turkish daily Zaman, quoting the Turkish Foreign Minister, stated ... “Do not be a slave to the Greeks,” what a nonsensical statement. Mr. Gul went on to say that “Greeks block the regulations, which destroy the EU’s prestige.” He said that Turkey is willing to fulfill its commitments and that the EU should also fulfill its commitments to Northern Cyprus.

Mr. Gul is seeking direct trade between the EU and the breakaway statelet in the occupied north. Turkey's Foreign Minister also wants Northern Cyprus to have the ability of participating in various international organizations and sporting events. How do proposals like these help reunify the island? Can Mr. Gul tell us exactly what he means by reunification (for Cyprus) which he allegedly aspires to and promotes? Can anyone point to a Turkish proposal that does not insist on a settlement based on the continued separation of the two communities?

A wolf in sheep’s clothing

The Turkish Cypriots thought they had a reformist in Mr. Talat but instead they wound up with a wolf in sheep’s clothing. For some time now, Mr. Talat among others coordinated a smear campaign to ridicule the President of the Republic concerning the issue of Ledra. Chuckling with such comments as “We could put up a curtain for them if they wish.” Mr. Talat tried to show the world that its the current leadership in Cyprus who wants to maintain the status quo. Mr. Talat suggesting that if Mr. Papadopoulos is stubborn on a simple crossing how will there be an agreement on a possible solution to Cyprus. The implication of this being that maybe its time for countries to deal directly with the North of Cyprus because finding a solution with the current Cypriot President will not be possible. Ironically, it was the current leadership in Cyprus…Mr. Papadopoulos government who first suggested the Ledra crossing in 2004. The Cyprus mail today has reported that the Turkish Cypriot shop owners in Nicosia have announced a large protest on Friday calling on Mr. Talat to remove the bridge. “We do not agree that the bridge should be there. It is both meaningless and an obstruction to the free flow of people between the two sides,” Turkish Cypriot Shop Owners Association head Hurrem Tulga told the Cyprus Mail yesterday. But it appears that Mr. Talat is too busy trying to sway world public opinion than do what he was brought to power for and that is making reconciliation between the two communities possible.

A human rights issue?

Just read an article that was picked up by several news wires. This article was about Turkish Cypriot Football players stripping off clothing in protest of the embargo. A publicity stunt organized by Huseyin Caglayan. He happens to be a UK fashion designer said the article. Mr. Huseyin said “This campaign is about human rights, not politics.” So “Balls to Embargoes!” is a human rights issue and not some perverted fetish he may have…very well then. Tell us when your campaign relating to Turkey’s embargo on Armenia will begin. Yes...Turkey, the only democratic country in the entire world that has a trade embargo on Armenia. Showing once again it will do as it pleases even if it means disregarding international norm. Speaking of the Caucuses…lets focus in on Armenia’s neighbor Azerbaijan. It seems that the election held in Azerbaijan a couple of weeks back had some voting irregularities to say it mildly. This however was never picked up by news wires…no, instead we have “Balls to Embargoes!” This only proves to show that there is a double standard when it comes to this region.

Credibility of the E.U.

I remember reading a Turkish news article that talked about Turkey's accession to the European Union. The article complained about possible brief restriction on Turks moving westward into the bloc once Turkey joins. The Turkish article hammered away ... the E.U. is a restricted private club. Interestingly enough ... no mention was made in that article on Turkey pushing for and receiving even harder restrictions on Greek Cypriots going to the North as envisioned in the Annan Plan. Now we see that it’s the credibility of the E.U. that keeps the Turkish FM awake at night. Wasn't Turkey's EU accession suppose to set the country on a course of dramatic transformation? Wasn’t Turkey suppose to normalize relations with its neighbors, particularly with Greece, Armenia and Cyprus before it joins the union? Turkey, a country that has violated UN and SC resolutions now numbering over 120, is worried about the credibility of the EU. The hypocrisy of it all...


From the Cihan News Agency:

Published: Friday, December 09, 2005
zaman.com

Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul urged the European Union to aid solving the problem in Cyprus.

"The EU should just help to solve the problem but should not exhibit an attitude which promotes non-solution. This will damage its credibility," Gul told a Brussels news conference on Thursday.