Emporium Current Essays

425

SJU

M ifiwijff fi^f TffSlFifl jrlj MimMM U-M 1 yilJ&U

CYPRUS uispuTi

Isf t* slj ;Jtl)|«J'i3! 'JLl Jo ^J* 'W-1 A fe

*•§

When the Republic of Cyprus was founded in 1060, it was a fully independent,
bicommunal state in which the Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot communities had the
status to co-founders and equal partners. The rights of both communities were
safeguarded by a constitution that contained 199 articles and was a model of procession.
A Treaty of Guarantee between the United Kingdom, Turkey and Greece assured the
independence of the new state. A Treaty of Alliance between Turkey, Greece and Cyprus
provided for its security. Finally, the Republic of Cyprus was universallyrecognised and
given a seat at the United Nations.

The Turkish Cypriots, comprising one-fifth of total Cypriot population, felt safe and
looked forward to many years of peace and prosperity. But the Greek Cypriots, under the
leadership of Archbishop Makarios, who had become the first president of Cyprus,
regarded independence only as a stepping stone toward enosis and the total Hellenization
of the Island. As Makarios put it, "Unless this small Turkish community forming a part of
the Turkish race is expelled, the duties of the heroes of EOKA can never be considered as
terminated." EOKA was the Greek Cypriot guerrilla organisation that had fought against
British rule in the 1950s. It was now rearmed to bring about the destruction of the
Republic of Cyprus and the absorption of the Island by Greece.

For the purposes of establishing the legal framework for enosis and neutralising all
opposition to his scheme, Makarios first forced the resignation of the distinguished
German jurist who was serving a president of his Supreme Court Constitutional Court.
Then, he implemented a plan -- the so-called "Akritas Plan" -- with the aim of cowing the
Turkish Cyprhts into submission.

The Akritas Plan, which was later published by the Greek newspapers Parties, was signed
by a person who identified himself only as "the Chief, Akritas," but was, in fact, none
other than Makarios's minister of the interior. Ploykarpos Yordadijis, the very man who,
at that time, was responsible for maintaining internal S)cace in Cyprus. According this
plan, the Turkish Cypriots would be presented with a scries of proposed amendments to
the Constitution of 1960, which would deprive them of rights which were so fundamental
that thev were included in the unalterable "Basic426
Emporium Current Essays

Articles" of the Constitution, such as that of having veto the Constitution, such as that of
having veto power over governmental decisions affecting the future status of the Island,
and that of having their own municipalities. Should the Turkish Cypriots reject-these
amendments, the Greek Cypriots would" show their strength to the Turkish Cypriots
immediately and forcefully,' with the result that the Turkish Cypriots would" probably be
brought to their senses."

The proposed amendments were submitted to the Turkish Cypriot leadership on

November 30, 1963. But even before the Turkish Cypriots had had time to complete their
study of them. EOKA and other paramilitary organisation went into action. Their acts of
aggression, which began in late December, were of extreme brutality. Among the first of
these were the slaughter of 25 Turkish Cypriot patients at the Nicosia General Hospital on
December 23, and the killing of 21 Turkish Cypriots (including a ten year-old girl) in the
villages of Ayios Vasilios and Skilloura on December 24.

At the same time Makarios dismissed ail the Turkish Cypriot civil sen-ants, cabinet
ministers, and members of the House of Representatives (the uni-cameral Cypriot
parliament). He also discharged all the Turkish Cypriot diplomats at the United Nations
and in foreign capitals, making it difficult for the Turkish Cypriots to present their case to
the world.

The collision course, which was well planned by virtue of the notorious Akritas Plan
leading to the Greek Cypriot onslaught on Turkish Cypriots and in the arbitrary exclusion
of the Turkish Cypriot community from the legislative, executive and judicial organs of
the bi-communal Republic laid the seeds of physical communal separation and division o
the Island and resulted in the establishment of the first dividing line - the Green Line --
on 30 December 1963. On 27 December 1963, in a statement published in the Die Welt
newspaper, the impartial President of the Cyprus Supreme Constitutional Court Professor
Forsthoff concluded that:

" Makarios bears on his shoulders the sole responsibility of the recent tragic events. His
aim is to deprive the Turkish community of their rights."

In spite of the genocide, the breach of the rule of law and the disruption of the
constitutional order, the United Nations Security Council Resolution 186 adopted on
March 4, 1964, in flagrant disregard of the true situation though it fit to take the term
Government of Cyprus in the said resolution as meaning the Greek Cypriot usurped
"Government of Cyprus" and treating it as the sole legitimate heir to the by then defunct
bicommunal Republic of Cyprus. This unjust interpretation in the Resolution of the
Security Council gave indirect legitimacy to the a Greek Island and that the

Emporium Current Essays

427

Turkish Cypriot community is a minority subject community of the now Greek Cypriot
administered so-called Republic of Cyprus.

As a sop to the Turkish community, however, the UN Security Council also decided on
March 4, 1964, to set up a UN peacekeeping force in Cyprus (UNFICYP) to "use its best
efforts to prevent and recurrence of fighting and, an necessary, to contribute to the
maintenance an restoration of law and order...

UNFICYP has been on the Island ever since but was, unfortunately, not able to uphold
the rule of law nor prevent the recurrence of fighting until the Turkish intervention of
July 20,
1974.

Turkish

Between 1963-1974 Turkish Cypriots were held hostage in their own land without
representation and participation in the government. In all, 103 Turkish Cypriot villages
were destroyed and the total Turkish Cypriot population, controlling and owning 32 per
cent of the land, pushed into ghetoo cantons comprising only 3 per cent of the Island.
Turkish Cypriot pleas for help during this period were ignored by the international
community. The Turkish intervention saved the Turkish Cypriots from extinction an was
responsible for creating a safe haven for its harassed population.

Following Turkish intervention of July 20,1974, the Foreign Ministers of Turkey, Greece
and the United Kingdom met in Geneva and in their declaration of 30 July 1974
recognised:

"...the existence in practice in the Republic of Cypnis of two autonomous administrations,

that of the Greek Cypriot community and that of the Turkish Cypriot community."

This was an international acknowledgement of the fact that since the break-up of existed
in practice in Cyprus two autonomous administrations. This fact is also acknowledged by
Mr. G. Clerides, the current Greek Cypriot President, in his memoirs, entitled My
Deposition. Herein M. Clerides says: ,

The constitutional crisis of 1963 disrupted the constitution a order and the continuity, and
the partnership status of the two communities, which was created by the Aurich
Agreements. With the separation in its Legislative, executive and judicial powers there
now exist today in Cyprus two poles of power on a separate geographical basis." .

In the same memoirs he has also observed:

"Just as the Greek Cypriot preoccupation was that Cyprus should be a Greek Cypriot
state, with a protected Turkish Cypriot minority, the Turkish preoccupation was to defeat
any such effort and to maintain the partnership concept." 428

Emporium Current Essays

However this was not to be. The ardour of Greek Cypriots for a Greek Cypriot state
remained undiminished. The Turkish Cypriots were, therefore oblige to declare their
independence on November 15, 1983. They had waited patiently for nearly 20 years in
the face of continuing violations and provocations, in order to reestablish and maintain
the partnership concept but all in vain.

Vienna Agreement

During this period of twenty years some noteworthy events did take place. On August
2,1975, the two communities reached an agreement in Vienna on the voluntary exchange
of populations between North and South Cyprus. The Exchange of Population Agreement
was instrumental in preparing the ground for the 197? and 1979 high level agreements
between the leaders of the two communities, where it was agreed that the future of
Cyprus lies in a bi-communal, bi-zonal federal settlement to be basdd on the free will of
the two politically equal communities.

In the face of the Greek Cyprus and Greek vision that Cyprus is Greek, and in the face of
persistent violent action taken to realise this vision, the Turkish Cypriots had no option
for safeguarding their identity except to establish their own homeland. Accordingly, the
Turkish Cypriot Parliament on November 15,
1983, expressing the legitimate and "will of tffe Turkish Cypriot people, declared the
establishment of an independent state which they named the Turkish Republic of
Northern Cyprus.

UN Security Council Resolution 541 (1983)

This declaration of independence was however deplored by the UN Security Council in

its Resolution 541 of November 18,1983, and it termed the declaration as the "purported
secession" of part of the Republic of Cyprus and described it as "legally invalid."

The UN Security Council Resolution 541 (1983) unfortunately is far from being a fair an
just assessment of the situation in the island. Since the Security Council purported to
attack importance to the compatibility of the conduct of the Turkish Cypriot community
with the treaties, it should have attached the same importance to the compatibility with
the treaties of the conduct of the Greek Cypriot community. By failing to do so, the
Security Council not only failed to apply in an objective and evenhanded manner the
substantive legal requirement to which it had itself made reference; it also failed to
adhere to the standard to equal treatment that it had repeatedly affirmed in its use in
relation to the negotiations between the two sides of the words "on an equal footing." Had
the Security Council taken a balanced view of the situation in 1983, it would have found
that the conduct of the Greek

Emporium Current Essays

429

Cypriot community had for the past twenty years been "incompatible" with the 1960
settlement. It was the Greek Cypriot side that whittled away the Basic Articles of that
constitution. In terms of the Treaty of Guarantee, a Cyprus that is not regulated by the
Basic Articles of its constitution not "the Republic of Cyprus"* which the Turkish
Cypriot side could be deemed to be 'seeding' from in 1983. AH this was over looked. .*•.

Greek Cypriot application for membership of the European Community.

The unjustified treating the Greek Cypriot usurped Government of Cyprus as the sole
legitimate successor of the defunct bi-communal Republic of Cyprus encouraged it to
apply for membership of the European Community. The Greek Cypriot application of
July 3,1990, top the European communities (EC) for full membership of Cyprus is
tantamount to accepting the Greek Cypriots to be the only people o the island possessing
the right of self-determination. In actual fact, there are two separate and politically equal
peoples or communities on the island. These two separate communities should legally
and morally be able to exercise their separate right of self-determination to decide
whether an application for membership of the EC is acceptable to all. The Greek Cypriots
Administration's action of unilateral application is an act whereby the Greek Cypriot are
trying to impose their political will on the Turkish Cypriot - a situation which is
completely unacceptable.

In fact, the two separate communities on the Island have enjoyed a completely separate
existence under their own administrations. The two peoples have existed separate!} in
their respective areas and under their respective administrations since
1963. Membership of the EC envisages the application of common policies throughout
the territories of the member states of the EC as well as free movement of goods, persons,
capital etc. this is impossible at the present state in Cyprus and will continue to be so until
a settlement is reached uniting the two existing separate states in the form of a bi-
communal, bi-zonal federal republic.

Right of self-determination

The right of self-determination was exercised by the two peoples jointly in I960, as
cofoundcrs of the Republic. The constitutional documents were signed by the leaders of
both peoples thus reflecting the consent of both pcoplcs.To say that there is only one
"people" of Cyprus, would ignore the national origins and different characteristics of
Greek and Turkish Cypriots, • . d treat them as members of a homogeneous society,
which is not really the--J"
430

Emporium Current Essays

case. Representative joint government of the two peoples has ceased to exist in Cyprus
since December 21,1963, with the Greek Cypriot attacks on the Turkish Cypriots and the
consequent separation of the two peoples. The effect of the first Greek Cypriot coup in
1963 against the 1960 Constitution was to put the Greek Cypriots in control of all the
organs of the state to the exclusion of the Turkish .Cypriots. On the Greek Cypriot
side a Greek Cypriot administration emerged and the Greek Cypriot
parliament unilaterally and unlawfully changed the Constitution. Under the
circumstances, Turkish Cypriots could not be denied the right of self-government, the
right to exercise their free will in setting up their own administration. The setting up of
the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus in November 1983 was the culmination of the
process of political and administrative evolution. This was inn the exercise f the right
of self-determination enshrined in the Declaration of Friendly Relations of 1970 and
the Helsinki Final Act of 1975. The exercise of the right of self-determination cannot be
construed as a step against the unity and territorial integrity of the Republic of Cyprus the
Constitution of which was described as "dead and buried" by the Greek Cypriots who
have excluded the Turkish Cypriots from the political system on the basis of ethnic
discrimination, thus creating a new situation which justified the use of the right of self-
determination.

Only the two peoples of Cyprus are competent to the negotiate a solution to the Cyprus
problem through their representatives, within the framework of the intercommunal talks,
on the basis of equality. Indeed the need for approval by the two communities of a hoped
for settlement has recently been confirmed by the 'opening statement' of the UN
secretary-general in New York on February 26,1990, preceding the evaluation meeting at
the third round of the intercommunal talks. The secretary-general said that the "solution
that is being sought is thus one that must be decided upon by, and must be acceptable to,
both communities," He added that his mission was with the two communities whose
"participation in the process is on an equal footing," and that the relationship of the two
communities is not "one of majority and minority." The secretary-general again referred
to these ideas in his report to the Security Council of March 8, 1990. The Security
Council resolution 649 of March 12, 1990, has also emphasised 4his parity of negotiating
status in the endeavour of the parties to establish a bi-communal and bi-zonal federation.
Furthermore, the right of self-determination is implicit in paragraph 3 of the resolution,
which calls upon the "leaders of the two communities to pursue their efforts to reach
freely a mutually acceptable solution."

Emporium Current Essays

431

Though self-determination is an explosive" word, because it is also invoked to justify

secessionist acts, the Turkish Cypriots case, however, does not seem to be well-
understood. Suspicions of secession in the minds of most people outweigh the
constructive aspects of self-determination. Given the fact that both sides have agree to
negotiate with the aim of reaching a settlement on the basis of a bi-communal, bi-zonal,
federal republic, there does not seem to be any cogent reason why self-determination
should be perceived as a 'destructive', rather than a constructive factor in the Cyprus
context.

Duty of Muslim Ummah

The Resolution of the Security Council of November 18,

1983, characterising the declaration of Independence by the TRNC as "legally invalid"
followed by its subsequent resolution of May 11,
1984 calling upon all states not to recognise "the purported state" of TRNC is one-sided
and unfair. It does not appear to take into consideration all the legal considerations. It
overlooks the fact hat the Turkish action was a direct reaction of the conduct of the Greek
Cypriot community during the previous 20 years. This conduct had consistently been
incompatible with the 1960 Settlement. It is well established that there can be no legal
basis for binding one party to the terms of an agreement without insisting on the
requirement of an equal degree of compliance by the other party. This principle has been
termed by the International Court of Justice as "one of the fundamental principles"
governing international -relations (Namibia Advisory Opinion): ICJ Reports 1971 at p.
46).

The failure of the Security Council to abide by this basic controlling legal consideration
undermines the rationality and persuasiveness of its resolutions. It, therefore, now
devolves upon the members of the OlC to strive for modification of these unjust
resolutions. The resolution passed by the OIC during the recent OIC Conference at
Islamabad on March 23, 1997, does not go far enough. The fact is emerging on the
continent of Europe. Its present travails can be appreciated by us as our history has been
somewhat similar and we can understand the situation better than any other member of
the OIC. It behoves Pakistan, therefore, to take the lead in this matter, By standing
shoulder to shoulder with their Turkish Cypriot brethren-who are fighting for the right of
self-determination and their identity, we-will only be paying our tribute to our own
martyrs who made4t possible for us to celebrate the Golden Jubilee of our independence,
by creating Pakistan 50 years ago.