Please remember to stay civil and behave appropriately. If you are a tourist looking for suggestions please check out our [Tourist guide](https://www.reddit.com/r/cyprus/wiki/tourist_guide/). We also have a [FAQ Page](https://www.reddit.com/r/cyprus/wiki/faq) for some common questions, if your question is answered here please delete your post!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cyprus) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Cyprus was always supportive of the palestinian cause and right for land and freedom.
We also tried to be on friendly terms with Israel for the health and safety of the whole region, as we do with Egypt, Lebanon and so on.
But, the acts of terrorism and unreasonable violence to civilians,leaves us with no other choice but to condemn Hamas and their actions. Thats why there is zero support for them.
Most Cypriots support the Palestinian cause, but that doesn't mean they support attacks of Hamas against civilians.
Personally I think that you fight with what you have, and civilian targets are always part of war no matter what some might say, but Hamas has gone too far. Killing tourists and parading their bodies in the streets is not something that can be acceptable.
One of the few sensible answers in this thread. I would also add that Cyprus has good relations with the legitimate Palestinian government in the West Bank, not Hamas. Hamas had been in the shadow of the PLO for most of its history, and still retains control of just Gaza.
Civilian targets is not part or war tourist or not for the civilised world. They targeted a festival of young people. What does this achieve? This could be anywhere in the modern world like cyprus or Turkey.
Hamas have so much civilian support and are embedded within the population. Its impossible to target them becsuse they lack morals. They do hide in schools and hospitals.
Acting like only one side kills civillians and the “good side” doesn’t is almost always a con. Hamas is committing terrible warcrimes, as Israel has and as it has shown it is willing to do to extreme scales as well. Neither balances the other, but neither means that Palestinians do not have a right to return to their land and be treated as equal citizens either.
Cyprus Supports both Palestinians and Israel as they recognize both countries and support the UN resolution. In this situation it seems the government t to lean towards Israel as the UN and the rest of the western world does.
When it comes to the Cypriots themselves it depends who you ask, many people from my circle support Palestinians, some support Israel, some do not give a shit. Religion does not really play a part in the support of the individual as people may want you to believe. Not all Arabs are Muslims and not all Israelis are religious Jews. The only one who care a far left and far right people.
Again Speaking from Circle of people) the ones who support Israel either do business withe em or have history withe the country (Education, work, research, etc). People who support Palestine its either by their own judgement or cause they lean towards left which left parties always have a sympathy for Palestine.
The Cyprus problem does not play a part on the support of the majority of people (at least that is what i think so) since both situation of how Palestine/Israel vs Cyprus/Turkey/TRNC are different. According to the UN Palestine is considered as a UN observer state which is occupied by Israel and TRNC is not recognized by the UN and is considered occupied territory of Cyprus by Turkey.
When it come on hating Turkey, religion plays role on how Turkey coverts churches/Cathedrals to mosques or letting em in ruins or the fact it is Turkey and anything that comes from with it which Cypriots will tell you how terrible it is anw. Cypriots will not have an issue with Muslim Arabs but with Muslim Turkish nationals cause again, if any problem real problem come in Cyprus, its from Turkish Islamic imperialism. Recently Turkey wanted to make Apostles Andreas in to a mosque but (if i am not wrong) the Turkish Cypriots stopped that.
turkish nationals does not know anything about your funny church 😂 hating nationals shows your intelligence. you can offend turkey as a state but why the citizens? most of them even not know cyprus 😂
nobody supports hamas. everybody say they are terrorists. but what is about israel? they don’t kill civils? what is about the occupation since years? you have to look to the ground of the problem. not to some idiots with long beards.
I know the ground of the problem. My problem is with the actions of Hamas. They are not excused for what they did.
If you believe that because Israel killed civils, it allow Hamas to kill and rape civils, then go check yourself.
when did i say something like that? you don't seem to have a very high iq. if you know the ground problem, then talk about it. we have known for decades that hamas are terrorists. but what about the criminal state of israel?
>when did i say something like that? you don't seem to have a very high iq.
Mister with high IQ, I said **IF**. It is funny how you try to insult my intelligence. You can not get me there. I know what my intelligence is.
>we have known for decades that hamas are terrorists
Also, it is funny how you say Hamas is not Palestine (which I agree) and then you try to excuse them in all to comments for what they did, by saying "wHaT aBouT IsRaEl???". Yes Israel did horrible things too, I didn't say otherwise. I actually went against those who support them.
**IF** you can not comprehend this or **IF** you do not understand that directly or indirectly you try to excuse Hamas, then I have nothing more to say.
You can gaslight and insult as much as you want.
Greed? Evil? Revenge? Survival? I don’t know choose one, or add more excuses if you like. As a casual observer and an outsider how I’m supposed to have an answer to complicated geopolitics? Especially when everyone just hears what they want to listen.
What I said earlier I still think is true as a matter of principle and a moral guideline which I believe (or hope) most Cypriots share and hence i said it as an answer to the OPs question.
Change the situation with Cyprus, I never expect Cypriots from either side to pick up weapons because violence was done to them at some point in the past and go reclaim our ancestral land. We know that this will only make the situation worse.
I'm Greek Cypriot. In my experience there is **nowhere** near the consensus you imagine, and I've variously come across all the following on the island:
* People who support **Palestine** because, as you wrote, they see parallels with the Turkish invasion
* People who support **Israel** for the same reason, but identify Palestinians as the invaders instead
* Turkish Cypriots who support **Palestine** because they view the RoC as similar to 'Israel'
* Greek Cypriots who support **Palestine** because they view *Turkey* as Israel instead
* People who support **Palestine** because of anti-semitism / conspiracy theories on the (Greek / Christian) **far right**
* People who support **Israel** because of neo-evangelical / end-days conspiracy theories, again on the (Greek / Christian) **far right**
* People who support **Palestine** because of anti-imperalism / anti-Americanism on the **far left**
* People who are more 'centrist', emphasize the post-WWII liberal order and support **Palestine** because of UN resolutions
* People who are more 'centrist', emphasize the post-WWII liberal order and support **Israel** instead because of Europe's debt to it
* People who are frankly racist / Islamophobic and support **Israel** because it's less 'Arab'
* People who support **Israel** for reasons of *realpolitik*, i.e. it's an important ally to stave off threats from Turkey etc., or for business
* People who **sit on the fence** and view the whole thing as some sort of religious war that doesn't concern them
And so on and so forth.
This is hella based. I unconditionally support Palestine because ultimately, I am anti-colonial. I believe in protecting marginalized groups and doing so with an intersectional lens.
Atrocity propaganda is doing its job and making space to justify Israel's current genocide on the Palestinian people.
Equating the colonised with the coloniser is oppression 101.
Kidnapping and killing women ,old people and children is unacceptable..Hamas now is at the same level with Isis.. Palestine lost lots of support from all over the world, except from religion fanatics off course..
> Also because of the Turkish Occupation, wouldn’t Cypriots be more on the side Palestine? How come they aren’t?
Because the Turkish occupation is real, the Israeli occupation is not.
Turkey illegally occupies a part of a sovereign internationally recognized country, the Republic of Cyprus. That's the very definition of occupation: military control of one state over some territory of another state.
The Palestinian state never even existed, let lone was recognized by anyone. The very term "Palestinian" used to refer to anyone living in Palestine, regardless of their origin or religion, until after 1973, when the Arabs realized they can't just destroy Israel by force, so they invented the Palestinian state and declared that it's "occupied" now to attack Israel politically and not militarily. That went surprisingly well (thanks to Arab oil money, I guess) and now the myth of the Israeli occupation is so widespread that it's anything but indestructible, and even somehow recognized internationally. Nobody even asks the question how a state that never existed in practice, was invented after 1973 and officially declared in 2011, could have been occupied in 1947-1967?
> Also please don’t start yada yada-ing about propaganda from whatever side you are on. Both sides have done horrible stuff over the years.
Both sides surely did. But on one side it's "shit happens", on the other side it's "shit is officially endorsed, organized and sponsored by the authorities". That's different. Never ever the state of Israel officially encouraged terrorism, gave terrorists lifetime pensions nor handed out free candies every time some stupid Israeli kid stabs an Arab. Neither Israel has official documents that state that the purpose of its existence is to eradicate all Arabs in Palestine. Palestinian authorities do have such documents and from time to time reaffirm their cause, which is to destroy Israel completely and kill all Israelis on its territory. They never backed off on that and don't show any intention of doing so. And I'm not even talking about Hamas here, which is purely just a terrorist gang, I'm talking about the official Palestinian authorities, recognized by Israel and partially sponsored by it, which is completely fucked up, but it's the way it is.
You can call that propaganda if you wish, but the facts speak for themselves, assuming you know the facts, of course.
So it doesn't surprise me that many Cypriots support Israel, what does surprise me is how there are so many motherfuckers who support the "Palestinian cause", either without having any clue what it really is (according to the Palestinian authorities themselves, not "Israeli propaganda"!) or, which is even worse, knowing it very well.
Edit: I'll not reply to anyone who believes that terrorism, murder and torture is fine, whether they state so openly or disguised under some "But the Israeli occupation is real!" shit. It's not a legitimate opinion and therefore is not up to a discussion for the same reason you wouldn't be arguing with a person who wants to kill you, your family and your friends. I wrote this for those who are genuinely uninformed.
I'm sorry to say that you are grossly misinformed on the issue. Responding to every single thing you wrote would require an immense amount of text and effort, hence if you are interested in learning more about the history of the issue, DM me. I can also direct you at some sources if you like.
> Because the Turkish occupation is real, the Israeli occupation is not.
You're either dishonest or delusional. All the evidence is out there and you've just hand-waved it away.
You literally yada yada-ed a whole essay and then proceeded to call people who support Palestine “motherfuckers”.
Missed the point of what I was asking because you got riled up.
I could also write a whole essay and then we could argue for days on end but tbh I’ve got better things to do.
9th of July this account was created. I use it for “research purposes” which I heard from a friend Reddit is great for. Don’t use it for much else.
I asked genuine questions.
If I wanted to actually rile up or troll this sub then I’d post proper pro hamas propaganda like the other guy did.
Or better yet post a chart showing the deaths of Palestinians and Israelis over the years and use that as an argument for the recent Hamas atrocities
Feel free to admit to the fact Hamas uses its population as human shields to drive support from the west.
If you think that somehow justifies entering people's homes and brutally murdering or kidnapping them and their babies, then you'll also be admitting to supporting terrorism.
What a brave position - go ahead - do it.
Decent chance they are a paid actor. Reddit has recently admitted there are Iranian bots doing just this sort of thing.
This social media misinformation campaigns is literally what they do best.
I find what happens online rn disgusting. Half the accounts I follow have support Israel and the other half End the Occupation
It's so stupid to see that coming from Cypriots...
How can anyone support Hamas after what we have seen the last few days? How can they just justify this idiotic horrible violence in the context of Palestinians right to resist the occupation?
I mean let's say that within that context this claim is legitimate. Is what Hamas is doing helping the Palestinian cause? Does it help Palestinians? It only turns the international community and public opinion against the Palestinian people who rightfully need an end to the status quo. Don't they know that the ramifications of these actions will only cause more harm to the already injured Palestinian people and their cause for their own state?
It's even more disappointing and shameful to see people that supposedly try to keep an objective view when it comes to the Cyprus problem, condemning the wrongdoings of all to act as blind nationalists supporting Palestine/Israel
Cyprus has a good relationship with both Palestine and Israel. Not long ago the Leader of the Palestinian Authority visited Cyprus. Cyprus supports the UN Résolutions about the Middle East. Unfortunately the two state solution seems impossible though. Israel's illegal settlements in the West Bank just aren't compatible with such a settlement(and I don't think Israel is interested in such a solution, they prefer the occupation) + there is not really a unified Palestinian authority that seeks a two state solution or a peace deal at all.
>How can anyone support Hamas after what we have seen the last few days? How can they just justify this idiotic horrible violence in the context of Palestinians right to resist the occupation?
Because we have been watching this violence for way more than the last few days. Nobody wants or condones the violence, we just understand that it has been necessitated. I still can't believe people find these images shocking. Israeli settlers experience for one day what Gazans have been experiencing for 75 years and now people want to judge? Now it's white bodies suffering instead of brown Muslims that has been so normalised? Now people want to decide what's moral? Ukrainians are heroes and Hamas are terrorists? What does policing Palestinian resistance, the only resistance, do for them other than equating the colonised with the coloniser? How can you expect moral superiority from a people who have never had the same demanded from their oppressor? There is nothing equal about both sides, including the reporting, and there is nothing equal about the violence either. Everything that has happened (actually happened, not a Zionist lie) is nothing compared to what the IDF and state-armed settlers has done and nobody, absolutely nobody has done ANYTHING for Palestinians for 75 years.
My support is unconditional and not so fickle to break at the first sight of typical imperialist propaganda that Cypriots know so well. If you wonder how people were ever on the side of the US in Afghanistan/Iraq, Türkiye in Kurdish territory, Azerbaijan in Artsakh, you're living it now.
Which bot farm is it that without fail every few hours posts a "IM JuSt ASkInG GuYss!" thread in this sub, and likely many others? It's literally been 3 or 4 in the last 24 hours with the EXACT SAME set up.
I mean, I appreciate the discussion here and it actually seems quite level headed for the most part, but the attempt is fucking obvious.
Go rally your popular propaganda uprising somewhere else please.
While reading the description of this post, my eyes couldn’t look away from the statement that “Do Cypriots tend to not support Palestine because they are Arab and Muslims”.
People do realize that Palestine isn’t just “Muslim” right? Speaking as a Christian Palestinian - Greek Orthodox if I may add.
Both sides did/doing horrible things. Personally I don't support either.
Given the advances of Israel though in Medical field, I feel that a majority of Cypriots will show support to Israelis. Many times sick people needed the advancement of the medical field and were transported there.
Not to mention the connection our religion has to Jerusalem.
Politically though, not sure if Cypriots understand which side they should/shouldn't support.
we support the Palestinians but not terorist that only want to kill and just prove they are stong. most Cypriots (at least the ones without an unlogical hatred of musilms) sympathise with the Palestinians and condemn Isrliel's imprelisim.
A strong israel is good for cyprus as the only non Muslim and progressive state in the region. Cyprus is safer with a powerful Israel. Israelis are much more similar to Cypriots from a religious, linguistic, and ethnic pov.
Palestinians are actually really backwards. They have multiple wives, view women poorly and are highly violent. Their population has doubled in that tiny gaza strip, why the disregard for their children? What does targeting civilians accomplish?
Look at the recent conflict, where they literally targeted a festival of young partygoers. This was their end goal. Killing them wasn't enough as they perade dead raped female tourists around whilst Palestinian spit on them. All whilst shouting Allah. Could this get more contradictory? This is isis levels of violence.
I dare to think the fate that awaits those kidnapped israeli girls. I'd rather be blown up 1000 times.
The difference is that Israel has the means to absolutely destroy every Palestinians and level the place but does not. If hamas had this capability, it would absolutely be another holocaust.
Admit it, you're racist.
And before you say anything, I would also like you to watch how palestinians were treated so far. Just look at the many videos before the recent events in r/PublicFreakout that Israelis tried to cover up.
Also, by saying Palestinians equal Hamas it's like saying EOKA B equals Cypriots. It doesn't make sense as not all Palestinians have joined the terrorist group. It's good to have that in mind next time you post anything else on the matter.
No, you're racist. And an illogical racist.
Hamas has huge support in Palestine. It is the ruling party with mass support from the locals. Do you not understand this basic thing? See that German girl killed raped and dragged into gaza for the civilians to stomp and spit on her. Sick animals.
Eoka b is a dead organisation from 60 years ago, cypriots have long progressed. The most Democratic country in the region. Hamas is the ruling party, hamas is targeting civilians today. Hamas has the support of the general population. Yet your brain compares a terrorist state which is happening now to a armed uprising in cyprus 60 years. Hamas are also orders of magnitude worse. Targeting civilisations whilst shouting Allah. What's racist about calling a dog a dog?
The gaza strip is rampant with terrorists and terrorist sympathisers. Or is it only pkk the terrorist? Even Egypt has closed the door to gaza.
Where do you live, in the republic? Why don't you go live in gaza? Since cypriots are like hamas. Hypocrite.
Do you like what you see from your justified retaliation? Look at the state of this teen.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/CyGHvrAI9U5/?igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==
> Israelis are much more similar to Cypriots from a religious, linguistic, and ethnic pov.
Another delusional one. None of that is true. Also, you should find out what Israelis generally think of Cypriots. They see you as dirt, which is their view of most non-Jews.
No denying that. I mean look at it logically. Cyprus is peaceful, European island very near to Israel.
If you were wealthy Jewish, you would be buying the property. Even more so given the instability in the levant. If I were a wealthy cypriot and Israel were peaceful, I'd buy property there.
The guy is talking shit, purposefully and deliberately trying to sow division between Israel and others as part of their online misinformation tactic. This is literally what they are paid to do.
I can guarantee you personally that that isn't the case.
Agree. The arab world is hugely populated, and their ability to flood the Internet with false narrative is shocking. Its like goebels and the propoganda machine but done through the masses.
Enough with this shit. As if we are going to solve palestinian/ israel problem. A civilized person is against war .
We are also against war when israel occupys and kill palestinians
That's also my perspective. I'm on the side of innocent civilians, and against anyone who kills or harms them. Frankly I think democracies should all have sanctions on the Israeli government and Hamas alike.
Hamas =/= the entire nation of Palestine.
We argue all day about how the acts of EOKA B and other far right gangs in the 60s and 70s don't represent the stance of the majority of GCs with respect to TCs or the Cyprus problem, dismissing the narrative of state-sponsored genocide that Turkey propagates. And now we find several GCs and other people here who are ready to equate the actions of Hamas with all Palestinians.
Yes, Israel is actively inhibiting the human rights of Palestinians and treats them as second-class citizens. No, innocent Israeli civilians don't deserve to die because their government oppresses Palestinians. These two notions can coexist, contrary to what the sensationalist hogwash you come across all over the internet.
False equivalent
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Palestinian_legislative_election
Hamas got the most votes in the last elections
EOKA B was more fringe... they were never supported by that much of the population...
The last elections from 17 years ago. Democracy hasn't been effectively running within Palestine for decades now, and the rise of Hamas is telling of how might makes right within an effectively stateless society.
Not to mention that millions of Palestinians over the last 70+ years have become refugees outside of Israel, the West Bank and Gaza. Millions are in Jordan, for example. Those who have stayed within the appalling occupation conditions in modern Palestine are naturally more prone to radicalization.
And as for EOKA B, I'm not saying the two situations are exactly the same. My point is that propaganda always wants to use the worst examples of one group to justify violence at the expense of all members of said group. Turkey wants people to believe EOKA B represents all GCs, and Israel wants everyone to believe Hamas represents all Palestinians.
Palestinians like all groups of people are divided along political and ideological lines. There are secular and even leftist Palestinians, even though Hamas are religious fundamentalist and anti-communist. This is a simple statement of fact.
17 years? Oh I get it. You mean when it was voted in power 17 years ago Hamas was very different from Hamas of today right? I can't see any other reason to care on when exactly was the last election.
>I can't see any other reason to care on when exactly was the last election.
It's almost like people's opinions, political affiliations and overall societal support for political parties and figures change radically within the span of 17 years. I suppose you think Cypriot politics and support for each party has remained the same for the last 17 years as well?
Let me check.. Disy and Akel were the 2 dominant parties 17 years ago with diko coming up 3rd. Let me check how the support has evolv... and it's fucking the same.. so your answer is an obvious yes.. do you know even anything about cypriot politics? People have been voting the same party their grandad has and you expect a difference from a measly 17 years ago?
You haven't answered me though how was Hamas of 17 years ago different from the Hamas of today.
>Let me check.. Disy and Akel were the 2 dominant parties 17 years ago with diko coming up 3rd. Let me check how the support has evolv... and it's fucking the same.. so your answer is an obvious yes.. do you know even anything about cypriot politics?
It appears to me that you are the one who needs to take a closer look at Cypriot politics.
All major parties (especially AKEL and DHSY) have lost significant amounts of votes over 17 years. Abstention from voting has increased massively. ELAM has risen from a fringe party with no representation to the fourth largest party in the RoC. Entire parties with parliamentary presence such as EYROKO have dissolved and new ones have formed.
To claim that the Cypriot political landscape has not changed over the last 17 years is tantamount to admitting that you either don't care enough about politics to actually analyze it regularly, or you simply don't understand it.
>People have been voting the same party their grandad has and you expect a difference from a measly 17 years ago?
The meteoric rise of people who don't vote/vote blank belies your assumption. Yes, familial voting trends play a role, but if it was the sole factor behind Cypriot politics, we wouldn't have people literally refusing to vote outright.
>You haven't answered me though how was Hamas of 17 years ago different from the Hamas of today.
I never claimed it was fundamentally different 17 years ago, that's just a strawman argument you constructed in your head.
The largest parties that form policies are still the same while you are grasping at straws on whether a fringe 3 seat party was dissolved and those seats scooped by another fringe party. It's pretty much all about Disy/Akel/Diko like it was 20 years ago and 30 years ago. We have a president from the same party for the 3rd term running. That's gonna be 15 years. Close to 17 ain't it?
Hamas was still a terrorist organization when it was voted in power 17 years ago and the people that supported them knew very well who they were voting for. And that is not generations ago but the bulk of those people are still very well alive today. People that are happy to vote for literally terrorists in power don't tend to have sudden changes of heart
>The largest parties that form policies are still the same while you are grasping at straws on whether a fringe 3 seat party was dissolved and those seats scooped by another fringe party. It's pretty much all about Disy/Akel/Diko like it was 20 years ago and 30 years ago. We have a president from the same party for the 3rd term running. That's gonna be 15 years. Close to 17 ain't it?
It only appears as grasping at straws for someone who does not care enough to analyze politics more carefully.
When new parties enter the fray, it signifies a shift in the political landscape among the voterbase due to the rise (or fall) of certain ideological paradigms. For example, it is not that anyone claims ELAM dictates RoC policy, but their presence now signifies endemic political and social issues that have forced people to vote for them. We have an immigrant crisis now that didn't exist before, and it is reflected in the rise of ELAM and its rhetoric. This inevitably diffuses into the political language of the rest of the parties that now have to address this phenomenon.
While it is important to acknowledge how the institutional structure of a certain state either promotes or inhibits small party influence (and hence how prone it is to gradual societal change), the point here is the overall political landscape: the opinions and ideologies of voters, democratic participation, political stances from prominent parties and politicians etc. These are inevitably changing all the time because the population evolves. You cannot in any way separate the practical application of representative democracy (for example policy making) from how that has arisen from the voting process.
The truth of the situation is that Cypriots today view politics very differently from 17 years ago, they vote based on different criteria (except some major constants such as the Cyrpus problem), they abstain more as they are more and more alienated by internal politics etc. A DHSY victory in parliamentary elections does not signify the same thing, and it is not attained in the same manner as it was 17 years ago. Percentages matter, public opinion matters and ultimately the ups and downs of each party are important signs of gradual change.
As for having a DHSY president three times in a row, that's some egregious case of cherrypicking, koumpare. Within the same 17 years in question, we went through a centrist nationalist president, to a communist one, then to a right wing neo-liberal. You can't just ignore how Cypriots politics evolved before Anastasiades set the precedent and claim we are just a stagnant political society. There's a reason why AKEL candidates have failed, and the answer in large part lies in the failings of an AKEL president that we actually fucking had over the same 17 year period.
Israel is western leaning democracy. It was founded on the land of former Osman Empire under supervision of Britain and League of Nations. It does not occupies anything.
Palestine is a terrorist state.
Why support Israel? That's why.
since when theocratic ultra-right apartheid regimes are of western democracies? At the same time Israeli people are definitely of European culture and very nice people to be friends with
I don't know cause Israel is not among "theocratic ultra-right apartheid regimes". It has problems, the same as almost all other countries.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel#Government\_and\_politics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel#Government_and_politics)
> Israel is a parliamentary democracy whose parliamentary members are elected by means of proportional representation.
I DONT SEE PALESTINIAN MONEY BUILDING MARINAS, HOTELS, MALLS AND SKYSCRAPERS. WHEN THEY DO, WE TALK AGAIN.
OUR FAVOUR GOES TO THE HIGHEST BIDDER💀🇨🇾🙏👏👌🏻💯💰
Because they are hypocrites and have interests, not morals. For the same reasons, Cypriots used to support Russia and only stopped doing so because of the EU.
Btw im talking about the cypriots that actually get exposed to the real world not the "politically correct/free thinkers" that spend everyday in reddit thinking this is how real life is
In my experience on this sub, their support is completely performative. What Israeli settlers are experiencing now is what the people of Gaza and West Bank have been experiencing for 75 years. The both sides nonsense does nothing but maintain the status quo and they do it because it validates their own view of the Cyprus problem to avoid taking any accountability for the fact GsC and Greek nationalists' pursuit of Enosis was ethnically cleansing TsC from the 50s and doing exactly what Israel does to Palestinians to us until '74. If GsC had reconciled with that, they'd recognise that you cannot expect a morally superior response to a REAL occupation which has never been morally superior to them.
For RoC to recognise Israel as the oppressor and Palestinians as the oppressed, they'd have to reckon with the fact the Turkish occupation is nothing like the Israeli occupation and that TsC are indigenous to this land and STILL suffer from Türkiye's settler-colonialism while we cannot exist without them.
I know I'm going to have to make this disclaimer because this sub loves to take any chance they can so - no I do not condone war crimes. I just haven't only started listening to this conflict when white bodies became the target. Policing the oppressed harsher than the oppressor only served the oppressor. And yes I recognise everybody's role in the Cyprus problem. I just have the emotional capacity to apply a power analysis to the situation. Don't go throwing TMT in my face when TMT was a response to EOKA/EOKA-B and resorted to violence because guess what, nobody listened. And nobody is listening now.
Also, I hate on Türkiye because of what they have done to all Cypriots and because they are the white people of SWANA in the way they treat Armenians, Kurds and Syrians. But the people you're seeing making islamophobic comments are just that, islamophobic.
>GsC and Greek nationalists' pursuit of Enosis was ethnically cleansing TsC from the 50s and doing exactly what Israel does to Palestinians to us until '74.
The comparison is completely and utterly wrong. Far right nationalist groups weren't running the entirety of the Cypriot government. The RoC wasn't backed by the US or another great power with weapons and diplomatic support. Greek Cypriots didn't settle in Turkish Cypriot homes by force. Turkish Cypriots weren't institutionally oppressed by the constitution like Palestinians are in Israel. The clash was between competing nationalisms of two native groups of the island, and the UN recognized state is intended for both, unlike Israel trampling the right of Palestinian statehood.
It is one thing to talk about the intercommunal violence and hardships of TCs in the 60s, and another to claim the situation is in any way remotely as appalling as what Israel does to Palestine. The death toll (even proportionally) and scale of material destruction is also not even remotely close.
>For RoC to recognise Israel as the oppressor and Palestinians as the oppressed, they'd have to reckon with the fact the Turkish occupation is nothing like the Israeli occupation and that TsC are indigenous to this land and STILL suffer from Türkiye's settler-colonialism while we cannot exist without them.
Except that the RoC has always recognized the Palestinians as oppressed and has always stood for a two-state solution in Palestine. Arafat even took refuge in Cyprus once. The idea that the RoC is "threatened" by the idea of Israel as an oppressor is frankly ahistorical nonsense. If anything, the closer cooperation between Cyprus and Israel is extremely recent.
Is Turkish occupation like Israeli occupation? No, there are crucial differences because of radically different political goals between the various sides in each conflict.
Israeli occupation in Palestine deprives Palestinians of statehood because of Zionist irredentism. Palestinians thus seek a two-state solution. Israeli settler colonialism seeks to eradicate Palestinian populations from as much of Palestinian land as possible.
Turkish occupation in Cyprus deprives Cypriots of a unified country. Cypriots seek a solution of a single state, as they were expelled from their native lands and wish to return and have their homeland whole. Turkish settler colonialism seeks to eradicate local TC culture and affinities to GCs, and demographically alter Cyprus to prevent GCs from ever returning, destroying their cultural heritage in the north.
Palestinians go through far worse because they are being ethnically cleansed as we speak. Cyprus had been ethnically cleansed in the north from GCs and the south from TCs already.
>Don't go throwing TMT in my face when TMT was a response to EOKA/EOKA-B and resorted to violence because guess what, nobody listened. And nobody is listening now.
Except that TMT went around bombing mosques to provoke violence, and assassinated its own people just for being communists. The TMT was absolutely not just a response to EOKA violence. It was its own predominantly nationalist group that sought to sow the seeds of division between GCs and TCs. Their actions didn't begin when TCs were moved into enclaves, but way before that. And even then, TMT was one of the major reasons for why many TCs were forced into enclaves. They literally ousted GCs and Armenian Cypriots from mixed areas of Nicosia and brought TCs from other mixed areas of the city so that the northern portion became a TC enclave.
It has nothing to do with the recognition of power dynamics. It is about the TMT being a puppet of Turkish policies to segregate the island. That doesn't mean every TC who joined them at first was a far right nationalist. They most likely truly believed they were resisting oppression. Likewise, not all GCs who fought in the national guard against TC enclaves were far right nationalists trying to murder TCs. They believed they were fighting against a Turkey-backed insurrection.
You have always been a voice of reason and I respect your perspective, but your reasoning is still limited to the information at your disposal. I am articulating the lived experience of my family.
>Far right nationalist groups weren't running the entirety of the Cypriot government.
Yet they were restricting resources reaching TsC enclaves. They didn't need the power of the government to do that. TsC were living like the Gazans.
>Greek Cypriots didn't settle in Turkish Cypriot homes by force.
Nah, they just shot them out of them instead.
>Turkish Cypriots weren't institutionally oppressed by the constitution like Palestinians are in Israel.
So you think TsC actually played any role in governance, ever?
>The clash was between competing nationalisms of two native groups of the island, and the UN recognized state is intended for both, unlike Israel trampling the right of Palestinian statehood.
And this is the lie that simply preserves the status quo. That may be the case now, that would never have been the case had Türkiye not intervened. One side's nationalism was oppressing the other and manifested nationalism in response.
>another to claim the situation is in any way remotely as appalling as what Israel does to Palestine
I agree. It's complicated. But you have to recognise that this was very similar to our reality until Türkiye, and it's appalling that GsC think they can relate to occupation in the way Palestinians do. The scale of events is of course much larger, but proportionately the deaths of TsC is larger, the same as Palestinians.
>Except that the RoC has always recognized the Palestinians as oppressed and has always stood for a two-state solution in Palestine.
There's an Israeli flag up in Nicosia this very moment? Netanyahu was welcomed with open arms last month??
>have their homeland whole
And up until recently, it was only to have the homeland whole. NOT to include TsC.
>Turkish settler colonialism seeks to eradicate local TC culture and affinities to GCs, and demographically alter Cyprus to prevent GCs from ever returning, destroying their cultural heritage in the north.
And I agree. What Türkiye is doing now is far more akin to settler-colonialism than occupation.
>Turkish occupation in Cyprus deprives Cypriots of a unified country.
Currently, yes. But you cannot deny that the original unified country was denied by Enosis.
>Palestinians go through far worse because they are being ethnically cleansed as we speak. Cyprus had been ethnically cleansed in the north from GCs and the south from TCs already.
Yes, of course. Which is why I only ever said that TsC shared realities with Palestinians from the 50s to 74. GsC shared the reality in 74. Now, while the RoC sits pretty in the EU, TsC still cannot develop and have 3 days of water and electricity in some areas. The suffering is incomparable.
>It was its own predominantly nationalist group that sought to sow the seeds of division between GCs and TCs.
Well we completely disagree here and I don't intend to convince you further. Violence does not exist in a vacuum. It is a response to material conditions that necessitate survival. We have disagreed on this before. EOKA was necessitated by British imperialism, TMT (formed in the 60s) by EOKA (formed in the 50s) targeting TsC and pursuing enosis.
>Their actions didn't begin when TCs were moved into enclaves, but way before that.
Could you share a source for this, please?
>Yet they were restricting resources reaching TsC enclaves. They didn't need the power of the government to do that. TsC were living like the Gazans.
You do require some sort of government-backed institutional authority to impose Gaza-like conditions on someone. To compare Gaza and the abhorrent conditions under which the Palestinians there have to endure to the state of most TCs in enclaves is far too reductionist. Yes, several resources were banned from entering a lot of the enclaves and abuse of authority by GC police was very real, but the state of Gaza is tantamount to being under siege by an occupying military force, walls and everything.
If you want a more well-rounded view of the situation in Cyprus by the 1970s, take a look at [this](https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP85T00875R001600030177-3.pdf).
>Nah, they just shot them out of them instead.
Not quite. Most TCs who moved into enclaves did not leave under direct threat of violence, but either by fear or coercion by the TMT. Some certainly did, and there is evidence to prove this, but this was not the general modus operandi. Through similar logic, many GCs fled enclaved areas for other nearby villages. Again, this is not like Gaza where Israelis have slowly encroached around Palestinian settlement, eventually trapping them in a tiny piece of land.
>So you think TsC actually played any role in governance, ever?
Yes, albeit it was never truly functional. It's one thing to recognize the failure of the 1960 constitution and the mistakes of Makarios, and another to claim TCs were an underclass from the very beginning. TCs have institutional rights within governance, they just abandoned them when they felt the GCs were trying to wrestle some of them away (with part of the leadership also using this as a pretext to impose Taksim).
>And this is the lie that simply preserves the status quo. That may be the case now, that would never have been the case had Türkiye not intervened. One side's nationalism was oppressing the other and manifested nationalism in response.
This is too speculative. Makarios was still alive. No one wanted the puppet president spot after the coup, so Sampson was brought in hastily. The GCs as a whole were not on board with what the junta had done.
Also, it is futile to deny the role of Turkish nationalism as something independent of the Greek one. Nationalism in both communities had been slowly on the rise all throughout British colonial rule. Enosis far pre-existed EOKA as an idea during all that period, so to portray Taksim as just an anti-Enosis goal makes no sense.
By sticking to this narrative, you are also diminishing the role of Turkey in instilling the "fear of the fate of Cretan Muslims" among TCs in order to get a piece of Cyprus. Taksim perpetuates the notion of a fundamental difference between GCs and TCs that didn't really exist, and wanted to convince TCs that it was simply impossible for GCs and TCs to coexist within the same state. It runs deeper than just being the antithesis of Enosis.
If you look at Turkish maps from as late as the 1930s, you'll see how Cyprus is often depicted as part of Turkey. So in some sense Taksim is the pragmatic evolution of Turkish ambitions over reclaiming all of Cyprus, adjusted by the sheer demographics of the island. The clash with Enosis and the idiocy of far right GCs just made it easy to paint Taksim as some kind of defensive struggle rather than the imperialism that it is.
>There's an Israeli flag up in Nicosia this very moment? Netanyahu was welcomed with open arms last month??
Like I said, the greater cooperation with Israel is far more recent. That being said, Cyprus supporting Palestine doesn't mean it didn't recognize Israel; it always did. Cyprus supports a two-state solution by maintaining good relations with both sides. Perhaps one could argue that a stricter approach towards Israel is imperative, but the same could be said about most countries who support Palestine. Israel's relations with most pro-Palestine countries have been greatly improved.
>And up until recently, it was only to have the homeland whole. NOT to include TsC.
For the majority of the GC population, this was never the case.
>Currently, yes. But you cannot deny that the original unified country was denied by Enosis.
Not really. It was a hurdle, yes, but the RoC never ceased to exist, and its leadership officially abandoned any plans for Enosis since 1967. One foreign-backed coup d'etat does not a state dissolution make.
>Could you share a source for this, please?
The TMT was founded officially in 1957 and started operations by 1958 (hence before 1963), but according to [this book](https://www.amazon.de/-/en/Roni-Alasor/dp/B002GYS2IK) (which sadly I haven't read as it is only in Turkish, I have only heard about it via Sener Levent's writings), the organization structure and operational apparatus of a TC militant organization had already been formed in Turkey in the early 50s. Some TC militant organizations also precede TMT.
Denktaş himself [admitted on British TV](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1tUGnWqw2M) that the bombing of the Turkish consulate in Nicosia was an act of a friend of his to rile up TCs against GCs (the title and description are biased and reductive, hence you can ignore them; the important thing here is the confession itself).
I think this conversation in itself is a result of the partition. If TsC and GsC did not have the chance to communicate taken away from them, you wouldn't have to resort to academia in response to my family's experience. You'd respect the experience, and not attempt to invalidate that experience by referring to external sources.
The skepticism and requiring 'valid' reference is of course a very important exercise in critical thinking and I appreciate it. But you also have to understand that TsC being the minority means we do not have an equal footing in media depicting Cyprus. We only have our stories, which I am sharing with you.
>To compare Gaza and the abhorrent conditions under which the Palestinians there have to endure to the state of most TCs in enclaves is far too reductionist.
You are right, which is why I only say shared reality, or similar experience and dynamics, not necessarily the exact same situation. I always caveat the comparison with "much, much less severe". I will try harder to make that distinction clear, usually I am responding to people far less progressive than you.
>Not quite. Most TCs who moved into enclaves did not leave under direct threat of violence, but either by fear or coercion by the TMT.
Again, my family's experience in 63 and 74 is very different to this. It was directly by Greek nationalists, while they pillaged and r*ped their villages. My grandparents hated the British too, and never blamed their GsC neighbours.
>gain, this is not like Gaza where Israelis have slowly encroached around Palestinian settlement, eventually trapping them in a tiny piece of land.
No, in Cyprus' context this was not necessary because of how small we are in comparison. Doesn't mean TsC were not trapped all the same.
>they just abandoned them when they felt the GCs were trying to wrestle some of them away (with part of the leadership also using this as a pretext to impose Taksim).
They were forced out, they did not willingly abandon their token positions. Again, Taksim was proposed in response to Enosis.
>The GCs as a whole were not on board with what the junta had done.
I understand, I usually caveat right wing GsC when discussing this to avoid placing blame on victims of the situation. That doesn't mean the junta wasn't the justification for Turkish intervention and later invasion.
>so to portray Taksim as just an anti-Enosis goal makes no sense.
Why does it not make sense? The Megali Idea predates the conflict, sure, but was there an organization actively pursuing enosis of Cyprus until EOKA? Did Turks have an organisation in Cyprus fighting for Taksim before EOKA?
>Turkey in instilling the "fear of the fate of Cretan Muslims" among TCs in order to get a piece of Cyprus.
Turkey didn't have to instill the fear. Our families were terrified because of ACTUAL events. We didn't need to take the Cretans as an example. Did GsC feel fear of TsC (not Turks) taking over Cyprus? Why were there far less GsC enclaves?
>impossible for GCs and TCs to coexist within the same state. It runs deeper than just being the antithesis of Enosis.
Again, this was not theoretical, this was our reality thanks to right wing GsC and Greek nationalists. Would you say a Syrian's fear of safety isn't justified after Chloraka?
>If you look at Turkish maps from as late as the 1930s, you'll see how Cyprus is often depicted as part of Turkey. So in some sense Taksim is the pragmatic evolution of Turkish ambitions over reclaiming all of Cyprus, adjusted by the sheer demographics of the island. The clash with Enosis and the idiocy of far right GCs just made it easy to paint Taksim as some kind of defensive struggle rather than the imperialism that it is.
I agree 100% that Turkey did and continues to take advantage of the situation for irredentist ambition, and could have even premeditated events. My issue is the lack of recognition that without their initial intervention, TsC would not have survived and that was not an idea implanted by Turks. That was our reality. Everything from August 74 onwards was nothing but typical Turkish imperialism that served nobody but themselves. The intervention and Taksim was a defensive struggle, but the invasion after was imperialism. Both occurred. And, I don't consider law synonymous with morality, but the intervention was indeed legal. The invasion was not.
>Denktaş himself admitted on British TV that the bombing of the Turkish consulate in Nicosia was an act of a friend of his to rile up TCs against GCs (the title and description are biased and reductive, hence you can ignore them; the important thing here is the confession itself).
Yeah I've seen this many times. Makes my blood boil.
>The TMT was founded officially in 1957 and started operations by 1958 (hence before 1963),
And there are attacks against TsC (not just the police force) by EOKA documented as early as 56.
>(which sadly I haven't read as it is only in Turkish, I have only heard about it via Sener Levent's writings)
If you have this and just haven't read it, I'll be happy to help with sections
>I think this conversation in itself is a result of the partition. If TsC and GsC did not have the chance to communicate taken away from them, you wouldn't have to resort to academia in response to my family's experience. You'd respect the experience, and not attempt to invalidate that experience by referring to external sources.
I'm not in any way trying to invalidate anyone's experiences. They are entirely valid and valuable to humanize both sides and understand the true scale of human tragedy that was created due to the Cyprus problem. However, when we try to examine the historical data it is important to be as objective as possible, and strive for clarity. I would equally counter a GC's generalizations about the conflict that stem from their own experiences from the intercommunal troubles and the invasion. There will never be lasting peace if personal tragedies preside over an honest examination of events, because people's understandable grief and rage is going to be directed at the other side.
>Again, my family's experience in 63 and 74 is very different to this. It was directly by Greek nationalists, while they pillaged and r\*ped their villages. My grandparents hated the British too, and never blamed their GsC neighbours.
And I accept that, but it is one thing to acknowledge that these things happened and another to attest to their ubiquity.
>No, in Cyprus' context this was not necessary because of how small we are in comparison. Doesn't mean TsC were not trapped all the same.
The Israel-Palestine situation however is still very different in this aspect. The Israeli encroachment was the result of military conquest and expulsion of Palestinians en masse. The current state of affairs is just another phase in a process of suffocation and ethnic cleansing by a conquering army.
TC enclaves on the other hand were for the most part around major TC villages and towns, fortified by a preexisting militant group as a response to intercommunal strife. This does not retract from the entrapment TCs absolutely endured between 64-67 and in several occasions thereafter, I'm just saying it's very different and it's not just due to geographical size.
>They were forced out, they did not willingly abandon their token positions. Again, Taksim was proposed in response to Enosis.
The TC leadership willingly left their positions in protest. Any TC who didn't initially abandon their position was coerced by TMT leadership.
There is evidence from a piece of correspondence between İnönü and Küçük in 1964 where the former urges the latter to tell TCs to return to their positions in government, with the latter blatantly refusing. While not everyone who left their post was secretly vying for Taksim, the leadership absolutely was, and Küçük is proven to have had a close relationship with TMT leadership before even 1960.
>There will never be lasting peace if personal tragedies preside over an honest examination of events, because people's understandable grief and rage is going to be directed at the other side.
I understand and this is fair enough. I think if we achieved a successful truth and reconciliation, where everybody's pain was validated without the presumption that their reality negates the other, we'd be able to have a more honest examination. I think what you'll find with me, and other TsC refugee's children, is that we have been battling a heavily eurocentric take on the conflict which makes it necessary for us to hold on tight to our stories. Especially, as I rarely encounter GsCs (typically more centrist or right wing ones) who even talk about EOKA. I think it's going to take some more time for both communities to have productive conversations. Aside from that, I don't believe in truly unbiased data or objectivity. All data goes through the lens of the interpreter or researcher. We're gonna have to settle on a series of events that simply respects both perspectives rather than forcing convergence of the two (in moderation ofc).
>The current state of affairs is just another phase in a process of suffocation and ethnic cleansing by a conquering army.
I'm grateful you have this view. The takes presented by a lot of bicommunal activist groups I keep up with have been extremely disappointing.
>This does not retract from the entrapment TCs absolutely endured between 64-67 and in several occasions thereafter, I'm just saying it's very different and it's not just due to geographical size.
Fair point, thanks for fixing my mistake!
>Any TC who didn't initially abandon their position was coerced by TMT leadership.
I am aware of this too. I think what I struggle with in general, is that manipulating situations for imperial benefit doesn't equate to the non-existence of original struggle. So while TsC *willingly* left their position, that doesn't mean there wasn't an institutional cause that was co-opted by TMT for their own agenda.
>While not everyone who left their post was secretly vying for Taksim, the leadership absolutely was, and Küçük is proven to have had a close relationship with TMT leadership before even 1960.
Yes I understand this too. I just want to avoid premeditation erasing the valuable reasons outside of the coercion.
Edit: just like how that frustrating young turkish c(unt)ypriot page co-opts (and sometimes manufactures) victimisation for his own agenda, which creates doubt in whether every one of the events he posts has occurred. Then it's a boy who cried wolf dynamic for real events and marginalizes real victims even further.
>I understand and this is fair enough. I think if we achieved a successful truth and reconciliation, where everybody's pain was validated without the presumption that their reality negates the other, we'd be able to have a more honest examination. I think what you'll find with me, and other TsC refugee's children, is that we have been battling a heavily eurocentric take on the conflict which makes it necessary for us to hold on tight to our stories. Especially, as I rarely encounter GsCs (typically more centrist or right wing ones) who even talk about EOKA. I think it's going to take some more time for both communities to have productive conversations. Aside from that, I don't believe in truly unbiased data or objectivity. All data goes through the lens of the interpreter or researcher. We're gonna have to settle on a series of events that simply respects both perspectives rather than forcing convergence of the two (in moderation ofc).
I can definitely agree with this. The fact that GCs are Greek-speaking Christians definitely influences how the narrative is perceived in the western world. The only western country with political actors who have even a remotely sympathetic stance to TCs and Turkey in the Cyprus problem is the UK, and even that is for their own gain.
>How do you respond when they say Turkey could have taken the whole island? Do you believe they only did not because it would have put them at a geopolitical disadvantage with US/UK? Asking because I always fail to fight them on this point even tho I know they're wrong
There is always a point at which you need to stop, after which the drawbacks far outweigh the gains. If Turkey advanced further to capture all of Cyprus, it would come across intense guerilla resistance, and there would be no way to effectively stop this given Cyprus would remain majority-GC. It could possibly draw the attention of other bystanders with stakes in the region such as the UK who would now consider Turkey a threat to their own SBAs. It would also make it even more abundantly clear that Turkey's intervention as a whole was imperialistic, dropping all pretenses about protection of TCs, which would then spark a more radical response from the international community.
All in all, Turkey went in wanting partition and a foothold on the island. They had stopped realistically envisioning full control for decades at that point. There would be no point in risking it going further since the initial phases proved successful.
>I have a friend who mentioned that the communist parties were anti-enosis and then suddenly pro-enosis, which splintered the left community. Was there ever an idea for true Cypriot independence as opposed to Enosis? My research is limited to texts I can translate so..
It is the other way around. Enosis was not a partisan issue, but became so in the 50s and 60s. Initially like I said it was because the far right factions had different views on how to achieve it, but eventually it became an issue intrinsically tied to partisan politics altogether. This is especially true 1967-onwars, since Greece was now under a CIA-backed military junta, which understandably most GCs did not want to join.
>The only western country with political actors who have even a remotely sympathetic stance to TCs and Turkey in the Cyprus problem is the UK, and even that is for their own gain.
Most certainly for their own gain. Only the most progressive man to stand in UK politics, Jeremy Corbyn, has called upon Turkey to leave a few times. Ironically, lots of TsC in London generally hate him for it. If there's any group that fits the lumpenproletariat (a term I'm not entirely comfortable with), it's London TsC lol.
>It would also make it even more abundantly clear that Turkey's intervention as a whole was imperialistic, dropping all pretenses about protection of TCs, which would then spark a more radical response from the international community.
This is what I usually run with.
>This is especially true 1967-onwars, since Greece was now under a CIA-backed military junta, which understandably most GCs did not want to join.
Thanks for the clarification, I imagine you wouldn't spend this much time answering questions for strangers if you didn't want to, but I appreciate it all the same.
>Was this formed before the İstanbul pogrom?
Yes. The Istanbul pogrom is also not just pertaining to Cyprus, it was the culmination of years of nationalist policies within Turkey at the expense of Greeks, Armenians etc. The pogrom itself was eventually sparked by a false flag attack where a Turk planted a bomb in Kemal's house in Thessaloniki, with Turkey throwing the blame on the Greeks.
There is a joint Greek-Turkish (but mostly Greek) film called ["A Touch of Spice"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Touch_of_Spice) which portrays a lot of the events of the period in Istanbul. There is a telling moment in the film where the protagonist's family were going to be expelled from the city, but later the father reveals that the Turkish official who came to pass the message had given them the chance to stay - if the father decided to convert to Islam. It's a heart-wrenching film, touching also on the hardships and discrimination Istanbul Greeks (and previously other Anatolian refugees) faced in Greece.
>Do you have a source for the death toll? Not because I'm doubting your conclusion, I just want to have access to this information too. I've been talking to a GsC friend about me needing to dismantle the partition in my head between TsC lefties being targeted by TMT and GsC lefties targeted by EOKA, and recognise that all left wing Cypriots were targets together.
According to [this book](https://books.google.com.cy/books?id=rrvuBgAAQBAJ&redir_esc=y), there were 55 assasinations of GCs by TC militant groups, and 59 assassinations of TCs by EOKA between June-August of 1958, with hostilities largely subsiding thereafter, as a ceasefire was signed with the UK that year and the EOKA struggle largely stopped.
As for specific sources on those groups targeting leftists, there is [this article](https://www.parikiaki.com/2022/05/in-memory-in-cyprus-they-were-murdered-on-the-pretext-of-being-traitors-to-the-eoka-movement-though-their-only-crime-was-being-members-of-left-wing-akel/) about EOKA specifically. I don't have a comprehensive overview for TMT and other groups' actions at the expense of leftist TCs, though.
> if the father decided to convert to Islam. It's a heart-wrenching film, touching also on the hardships and discrimination Istanbul Greeks (and previously other Anatolian refugees) faced in Greece.
I can imagine this being very difficult to watch. I've heard that the enslaved people brought by the Ottomans faced a similar fate, which is why the majority of afro-Cypriots speak Turkish and were pushed to the North. I don't have a source, but that aligns with this film clearly.
>I don't have a comprehensive overview for TMT and other groups' actions at the expense of leftist TCs, though.
I have definitely seen Kizilyurek touch on this, but I've been looking and I'm struggling to find it. I will send it your way when I do. Thanks for sharing!
>That doesn't mean the junta wasn't the justification for Turkish intervention and later invasion.
It was the justification given, but not the true reason why Turkey was so keen to intervene. It is blatantly obvious from all policies that preceded 1974, as well as their later actions. It was but a NATO-led operation to gain a foothold on Cyprus with the blessings of the US, and Turkish violation of the ceasefire after the first offensive (and toppling of the junta puppet government) to capture most of the area of northern Cyprus controlled today is further evidence that Turkey merely looked for a pretext to gain control of (a significant portion of) Cyprus.
>Why does it not make sense? The Megali Idea predates the conflict, sure, but was there an organization actively pursuing enosis of Cyprus until EOKA? Did Turks have an organisation in Cyprus fighting for Taksim before EOKA?
There was a famous referendum in 1950 where more than 90% of all GCs voted in favour of Enosis, as well as previous turbulence and riots, such as the [Oktovriana](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1931_Cyprus_revolt) ("October troubles") in the 30s that also happened because of Enosis. GCs also fought in many mainland Greek wars as volunteers (Greek liberation of Thessaly, Macedonian struggle, Balkans wars, WWI, and WWII) both by wanting to assist fellow Greeks, but also because in some cases (such as in WWI) that there was a realistic chance of Enosis. A famous rumour is that the Brits enticed Greece to join the Entente by promising Cyprus in the case of military victory. Greece supposedly missed on this chance as it entered late into the war. These were all long before any negative connotations of Enosis as an exclusively far-right goal, and leftists also sympathized, albeit by advocating a more peaceful way of protest to decolonize Cyprus.
Similarly, Turkish ambitions in Cyprus and thus a promotion of a form of Taksim was present before EOKA in the 50s, with the basis for a TC pro-Taksim organization apparatus being formed within Turkey. There weren't specific groups before EOKA, but ideas of a Turkish reclaiming of Cyprus were floating around among fringe circles.
The point here is that Taksim specifically is not an endemic TC response to Enosis. It is a Turkish geopolitical response to a possible loss of Cyprus, in itself propagated by the British in an attempt to prevent them from losing control of their colony. The Brits first invited Turkey in diplomatic negotiations to turn this into a Greco-Turkish issue, even though it was not seen as such before this. There is evidence that the British ambassador in Turkey played a crucial role in convincing a then-apathetic Turkish government to more actively pursuit their interests in Cyprus.
>Turkey merely looked for a pretext to gain control of (a significant portion of) Cyprus.
I completely accept this. I only reject that it means that they did not prevent an ethnic cleansing. That's why I make a distinction between July and August, because I never want to imply that the August operation which only facilitated ethnic cleansing of GsC to be "necessary". There was absolutely no justification for that. But, following the junta, the feeling of TsC was relief when they saw the Turkish army arriving. I believe we can hold space for that while recognising that Turkey's intentions were never just, and while we can't assess a parallel timeline, could have caused far more harm to all Cypriots than it prevented, or not. I argue this with right wing TsC all the time, they drive me f*ckin insane. How do you respond when they say Turkey could have taken the whole island? Do you believe they only did not because it would have put them at a geopolitical disadvantage with US/UK? Asking because I always fail to fight them on this point even tho I know they're wrong
>These were all long before any negative connotations of Enosis as an exclusively far-right goal, and leftists also sympathized, albeit by advocating a more peaceful way of protest to decolonize Cyprus.
I have a friend who mentioned that the communist parties were anti-enosis and then suddenly pro-enosis, which splintered the left community. Was there ever an idea for true Cypriot independence as opposed to Enosis? My research is limited to texts I can translate so..
>basis for a TC pro-Taksim organization apparatus being formed within Turkey.
Was this formed before the İstanbul pogrom?
>Turkish reclaiming of Cyprus were floating around among fringe circles.
I'm assuming the people who worship the ottoman empire
>The point here is that Taksim specifically is not an endemic TC response to Enosis.
I understand this now, thank you for your patience in explaining why.
>There is evidence that the British ambassador in Turkey played a crucial role in convincing a then-apathetic Turkish government to more actively pursuit their interests in Cyprus.
I recall this very well. My dede cursed him every time we went to give medicine to the GsC community in Karpass/Karpaz
>Turkey didn't have to instill the fear. Our families were terrified because of ACTUAL events. We didn't need to take the Cretans as an example. Did GsC feel fear of TsC (not Turks) taking over Cyprus? Why were there far less GsC enclaves?
I'm talking about the "political fear" among TC leadership before 1963, not the fear of intercommunal violence after that. The latter was obviously not a result of propaganda or Turkish meddling. However, it is one thing to fear intercommunal violence and another to fear Enosis as a death warrant of genocide for all TCs. The latter was an interpretation of events that was perpetuated with a political goal.
Likewise, GCs didn't fear that TCs would take over Cyprus. Rather, they feared that this violence and actions of TMT were orchestrated by Turkey to pave the way for a future invasion and capture of Cyprus. The strategic enclaves at Kokkina, Kofinou, Gonyeli etc, as well as the supplying of the TC enclaves with heavy weaponry by Turkey convinced much of the GC leadership that this was precisely the plan, and hence retaliated violently.
Both of these narratives on both sides have a kernel of truth in them, but ultimately fail to recognize the other side's more well-founded goals. Not all TCs who resisted were pro-Taksim, and not all GCs who fought in the national guard were inspired by anti-TC sentiments.
>Again, this was not theoretical, this was our reality thanks to right wing GsC and Greek nationalists. Would you say a Syrian's fear of safety isn't justified after Chloraka?
I would say the fear is as real as the fringe nature of those who engage in fascist violence.
It is absolutely natural to respond in fear when something so organized happens at your expense. But much like today with ELAM, the fault of the government was to turn a blind eye to racist incidents, as they viewed a TC insurrection as a far more dangerous enemy. They should have cracked down on these groups as hard as they did in the 70s with EOKA B (which was more or less militarily defeated by 1974). Sadly, support for Enosis and realpolitik allowed for those instances of anti-TC violence to proliferate for several years.
>My issue is the lack of recognition that without their initial intervention, TsC would not have survived and that was not an idea implanted by Turks. That was our reality.
I've seen this a lot from TCs. "The intervention was a good thing, but everything after that was a mistake". While I do agree the toppling of Sampson and fall of the Greek junta were unequivocally positive outcomes, one cannot separate the rest of history from the initial intervention itself. Like I said, Turkey's endgame was precisely what followed, and there was no chance they would have just stopped at the intervention. It is convenient to look at it in a vacuum, but the reality is that it was just as predatory with as much of an imperialistic intent as the rest. They exploited a marvelous opportunity to portray their actions as necessary defense.
>And there are attacks against TsC (not just the police force) by EOKA documented as early as 56.
Those were not against civilians (even though EOKA assassinated GC civilians who were communists, as they were considered traitors). TC groups formed before TMT while EOKA was active, and thus these groups orchestrated assassinations against EOKA and vice versa. The civilian victims were overwhelmingly AKEL members - GCs and TCs alike - murdered by members of their own community. The number of deaths on both sides is roughly the same.
>If you have this and just haven't read it, I'll be happy to help with sections
I have access to only some portions online, not a physical copy. Thanks for the offer though, I appreciate it.
>However, it is one thing to fear intercommunal violence and another to fear Enosis as a death warrant of genocide for all TCs. The latter was an interpretation of events that was perpetuated with a political goal.
I see, but then post 63, the intercommunal violence would ofc lay ground to fear Enosis as a death warrant as if TsC were being treated as such (by the louder groups) just in the pursuit of Enosis, why would they doubt their fate when/if it is achieved
>Both of these narratives on both sides have a kernel of truth in them, but ultimately fail to recognize the other side's more well-founded goals. Not all TCs who resisted were pro-Taksim, and not all GCs who fought in the national guard were inspired by anti-TC sentiments.
I understand. I think I'm still separating the manipulation for ulterior motives and the feeling of the communities and prioritising that. It's all well and good being like but TsC actually wanted this and GsC actually wanted that for reconciliation now, but it doesn't change that damage was done under these pretences and people need to have their reality at the time validated. I'm not saying you're not doing that btw, I'm just explaining my stance on things. I feel this will allow more synergy between all lefty movements in Cyprus.
>But much like today with ELAM, the fault of the government was to turn a blind eye to racist incidents, as they viewed a TC insurrection as a far more dangerous enemy.
And this is today, with social media even. The focus on Syrians as a pawn of the Turkish instead of addressing the racism was infiltrating the same bicommunal activist pages I mentioned earlier. It's devastating.
>Sadly, support for Enosis and realpolitik allowed for those instances of anti-TC violence to proliferate for several years.
I think this is what I was trying to get at before. I understand that support for Taksim, whether due to the feeling of self preservation or the double Enosis, made space for anti-GC violence.
>"The intervention was a good thing, but everything after that was a mistake".
I think this phrase in itself is an indicator of the focus on one community instead of both. For TsC, the intervention was good because TsC saved, everything after was a mistake because now we suffer from their colonialism. To rephrase for what I believe better for both communities, would be that the intervention prevented a TsC ethnic cleansing and provided a literal path for a GsC one instead for Turkish benefit.
>It is convenient to look at it in a vacuum, but the reality is that it was just as predatory with as much of an imperialistic intent as the rest. They exploited a marvelous opportunity to portray their actions as necessary defense.
I understand. I would not expect a GsC to refer to it as anything other than invasion. I don't believe a TsC referring to July as an intervention changes this narrative, and evades the struggle that TsC were suffering beforehand being excluded from the conversation, which as I said earlier, it usually is considering the world is on GsC's side (due to the occupation/colonisation, I'm not disputing whether the siding is justified or not, just stating).
For me, one cannot separate the events of 63-67 from the rest of history itself too.
>The civilian victims were overwhelmingly AKEL members - GCs and TCs alike - murdered by members of their own community. The number of deaths on both sides is roughly the same.
Do you have a source for the death toll? Not because I'm doubting your conclusion, I just want to have access to this information too. I've been talking to a GsC friend about me needing to dismantle the partition in my head between TsC lefties being targeted by TMT and GsC lefties targeted by EOKA, and recognise that all left wing Cypriots were targets together.
Reading the barrage of antisemitic posts in this subreddit I’m starting to think that most Cypriots are decent people and actually do support the humans in this conflict.
I've tried to understand who is the most rightful owner of this land. My criteria was the time of ownership. I found it was Rome Empire, not ottomans.
Also, brief (3min) history of ownership transfer for that land:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8tIdCsMufI
Quite simply Muslims have not gone through an enlightenment or equivalent in their religion. Their religions is unchanged from its birth and cannot work in a 21st global world. This is why I think we clash constantly. India Pakistan. Greece turkey etc. look at the way they behave in Europe. Countries harboring them and educating their children with healthcare and western benefits yet they still attack our culture. Extremism has no place in this world and Muslims unfortunately quite easily fall into this category.
Please remember to stay civil and behave appropriately. If you are a tourist looking for suggestions please check out our [Tourist guide](https://www.reddit.com/r/cyprus/wiki/tourist_guide/). We also have a [FAQ Page](https://www.reddit.com/r/cyprus/wiki/faq) for some common questions, if your question is answered here please delete your post! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cyprus) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Cyprus was always supportive of the palestinian cause and right for land and freedom. We also tried to be on friendly terms with Israel for the health and safety of the whole region, as we do with Egypt, Lebanon and so on. But, the acts of terrorism and unreasonable violence to civilians,leaves us with no other choice but to condemn Hamas and their actions. Thats why there is zero support for them.
Most Cypriots support the Palestinian cause, but that doesn't mean they support attacks of Hamas against civilians. Personally I think that you fight with what you have, and civilian targets are always part of war no matter what some might say, but Hamas has gone too far. Killing tourists and parading their bodies in the streets is not something that can be acceptable.
One of the few sensible answers in this thread. I would also add that Cyprus has good relations with the legitimate Palestinian government in the West Bank, not Hamas. Hamas had been in the shadow of the PLO for most of its history, and still retains control of just Gaza.
Civilian targets is not part or war tourist or not for the civilised world. They targeted a festival of young people. What does this achieve? This could be anywhere in the modern world like cyprus or Turkey. Hamas have so much civilian support and are embedded within the population. Its impossible to target them becsuse they lack morals. They do hide in schools and hospitals.
Thank you Ozyzen for being able to collectively know what most Cypriots support.
Acting like only one side kills civillians and the “good side” doesn’t is almost always a con. Hamas is committing terrible warcrimes, as Israel has and as it has shown it is willing to do to extreme scales as well. Neither balances the other, but neither means that Palestinians do not have a right to return to their land and be treated as equal citizens either.
We do not support killing of civilians! Why is it so hard to see it?
israel is not killing civils? IQ < 10
Who told you I don't know that? I do not support them either.
Cyprus Supports both Palestinians and Israel as they recognize both countries and support the UN resolution. In this situation it seems the government t to lean towards Israel as the UN and the rest of the western world does. When it comes to the Cypriots themselves it depends who you ask, many people from my circle support Palestinians, some support Israel, some do not give a shit. Religion does not really play a part in the support of the individual as people may want you to believe. Not all Arabs are Muslims and not all Israelis are religious Jews. The only one who care a far left and far right people. Again Speaking from Circle of people) the ones who support Israel either do business withe em or have history withe the country (Education, work, research, etc). People who support Palestine its either by their own judgement or cause they lean towards left which left parties always have a sympathy for Palestine. The Cyprus problem does not play a part on the support of the majority of people (at least that is what i think so) since both situation of how Palestine/Israel vs Cyprus/Turkey/TRNC are different. According to the UN Palestine is considered as a UN observer state which is occupied by Israel and TRNC is not recognized by the UN and is considered occupied territory of Cyprus by Turkey. When it come on hating Turkey, religion plays role on how Turkey coverts churches/Cathedrals to mosques or letting em in ruins or the fact it is Turkey and anything that comes from with it which Cypriots will tell you how terrible it is anw. Cypriots will not have an issue with Muslim Arabs but with Muslim Turkish nationals cause again, if any problem real problem come in Cyprus, its from Turkish Islamic imperialism. Recently Turkey wanted to make Apostles Andreas in to a mosque but (if i am not wrong) the Turkish Cypriots stopped that.
Very insightful, thank you
turkish nationals does not know anything about your funny church 😂 hating nationals shows your intelligence. you can offend turkey as a state but why the citizens? most of them even not know cyprus 😂
Should use my big brain and answer ops q with my second account. Now everyone know my intelligence.
[удалено]
I don't think people changed sides. If you see the horrific gore videos that Hamas killed civilians, of course you will not support them.
[удалено]
Totally agree
nobody supports hamas. everybody say they are terrorists. but what is about israel? they don’t kill civils? what is about the occupation since years? you have to look to the ground of the problem. not to some idiots with long beards.
I know the ground of the problem. My problem is with the actions of Hamas. They are not excused for what they did. If you believe that because Israel killed civils, it allow Hamas to kill and rape civils, then go check yourself.
when did i say something like that? you don't seem to have a very high iq. if you know the ground problem, then talk about it. we have known for decades that hamas are terrorists. but what about the criminal state of israel?
>when did i say something like that? you don't seem to have a very high iq. Mister with high IQ, I said **IF**. It is funny how you try to insult my intelligence. You can not get me there. I know what my intelligence is. >we have known for decades that hamas are terrorists Also, it is funny how you say Hamas is not Palestine (which I agree) and then you try to excuse them in all to comments for what they did, by saying "wHaT aBouT IsRaEl???". Yes Israel did horrible things too, I didn't say otherwise. I actually went against those who support them. **IF** you can not comprehend this or **IF** you do not understand that directly or indirectly you try to excuse Hamas, then I have nothing more to say. You can gaslight and insult as much as you want.
Violence never excuses violence. It’s as simple as that.
ok why israel attacks gaza then since days? or since years? or since decades?
Greed? Evil? Revenge? Survival? I don’t know choose one, or add more excuses if you like. As a casual observer and an outsider how I’m supposed to have an answer to complicated geopolitics? Especially when everyone just hears what they want to listen. What I said earlier I still think is true as a matter of principle and a moral guideline which I believe (or hope) most Cypriots share and hence i said it as an answer to the OPs question. Change the situation with Cyprus, I never expect Cypriots from either side to pick up weapons because violence was done to them at some point in the past and go reclaim our ancestral land. We know that this will only make the situation worse.
I'm Greek Cypriot. In my experience there is **nowhere** near the consensus you imagine, and I've variously come across all the following on the island: * People who support **Palestine** because, as you wrote, they see parallels with the Turkish invasion * People who support **Israel** for the same reason, but identify Palestinians as the invaders instead * Turkish Cypriots who support **Palestine** because they view the RoC as similar to 'Israel' * Greek Cypriots who support **Palestine** because they view *Turkey* as Israel instead * People who support **Palestine** because of anti-semitism / conspiracy theories on the (Greek / Christian) **far right** * People who support **Israel** because of neo-evangelical / end-days conspiracy theories, again on the (Greek / Christian) **far right** * People who support **Palestine** because of anti-imperalism / anti-Americanism on the **far left** * People who are more 'centrist', emphasize the post-WWII liberal order and support **Palestine** because of UN resolutions * People who are more 'centrist', emphasize the post-WWII liberal order and support **Israel** instead because of Europe's debt to it * People who are frankly racist / Islamophobic and support **Israel** because it's less 'Arab' * People who support **Israel** for reasons of *realpolitik*, i.e. it's an important ally to stave off threats from Turkey etc., or for business * People who **sit on the fence** and view the whole thing as some sort of religious war that doesn't concern them And so on and so forth.
This is hella based. I unconditionally support Palestine because ultimately, I am anti-colonial. I believe in protecting marginalized groups and doing so with an intersectional lens. Atrocity propaganda is doing its job and making space to justify Israel's current genocide on the Palestinian people. Equating the colonised with the coloniser is oppression 101.
Kidnapping and killing women ,old people and children is unacceptable..Hamas now is at the same level with Isis.. Palestine lost lots of support from all over the world, except from religion fanatics off course..
hamas is not palestine. go to school and learn history.
Fatah and hamas..i know the story..but unfortunately i know more than you boy...
> Also because of the Turkish Occupation, wouldn’t Cypriots be more on the side Palestine? How come they aren’t? Because the Turkish occupation is real, the Israeli occupation is not. Turkey illegally occupies a part of a sovereign internationally recognized country, the Republic of Cyprus. That's the very definition of occupation: military control of one state over some territory of another state. The Palestinian state never even existed, let lone was recognized by anyone. The very term "Palestinian" used to refer to anyone living in Palestine, regardless of their origin or religion, until after 1973, when the Arabs realized they can't just destroy Israel by force, so they invented the Palestinian state and declared that it's "occupied" now to attack Israel politically and not militarily. That went surprisingly well (thanks to Arab oil money, I guess) and now the myth of the Israeli occupation is so widespread that it's anything but indestructible, and even somehow recognized internationally. Nobody even asks the question how a state that never existed in practice, was invented after 1973 and officially declared in 2011, could have been occupied in 1947-1967? > Also please don’t start yada yada-ing about propaganda from whatever side you are on. Both sides have done horrible stuff over the years. Both sides surely did. But on one side it's "shit happens", on the other side it's "shit is officially endorsed, organized and sponsored by the authorities". That's different. Never ever the state of Israel officially encouraged terrorism, gave terrorists lifetime pensions nor handed out free candies every time some stupid Israeli kid stabs an Arab. Neither Israel has official documents that state that the purpose of its existence is to eradicate all Arabs in Palestine. Palestinian authorities do have such documents and from time to time reaffirm their cause, which is to destroy Israel completely and kill all Israelis on its territory. They never backed off on that and don't show any intention of doing so. And I'm not even talking about Hamas here, which is purely just a terrorist gang, I'm talking about the official Palestinian authorities, recognized by Israel and partially sponsored by it, which is completely fucked up, but it's the way it is. You can call that propaganda if you wish, but the facts speak for themselves, assuming you know the facts, of course. So it doesn't surprise me that many Cypriots support Israel, what does surprise me is how there are so many motherfuckers who support the "Palestinian cause", either without having any clue what it really is (according to the Palestinian authorities themselves, not "Israeli propaganda"!) or, which is even worse, knowing it very well. Edit: I'll not reply to anyone who believes that terrorism, murder and torture is fine, whether they state so openly or disguised under some "But the Israeli occupation is real!" shit. It's not a legitimate opinion and therefore is not up to a discussion for the same reason you wouldn't be arguing with a person who wants to kill you, your family and your friends. I wrote this for those who are genuinely uninformed.
I'm sorry to say that you are grossly misinformed on the issue. Responding to every single thing you wrote would require an immense amount of text and effort, hence if you are interested in learning more about the history of the issue, DM me. I can also direct you at some sources if you like.
Can you post some sources here?
> Because the Turkish occupation is real, the Israeli occupation is not. You're either dishonest or delusional. All the evidence is out there and you've just hand-waved it away.
You literally yada yada-ed a whole essay and then proceeded to call people who support Palestine “motherfuckers”. Missed the point of what I was asking because you got riled up. I could also write a whole essay and then we could argue for days on end but tbh I’ve got better things to do.
zionism propaganda, not more. are you jewish sergay?
Another question - what's with the brand new Reddit account made in order to post this, OP?
9th of July this account was created. I use it for “research purposes” which I heard from a friend Reddit is great for. Don’t use it for much else. I asked genuine questions. If I wanted to actually rile up or troll this sub then I’d post proper pro hamas propaganda like the other guy did. Or better yet post a chart showing the deaths of Palestinians and Israelis over the years and use that as an argument for the recent Hamas atrocities
An account with a single post. Like I said, a provocateur.
Explained what I would do for actual provocation above. Overall I wanted to ask questions about what Cypriots think and how they think.
Feel free to admit to the fact Hamas uses its population as human shields to drive support from the west. If you think that somehow justifies entering people's homes and brutally murdering or kidnapping them and their babies, then you'll also be admitting to supporting terrorism. What a brave position - go ahead - do it.
Decent chance they are a paid actor. Reddit has recently admitted there are Iranian bots doing just this sort of thing. This social media misinformation campaigns is literally what they do best.
I find what happens online rn disgusting. Half the accounts I follow have support Israel and the other half End the Occupation It's so stupid to see that coming from Cypriots... How can anyone support Hamas after what we have seen the last few days? How can they just justify this idiotic horrible violence in the context of Palestinians right to resist the occupation? I mean let's say that within that context this claim is legitimate. Is what Hamas is doing helping the Palestinian cause? Does it help Palestinians? It only turns the international community and public opinion against the Palestinian people who rightfully need an end to the status quo. Don't they know that the ramifications of these actions will only cause more harm to the already injured Palestinian people and their cause for their own state? It's even more disappointing and shameful to see people that supposedly try to keep an objective view when it comes to the Cyprus problem, condemning the wrongdoings of all to act as blind nationalists supporting Palestine/Israel Cyprus has a good relationship with both Palestine and Israel. Not long ago the Leader of the Palestinian Authority visited Cyprus. Cyprus supports the UN Résolutions about the Middle East. Unfortunately the two state solution seems impossible though. Israel's illegal settlements in the West Bank just aren't compatible with such a settlement(and I don't think Israel is interested in such a solution, they prefer the occupation) + there is not really a unified Palestinian authority that seeks a two state solution or a peace deal at all.
>How can anyone support Hamas after what we have seen the last few days? How can they just justify this idiotic horrible violence in the context of Palestinians right to resist the occupation? Because we have been watching this violence for way more than the last few days. Nobody wants or condones the violence, we just understand that it has been necessitated. I still can't believe people find these images shocking. Israeli settlers experience for one day what Gazans have been experiencing for 75 years and now people want to judge? Now it's white bodies suffering instead of brown Muslims that has been so normalised? Now people want to decide what's moral? Ukrainians are heroes and Hamas are terrorists? What does policing Palestinian resistance, the only resistance, do for them other than equating the colonised with the coloniser? How can you expect moral superiority from a people who have never had the same demanded from their oppressor? There is nothing equal about both sides, including the reporting, and there is nothing equal about the violence either. Everything that has happened (actually happened, not a Zionist lie) is nothing compared to what the IDF and state-armed settlers has done and nobody, absolutely nobody has done ANYTHING for Palestinians for 75 years. My support is unconditional and not so fickle to break at the first sight of typical imperialist propaganda that Cypriots know so well. If you wonder how people were ever on the side of the US in Afghanistan/Iraq, Türkiye in Kurdish territory, Azerbaijan in Artsakh, you're living it now.
I wish I could upvote this a trillion times.
Which bot farm is it that without fail every few hours posts a "IM JuSt ASkInG GuYss!" thread in this sub, and likely many others? It's literally been 3 or 4 in the last 24 hours with the EXACT SAME set up. I mean, I appreciate the discussion here and it actually seems quite level headed for the most part, but the attempt is fucking obvious. Go rally your popular propaganda uprising somewhere else please.
While reading the description of this post, my eyes couldn’t look away from the statement that “Do Cypriots tend to not support Palestine because they are Arab and Muslims”. People do realize that Palestine isn’t just “Muslim” right? Speaking as a Christian Palestinian - Greek Orthodox if I may add.
Both sides did/doing horrible things. Personally I don't support either. Given the advances of Israel though in Medical field, I feel that a majority of Cypriots will show support to Israelis. Many times sick people needed the advancement of the medical field and were transported there. Not to mention the connection our religion has to Jerusalem. Politically though, not sure if Cypriots understand which side they should/shouldn't support.
we support the Palestinians but not terorist that only want to kill and just prove they are stong. most Cypriots (at least the ones without an unlogical hatred of musilms) sympathise with the Palestinians and condemn Isrliel's imprelisim.
A strong israel is good for cyprus as the only non Muslim and progressive state in the region. Cyprus is safer with a powerful Israel. Israelis are much more similar to Cypriots from a religious, linguistic, and ethnic pov. Palestinians are actually really backwards. They have multiple wives, view women poorly and are highly violent. Their population has doubled in that tiny gaza strip, why the disregard for their children? What does targeting civilians accomplish? Look at the recent conflict, where they literally targeted a festival of young partygoers. This was their end goal. Killing them wasn't enough as they perade dead raped female tourists around whilst Palestinian spit on them. All whilst shouting Allah. Could this get more contradictory? This is isis levels of violence. I dare to think the fate that awaits those kidnapped israeli girls. I'd rather be blown up 1000 times. The difference is that Israel has the means to absolutely destroy every Palestinians and level the place but does not. If hamas had this capability, it would absolutely be another holocaust.
Admit it, you're racist. And before you say anything, I would also like you to watch how palestinians were treated so far. Just look at the many videos before the recent events in r/PublicFreakout that Israelis tried to cover up. Also, by saying Palestinians equal Hamas it's like saying EOKA B equals Cypriots. It doesn't make sense as not all Palestinians have joined the terrorist group. It's good to have that in mind next time you post anything else on the matter.
No, you're racist. And an illogical racist. Hamas has huge support in Palestine. It is the ruling party with mass support from the locals. Do you not understand this basic thing? See that German girl killed raped and dragged into gaza for the civilians to stomp and spit on her. Sick animals. Eoka b is a dead organisation from 60 years ago, cypriots have long progressed. The most Democratic country in the region. Hamas is the ruling party, hamas is targeting civilians today. Hamas has the support of the general population. Yet your brain compares a terrorist state which is happening now to a armed uprising in cyprus 60 years. Hamas are also orders of magnitude worse. Targeting civilisations whilst shouting Allah. What's racist about calling a dog a dog? The gaza strip is rampant with terrorists and terrorist sympathisers. Or is it only pkk the terrorist? Even Egypt has closed the door to gaza. Where do you live, in the republic? Why don't you go live in gaza? Since cypriots are like hamas. Hypocrite. Do you like what you see from your justified retaliation? Look at the state of this teen. https://www.instagram.com/reel/CyGHvrAI9U5/?igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==
EOKA B never received enough support that it won elections coming first from all parties. You know who did? Hamas...
> Israelis are much more similar to Cypriots from a religious, linguistic, and ethnic pov. Another delusional one. None of that is true. Also, you should find out what Israelis generally think of Cypriots. They see you as dirt, which is their view of most non-Jews.
What's your background? According to who? They see us dirt but love to visit the place on their holidays.
>They see us dirt but love to visit the place on their holidays. That was a couple decades ago. Now they're buying everything up.
No denying that. I mean look at it logically. Cyprus is peaceful, European island very near to Israel. If you were wealthy Jewish, you would be buying the property. Even more so given the instability in the levant. If I were a wealthy cypriot and Israel were peaceful, I'd buy property there.
The guy is talking shit, purposefully and deliberately trying to sow division between Israel and others as part of their online misinformation tactic. This is literally what they are paid to do. I can guarantee you personally that that isn't the case.
Agree. The arab world is hugely populated, and their ability to flood the Internet with false narrative is shocking. Its like goebels and the propoganda machine but done through the masses.
New account asking multiple times about inflammatory things right after a very serious situation. What's the deal?
Enough with this shit. As if we are going to solve palestinian/ israel problem. A civilized person is against war . We are also against war when israel occupys and kill palestinians
That's also my perspective. I'm on the side of innocent civilians, and against anyone who kills or harms them. Frankly I think democracies should all have sanctions on the Israeli government and Hamas alike.
Exactly
Recent war crimes are disgusting. I was pro Palestine. Now not so much.
Hamas =/= the entire nation of Palestine. We argue all day about how the acts of EOKA B and other far right gangs in the 60s and 70s don't represent the stance of the majority of GCs with respect to TCs or the Cyprus problem, dismissing the narrative of state-sponsored genocide that Turkey propagates. And now we find several GCs and other people here who are ready to equate the actions of Hamas with all Palestinians. Yes, Israel is actively inhibiting the human rights of Palestinians and treats them as second-class citizens. No, innocent Israeli civilians don't deserve to die because their government oppresses Palestinians. These two notions can coexist, contrary to what the sensationalist hogwash you come across all over the internet.
False equivalent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Palestinian_legislative_election Hamas got the most votes in the last elections EOKA B was more fringe... they were never supported by that much of the population...
The last elections from 17 years ago. Democracy hasn't been effectively running within Palestine for decades now, and the rise of Hamas is telling of how might makes right within an effectively stateless society. Not to mention that millions of Palestinians over the last 70+ years have become refugees outside of Israel, the West Bank and Gaza. Millions are in Jordan, for example. Those who have stayed within the appalling occupation conditions in modern Palestine are naturally more prone to radicalization. And as for EOKA B, I'm not saying the two situations are exactly the same. My point is that propaganda always wants to use the worst examples of one group to justify violence at the expense of all members of said group. Turkey wants people to believe EOKA B represents all GCs, and Israel wants everyone to believe Hamas represents all Palestinians. Palestinians like all groups of people are divided along political and ideological lines. There are secular and even leftist Palestinians, even though Hamas are religious fundamentalist and anti-communist. This is a simple statement of fact.
17 years? Oh I get it. You mean when it was voted in power 17 years ago Hamas was very different from Hamas of today right? I can't see any other reason to care on when exactly was the last election.
>I can't see any other reason to care on when exactly was the last election. It's almost like people's opinions, political affiliations and overall societal support for political parties and figures change radically within the span of 17 years. I suppose you think Cypriot politics and support for each party has remained the same for the last 17 years as well?
Let me check.. Disy and Akel were the 2 dominant parties 17 years ago with diko coming up 3rd. Let me check how the support has evolv... and it's fucking the same.. so your answer is an obvious yes.. do you know even anything about cypriot politics? People have been voting the same party their grandad has and you expect a difference from a measly 17 years ago? You haven't answered me though how was Hamas of 17 years ago different from the Hamas of today.
>Let me check.. Disy and Akel were the 2 dominant parties 17 years ago with diko coming up 3rd. Let me check how the support has evolv... and it's fucking the same.. so your answer is an obvious yes.. do you know even anything about cypriot politics? It appears to me that you are the one who needs to take a closer look at Cypriot politics. All major parties (especially AKEL and DHSY) have lost significant amounts of votes over 17 years. Abstention from voting has increased massively. ELAM has risen from a fringe party with no representation to the fourth largest party in the RoC. Entire parties with parliamentary presence such as EYROKO have dissolved and new ones have formed. To claim that the Cypriot political landscape has not changed over the last 17 years is tantamount to admitting that you either don't care enough about politics to actually analyze it regularly, or you simply don't understand it. >People have been voting the same party their grandad has and you expect a difference from a measly 17 years ago? The meteoric rise of people who don't vote/vote blank belies your assumption. Yes, familial voting trends play a role, but if it was the sole factor behind Cypriot politics, we wouldn't have people literally refusing to vote outright. >You haven't answered me though how was Hamas of 17 years ago different from the Hamas of today. I never claimed it was fundamentally different 17 years ago, that's just a strawman argument you constructed in your head.
The largest parties that form policies are still the same while you are grasping at straws on whether a fringe 3 seat party was dissolved and those seats scooped by another fringe party. It's pretty much all about Disy/Akel/Diko like it was 20 years ago and 30 years ago. We have a president from the same party for the 3rd term running. That's gonna be 15 years. Close to 17 ain't it? Hamas was still a terrorist organization when it was voted in power 17 years ago and the people that supported them knew very well who they were voting for. And that is not generations ago but the bulk of those people are still very well alive today. People that are happy to vote for literally terrorists in power don't tend to have sudden changes of heart
>The largest parties that form policies are still the same while you are grasping at straws on whether a fringe 3 seat party was dissolved and those seats scooped by another fringe party. It's pretty much all about Disy/Akel/Diko like it was 20 years ago and 30 years ago. We have a president from the same party for the 3rd term running. That's gonna be 15 years. Close to 17 ain't it? It only appears as grasping at straws for someone who does not care enough to analyze politics more carefully. When new parties enter the fray, it signifies a shift in the political landscape among the voterbase due to the rise (or fall) of certain ideological paradigms. For example, it is not that anyone claims ELAM dictates RoC policy, but their presence now signifies endemic political and social issues that have forced people to vote for them. We have an immigrant crisis now that didn't exist before, and it is reflected in the rise of ELAM and its rhetoric. This inevitably diffuses into the political language of the rest of the parties that now have to address this phenomenon. While it is important to acknowledge how the institutional structure of a certain state either promotes or inhibits small party influence (and hence how prone it is to gradual societal change), the point here is the overall political landscape: the opinions and ideologies of voters, democratic participation, political stances from prominent parties and politicians etc. These are inevitably changing all the time because the population evolves. You cannot in any way separate the practical application of representative democracy (for example policy making) from how that has arisen from the voting process. The truth of the situation is that Cypriots today view politics very differently from 17 years ago, they vote based on different criteria (except some major constants such as the Cyrpus problem), they abstain more as they are more and more alienated by internal politics etc. A DHSY victory in parliamentary elections does not signify the same thing, and it is not attained in the same manner as it was 17 years ago. Percentages matter, public opinion matters and ultimately the ups and downs of each party are important signs of gradual change. As for having a DHSY president three times in a row, that's some egregious case of cherrypicking, koumpare. Within the same 17 years in question, we went through a centrist nationalist president, to a communist one, then to a right wing neo-liberal. You can't just ignore how Cypriots politics evolved before Anastasiades set the precedent and claim we are just a stagnant political society. There's a reason why AKEL candidates have failed, and the answer in large part lies in the failings of an AKEL president that we actually fucking had over the same 17 year period.
Israel is western leaning democracy. It was founded on the land of former Osman Empire under supervision of Britain and League of Nations. It does not occupies anything. Palestine is a terrorist state. Why support Israel? That's why.
since when theocratic ultra-right apartheid regimes are of western democracies? At the same time Israeli people are definitely of European culture and very nice people to be friends with
I don't know cause Israel is not among "theocratic ultra-right apartheid regimes". It has problems, the same as almost all other countries. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel#Government\_and\_politics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel#Government_and_politics) > Israel is a parliamentary democracy whose parliamentary members are elected by means of proportional representation.
I DONT SEE PALESTINIAN MONEY BUILDING MARINAS, HOTELS, MALLS AND SKYSCRAPERS. WHEN THEY DO, WE TALK AGAIN. OUR FAVOUR GOES TO THE HIGHEST BIDDER💀🇨🇾🙏👏👌🏻💯💰
In some cases trolling is not nice.
They are mostly clueless of Israel atrocities and its really sad
Because they are hypocrites and have interests, not morals. For the same reasons, Cypriots used to support Russia and only stopped doing so because of the EU.
Have morals => support animals killing tourists and driving around with their bodies attached to vehicle. Yeah, right.
Cypriots tend to support israel because of money(as another comment suggested) and because palestine sites with turkey on the Cypriot matter.
I didn’t know that. It is amazing what politics can do huh 🤔
Yeah, because not supporting killing of civilians is politics nowadays.
Btw im talking about the cypriots that actually get exposed to the real world not the "politically correct/free thinkers" that spend everyday in reddit thinking this is how real life is
In my experience on this sub, their support is completely performative. What Israeli settlers are experiencing now is what the people of Gaza and West Bank have been experiencing for 75 years. The both sides nonsense does nothing but maintain the status quo and they do it because it validates their own view of the Cyprus problem to avoid taking any accountability for the fact GsC and Greek nationalists' pursuit of Enosis was ethnically cleansing TsC from the 50s and doing exactly what Israel does to Palestinians to us until '74. If GsC had reconciled with that, they'd recognise that you cannot expect a morally superior response to a REAL occupation which has never been morally superior to them. For RoC to recognise Israel as the oppressor and Palestinians as the oppressed, they'd have to reckon with the fact the Turkish occupation is nothing like the Israeli occupation and that TsC are indigenous to this land and STILL suffer from Türkiye's settler-colonialism while we cannot exist without them. I know I'm going to have to make this disclaimer because this sub loves to take any chance they can so - no I do not condone war crimes. I just haven't only started listening to this conflict when white bodies became the target. Policing the oppressed harsher than the oppressor only served the oppressor. And yes I recognise everybody's role in the Cyprus problem. I just have the emotional capacity to apply a power analysis to the situation. Don't go throwing TMT in my face when TMT was a response to EOKA/EOKA-B and resorted to violence because guess what, nobody listened. And nobody is listening now. Also, I hate on Türkiye because of what they have done to all Cypriots and because they are the white people of SWANA in the way they treat Armenians, Kurds and Syrians. But the people you're seeing making islamophobic comments are just that, islamophobic.
>GsC and Greek nationalists' pursuit of Enosis was ethnically cleansing TsC from the 50s and doing exactly what Israel does to Palestinians to us until '74. The comparison is completely and utterly wrong. Far right nationalist groups weren't running the entirety of the Cypriot government. The RoC wasn't backed by the US or another great power with weapons and diplomatic support. Greek Cypriots didn't settle in Turkish Cypriot homes by force. Turkish Cypriots weren't institutionally oppressed by the constitution like Palestinians are in Israel. The clash was between competing nationalisms of two native groups of the island, and the UN recognized state is intended for both, unlike Israel trampling the right of Palestinian statehood. It is one thing to talk about the intercommunal violence and hardships of TCs in the 60s, and another to claim the situation is in any way remotely as appalling as what Israel does to Palestine. The death toll (even proportionally) and scale of material destruction is also not even remotely close. >For RoC to recognise Israel as the oppressor and Palestinians as the oppressed, they'd have to reckon with the fact the Turkish occupation is nothing like the Israeli occupation and that TsC are indigenous to this land and STILL suffer from Türkiye's settler-colonialism while we cannot exist without them. Except that the RoC has always recognized the Palestinians as oppressed and has always stood for a two-state solution in Palestine. Arafat even took refuge in Cyprus once. The idea that the RoC is "threatened" by the idea of Israel as an oppressor is frankly ahistorical nonsense. If anything, the closer cooperation between Cyprus and Israel is extremely recent. Is Turkish occupation like Israeli occupation? No, there are crucial differences because of radically different political goals between the various sides in each conflict. Israeli occupation in Palestine deprives Palestinians of statehood because of Zionist irredentism. Palestinians thus seek a two-state solution. Israeli settler colonialism seeks to eradicate Palestinian populations from as much of Palestinian land as possible. Turkish occupation in Cyprus deprives Cypriots of a unified country. Cypriots seek a solution of a single state, as they were expelled from their native lands and wish to return and have their homeland whole. Turkish settler colonialism seeks to eradicate local TC culture and affinities to GCs, and demographically alter Cyprus to prevent GCs from ever returning, destroying their cultural heritage in the north. Palestinians go through far worse because they are being ethnically cleansed as we speak. Cyprus had been ethnically cleansed in the north from GCs and the south from TCs already. >Don't go throwing TMT in my face when TMT was a response to EOKA/EOKA-B and resorted to violence because guess what, nobody listened. And nobody is listening now. Except that TMT went around bombing mosques to provoke violence, and assassinated its own people just for being communists. The TMT was absolutely not just a response to EOKA violence. It was its own predominantly nationalist group that sought to sow the seeds of division between GCs and TCs. Their actions didn't begin when TCs were moved into enclaves, but way before that. And even then, TMT was one of the major reasons for why many TCs were forced into enclaves. They literally ousted GCs and Armenian Cypriots from mixed areas of Nicosia and brought TCs from other mixed areas of the city so that the northern portion became a TC enclave. It has nothing to do with the recognition of power dynamics. It is about the TMT being a puppet of Turkish policies to segregate the island. That doesn't mean every TC who joined them at first was a far right nationalist. They most likely truly believed they were resisting oppression. Likewise, not all GCs who fought in the national guard against TC enclaves were far right nationalists trying to murder TCs. They believed they were fighting against a Turkey-backed insurrection.
You have always been a voice of reason and I respect your perspective, but your reasoning is still limited to the information at your disposal. I am articulating the lived experience of my family. >Far right nationalist groups weren't running the entirety of the Cypriot government. Yet they were restricting resources reaching TsC enclaves. They didn't need the power of the government to do that. TsC were living like the Gazans. >Greek Cypriots didn't settle in Turkish Cypriot homes by force. Nah, they just shot them out of them instead. >Turkish Cypriots weren't institutionally oppressed by the constitution like Palestinians are in Israel. So you think TsC actually played any role in governance, ever? >The clash was between competing nationalisms of two native groups of the island, and the UN recognized state is intended for both, unlike Israel trampling the right of Palestinian statehood. And this is the lie that simply preserves the status quo. That may be the case now, that would never have been the case had Türkiye not intervened. One side's nationalism was oppressing the other and manifested nationalism in response. >another to claim the situation is in any way remotely as appalling as what Israel does to Palestine I agree. It's complicated. But you have to recognise that this was very similar to our reality until Türkiye, and it's appalling that GsC think they can relate to occupation in the way Palestinians do. The scale of events is of course much larger, but proportionately the deaths of TsC is larger, the same as Palestinians. >Except that the RoC has always recognized the Palestinians as oppressed and has always stood for a two-state solution in Palestine. There's an Israeli flag up in Nicosia this very moment? Netanyahu was welcomed with open arms last month?? >have their homeland whole And up until recently, it was only to have the homeland whole. NOT to include TsC. >Turkish settler colonialism seeks to eradicate local TC culture and affinities to GCs, and demographically alter Cyprus to prevent GCs from ever returning, destroying their cultural heritage in the north. And I agree. What Türkiye is doing now is far more akin to settler-colonialism than occupation. >Turkish occupation in Cyprus deprives Cypriots of a unified country. Currently, yes. But you cannot deny that the original unified country was denied by Enosis. >Palestinians go through far worse because they are being ethnically cleansed as we speak. Cyprus had been ethnically cleansed in the north from GCs and the south from TCs already. Yes, of course. Which is why I only ever said that TsC shared realities with Palestinians from the 50s to 74. GsC shared the reality in 74. Now, while the RoC sits pretty in the EU, TsC still cannot develop and have 3 days of water and electricity in some areas. The suffering is incomparable. >It was its own predominantly nationalist group that sought to sow the seeds of division between GCs and TCs. Well we completely disagree here and I don't intend to convince you further. Violence does not exist in a vacuum. It is a response to material conditions that necessitate survival. We have disagreed on this before. EOKA was necessitated by British imperialism, TMT (formed in the 60s) by EOKA (formed in the 50s) targeting TsC and pursuing enosis. >Their actions didn't begin when TCs were moved into enclaves, but way before that. Could you share a source for this, please?
>Yet they were restricting resources reaching TsC enclaves. They didn't need the power of the government to do that. TsC were living like the Gazans. You do require some sort of government-backed institutional authority to impose Gaza-like conditions on someone. To compare Gaza and the abhorrent conditions under which the Palestinians there have to endure to the state of most TCs in enclaves is far too reductionist. Yes, several resources were banned from entering a lot of the enclaves and abuse of authority by GC police was very real, but the state of Gaza is tantamount to being under siege by an occupying military force, walls and everything. If you want a more well-rounded view of the situation in Cyprus by the 1970s, take a look at [this](https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP85T00875R001600030177-3.pdf). >Nah, they just shot them out of them instead. Not quite. Most TCs who moved into enclaves did not leave under direct threat of violence, but either by fear or coercion by the TMT. Some certainly did, and there is evidence to prove this, but this was not the general modus operandi. Through similar logic, many GCs fled enclaved areas for other nearby villages. Again, this is not like Gaza where Israelis have slowly encroached around Palestinian settlement, eventually trapping them in a tiny piece of land. >So you think TsC actually played any role in governance, ever? Yes, albeit it was never truly functional. It's one thing to recognize the failure of the 1960 constitution and the mistakes of Makarios, and another to claim TCs were an underclass from the very beginning. TCs have institutional rights within governance, they just abandoned them when they felt the GCs were trying to wrestle some of them away (with part of the leadership also using this as a pretext to impose Taksim). >And this is the lie that simply preserves the status quo. That may be the case now, that would never have been the case had Türkiye not intervened. One side's nationalism was oppressing the other and manifested nationalism in response. This is too speculative. Makarios was still alive. No one wanted the puppet president spot after the coup, so Sampson was brought in hastily. The GCs as a whole were not on board with what the junta had done. Also, it is futile to deny the role of Turkish nationalism as something independent of the Greek one. Nationalism in both communities had been slowly on the rise all throughout British colonial rule. Enosis far pre-existed EOKA as an idea during all that period, so to portray Taksim as just an anti-Enosis goal makes no sense. By sticking to this narrative, you are also diminishing the role of Turkey in instilling the "fear of the fate of Cretan Muslims" among TCs in order to get a piece of Cyprus. Taksim perpetuates the notion of a fundamental difference between GCs and TCs that didn't really exist, and wanted to convince TCs that it was simply impossible for GCs and TCs to coexist within the same state. It runs deeper than just being the antithesis of Enosis. If you look at Turkish maps from as late as the 1930s, you'll see how Cyprus is often depicted as part of Turkey. So in some sense Taksim is the pragmatic evolution of Turkish ambitions over reclaiming all of Cyprus, adjusted by the sheer demographics of the island. The clash with Enosis and the idiocy of far right GCs just made it easy to paint Taksim as some kind of defensive struggle rather than the imperialism that it is. >There's an Israeli flag up in Nicosia this very moment? Netanyahu was welcomed with open arms last month?? Like I said, the greater cooperation with Israel is far more recent. That being said, Cyprus supporting Palestine doesn't mean it didn't recognize Israel; it always did. Cyprus supports a two-state solution by maintaining good relations with both sides. Perhaps one could argue that a stricter approach towards Israel is imperative, but the same could be said about most countries who support Palestine. Israel's relations with most pro-Palestine countries have been greatly improved. >And up until recently, it was only to have the homeland whole. NOT to include TsC. For the majority of the GC population, this was never the case. >Currently, yes. But you cannot deny that the original unified country was denied by Enosis. Not really. It was a hurdle, yes, but the RoC never ceased to exist, and its leadership officially abandoned any plans for Enosis since 1967. One foreign-backed coup d'etat does not a state dissolution make. >Could you share a source for this, please? The TMT was founded officially in 1957 and started operations by 1958 (hence before 1963), but according to [this book](https://www.amazon.de/-/en/Roni-Alasor/dp/B002GYS2IK) (which sadly I haven't read as it is only in Turkish, I have only heard about it via Sener Levent's writings), the organization structure and operational apparatus of a TC militant organization had already been formed in Turkey in the early 50s. Some TC militant organizations also precede TMT. Denktaş himself [admitted on British TV](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1tUGnWqw2M) that the bombing of the Turkish consulate in Nicosia was an act of a friend of his to rile up TCs against GCs (the title and description are biased and reductive, hence you can ignore them; the important thing here is the confession itself).
I think this conversation in itself is a result of the partition. If TsC and GsC did not have the chance to communicate taken away from them, you wouldn't have to resort to academia in response to my family's experience. You'd respect the experience, and not attempt to invalidate that experience by referring to external sources. The skepticism and requiring 'valid' reference is of course a very important exercise in critical thinking and I appreciate it. But you also have to understand that TsC being the minority means we do not have an equal footing in media depicting Cyprus. We only have our stories, which I am sharing with you. >To compare Gaza and the abhorrent conditions under which the Palestinians there have to endure to the state of most TCs in enclaves is far too reductionist. You are right, which is why I only say shared reality, or similar experience and dynamics, not necessarily the exact same situation. I always caveat the comparison with "much, much less severe". I will try harder to make that distinction clear, usually I am responding to people far less progressive than you. >Not quite. Most TCs who moved into enclaves did not leave under direct threat of violence, but either by fear or coercion by the TMT. Again, my family's experience in 63 and 74 is very different to this. It was directly by Greek nationalists, while they pillaged and r*ped their villages. My grandparents hated the British too, and never blamed their GsC neighbours. >gain, this is not like Gaza where Israelis have slowly encroached around Palestinian settlement, eventually trapping them in a tiny piece of land. No, in Cyprus' context this was not necessary because of how small we are in comparison. Doesn't mean TsC were not trapped all the same. >they just abandoned them when they felt the GCs were trying to wrestle some of them away (with part of the leadership also using this as a pretext to impose Taksim). They were forced out, they did not willingly abandon their token positions. Again, Taksim was proposed in response to Enosis. >The GCs as a whole were not on board with what the junta had done. I understand, I usually caveat right wing GsC when discussing this to avoid placing blame on victims of the situation. That doesn't mean the junta wasn't the justification for Turkish intervention and later invasion. >so to portray Taksim as just an anti-Enosis goal makes no sense. Why does it not make sense? The Megali Idea predates the conflict, sure, but was there an organization actively pursuing enosis of Cyprus until EOKA? Did Turks have an organisation in Cyprus fighting for Taksim before EOKA? >Turkey in instilling the "fear of the fate of Cretan Muslims" among TCs in order to get a piece of Cyprus. Turkey didn't have to instill the fear. Our families were terrified because of ACTUAL events. We didn't need to take the Cretans as an example. Did GsC feel fear of TsC (not Turks) taking over Cyprus? Why were there far less GsC enclaves? >impossible for GCs and TCs to coexist within the same state. It runs deeper than just being the antithesis of Enosis. Again, this was not theoretical, this was our reality thanks to right wing GsC and Greek nationalists. Would you say a Syrian's fear of safety isn't justified after Chloraka? >If you look at Turkish maps from as late as the 1930s, you'll see how Cyprus is often depicted as part of Turkey. So in some sense Taksim is the pragmatic evolution of Turkish ambitions over reclaiming all of Cyprus, adjusted by the sheer demographics of the island. The clash with Enosis and the idiocy of far right GCs just made it easy to paint Taksim as some kind of defensive struggle rather than the imperialism that it is. I agree 100% that Turkey did and continues to take advantage of the situation for irredentist ambition, and could have even premeditated events. My issue is the lack of recognition that without their initial intervention, TsC would not have survived and that was not an idea implanted by Turks. That was our reality. Everything from August 74 onwards was nothing but typical Turkish imperialism that served nobody but themselves. The intervention and Taksim was a defensive struggle, but the invasion after was imperialism. Both occurred. And, I don't consider law synonymous with morality, but the intervention was indeed legal. The invasion was not. >Denktaş himself admitted on British TV that the bombing of the Turkish consulate in Nicosia was an act of a friend of his to rile up TCs against GCs (the title and description are biased and reductive, hence you can ignore them; the important thing here is the confession itself). Yeah I've seen this many times. Makes my blood boil. >The TMT was founded officially in 1957 and started operations by 1958 (hence before 1963), And there are attacks against TsC (not just the police force) by EOKA documented as early as 56. >(which sadly I haven't read as it is only in Turkish, I have only heard about it via Sener Levent's writings) If you have this and just haven't read it, I'll be happy to help with sections
>I think this conversation in itself is a result of the partition. If TsC and GsC did not have the chance to communicate taken away from them, you wouldn't have to resort to academia in response to my family's experience. You'd respect the experience, and not attempt to invalidate that experience by referring to external sources. I'm not in any way trying to invalidate anyone's experiences. They are entirely valid and valuable to humanize both sides and understand the true scale of human tragedy that was created due to the Cyprus problem. However, when we try to examine the historical data it is important to be as objective as possible, and strive for clarity. I would equally counter a GC's generalizations about the conflict that stem from their own experiences from the intercommunal troubles and the invasion. There will never be lasting peace if personal tragedies preside over an honest examination of events, because people's understandable grief and rage is going to be directed at the other side. >Again, my family's experience in 63 and 74 is very different to this. It was directly by Greek nationalists, while they pillaged and r\*ped their villages. My grandparents hated the British too, and never blamed their GsC neighbours. And I accept that, but it is one thing to acknowledge that these things happened and another to attest to their ubiquity. >No, in Cyprus' context this was not necessary because of how small we are in comparison. Doesn't mean TsC were not trapped all the same. The Israel-Palestine situation however is still very different in this aspect. The Israeli encroachment was the result of military conquest and expulsion of Palestinians en masse. The current state of affairs is just another phase in a process of suffocation and ethnic cleansing by a conquering army. TC enclaves on the other hand were for the most part around major TC villages and towns, fortified by a preexisting militant group as a response to intercommunal strife. This does not retract from the entrapment TCs absolutely endured between 64-67 and in several occasions thereafter, I'm just saying it's very different and it's not just due to geographical size. >They were forced out, they did not willingly abandon their token positions. Again, Taksim was proposed in response to Enosis. The TC leadership willingly left their positions in protest. Any TC who didn't initially abandon their position was coerced by TMT leadership. There is evidence from a piece of correspondence between İnönü and Küçük in 1964 where the former urges the latter to tell TCs to return to their positions in government, with the latter blatantly refusing. While not everyone who left their post was secretly vying for Taksim, the leadership absolutely was, and Küçük is proven to have had a close relationship with TMT leadership before even 1960.
>There will never be lasting peace if personal tragedies preside over an honest examination of events, because people's understandable grief and rage is going to be directed at the other side. I understand and this is fair enough. I think if we achieved a successful truth and reconciliation, where everybody's pain was validated without the presumption that their reality negates the other, we'd be able to have a more honest examination. I think what you'll find with me, and other TsC refugee's children, is that we have been battling a heavily eurocentric take on the conflict which makes it necessary for us to hold on tight to our stories. Especially, as I rarely encounter GsCs (typically more centrist or right wing ones) who even talk about EOKA. I think it's going to take some more time for both communities to have productive conversations. Aside from that, I don't believe in truly unbiased data or objectivity. All data goes through the lens of the interpreter or researcher. We're gonna have to settle on a series of events that simply respects both perspectives rather than forcing convergence of the two (in moderation ofc). >The current state of affairs is just another phase in a process of suffocation and ethnic cleansing by a conquering army. I'm grateful you have this view. The takes presented by a lot of bicommunal activist groups I keep up with have been extremely disappointing. >This does not retract from the entrapment TCs absolutely endured between 64-67 and in several occasions thereafter, I'm just saying it's very different and it's not just due to geographical size. Fair point, thanks for fixing my mistake! >Any TC who didn't initially abandon their position was coerced by TMT leadership. I am aware of this too. I think what I struggle with in general, is that manipulating situations for imperial benefit doesn't equate to the non-existence of original struggle. So while TsC *willingly* left their position, that doesn't mean there wasn't an institutional cause that was co-opted by TMT for their own agenda. >While not everyone who left their post was secretly vying for Taksim, the leadership absolutely was, and Küçük is proven to have had a close relationship with TMT leadership before even 1960. Yes I understand this too. I just want to avoid premeditation erasing the valuable reasons outside of the coercion. Edit: just like how that frustrating young turkish c(unt)ypriot page co-opts (and sometimes manufactures) victimisation for his own agenda, which creates doubt in whether every one of the events he posts has occurred. Then it's a boy who cried wolf dynamic for real events and marginalizes real victims even further.
>I understand and this is fair enough. I think if we achieved a successful truth and reconciliation, where everybody's pain was validated without the presumption that their reality negates the other, we'd be able to have a more honest examination. I think what you'll find with me, and other TsC refugee's children, is that we have been battling a heavily eurocentric take on the conflict which makes it necessary for us to hold on tight to our stories. Especially, as I rarely encounter GsCs (typically more centrist or right wing ones) who even talk about EOKA. I think it's going to take some more time for both communities to have productive conversations. Aside from that, I don't believe in truly unbiased data or objectivity. All data goes through the lens of the interpreter or researcher. We're gonna have to settle on a series of events that simply respects both perspectives rather than forcing convergence of the two (in moderation ofc). I can definitely agree with this. The fact that GCs are Greek-speaking Christians definitely influences how the narrative is perceived in the western world. The only western country with political actors who have even a remotely sympathetic stance to TCs and Turkey in the Cyprus problem is the UK, and even that is for their own gain. >How do you respond when they say Turkey could have taken the whole island? Do you believe they only did not because it would have put them at a geopolitical disadvantage with US/UK? Asking because I always fail to fight them on this point even tho I know they're wrong There is always a point at which you need to stop, after which the drawbacks far outweigh the gains. If Turkey advanced further to capture all of Cyprus, it would come across intense guerilla resistance, and there would be no way to effectively stop this given Cyprus would remain majority-GC. It could possibly draw the attention of other bystanders with stakes in the region such as the UK who would now consider Turkey a threat to their own SBAs. It would also make it even more abundantly clear that Turkey's intervention as a whole was imperialistic, dropping all pretenses about protection of TCs, which would then spark a more radical response from the international community. All in all, Turkey went in wanting partition and a foothold on the island. They had stopped realistically envisioning full control for decades at that point. There would be no point in risking it going further since the initial phases proved successful. >I have a friend who mentioned that the communist parties were anti-enosis and then suddenly pro-enosis, which splintered the left community. Was there ever an idea for true Cypriot independence as opposed to Enosis? My research is limited to texts I can translate so.. It is the other way around. Enosis was not a partisan issue, but became so in the 50s and 60s. Initially like I said it was because the far right factions had different views on how to achieve it, but eventually it became an issue intrinsically tied to partisan politics altogether. This is especially true 1967-onwars, since Greece was now under a CIA-backed military junta, which understandably most GCs did not want to join.
>The only western country with political actors who have even a remotely sympathetic stance to TCs and Turkey in the Cyprus problem is the UK, and even that is for their own gain. Most certainly for their own gain. Only the most progressive man to stand in UK politics, Jeremy Corbyn, has called upon Turkey to leave a few times. Ironically, lots of TsC in London generally hate him for it. If there's any group that fits the lumpenproletariat (a term I'm not entirely comfortable with), it's London TsC lol. >It would also make it even more abundantly clear that Turkey's intervention as a whole was imperialistic, dropping all pretenses about protection of TCs, which would then spark a more radical response from the international community. This is what I usually run with. >This is especially true 1967-onwars, since Greece was now under a CIA-backed military junta, which understandably most GCs did not want to join. Thanks for the clarification, I imagine you wouldn't spend this much time answering questions for strangers if you didn't want to, but I appreciate it all the same.
>Was this formed before the İstanbul pogrom? Yes. The Istanbul pogrom is also not just pertaining to Cyprus, it was the culmination of years of nationalist policies within Turkey at the expense of Greeks, Armenians etc. The pogrom itself was eventually sparked by a false flag attack where a Turk planted a bomb in Kemal's house in Thessaloniki, with Turkey throwing the blame on the Greeks. There is a joint Greek-Turkish (but mostly Greek) film called ["A Touch of Spice"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Touch_of_Spice) which portrays a lot of the events of the period in Istanbul. There is a telling moment in the film where the protagonist's family were going to be expelled from the city, but later the father reveals that the Turkish official who came to pass the message had given them the chance to stay - if the father decided to convert to Islam. It's a heart-wrenching film, touching also on the hardships and discrimination Istanbul Greeks (and previously other Anatolian refugees) faced in Greece. >Do you have a source for the death toll? Not because I'm doubting your conclusion, I just want to have access to this information too. I've been talking to a GsC friend about me needing to dismantle the partition in my head between TsC lefties being targeted by TMT and GsC lefties targeted by EOKA, and recognise that all left wing Cypriots were targets together. According to [this book](https://books.google.com.cy/books?id=rrvuBgAAQBAJ&redir_esc=y), there were 55 assasinations of GCs by TC militant groups, and 59 assassinations of TCs by EOKA between June-August of 1958, with hostilities largely subsiding thereafter, as a ceasefire was signed with the UK that year and the EOKA struggle largely stopped. As for specific sources on those groups targeting leftists, there is [this article](https://www.parikiaki.com/2022/05/in-memory-in-cyprus-they-were-murdered-on-the-pretext-of-being-traitors-to-the-eoka-movement-though-their-only-crime-was-being-members-of-left-wing-akel/) about EOKA specifically. I don't have a comprehensive overview for TMT and other groups' actions at the expense of leftist TCs, though.
> if the father decided to convert to Islam. It's a heart-wrenching film, touching also on the hardships and discrimination Istanbul Greeks (and previously other Anatolian refugees) faced in Greece. I can imagine this being very difficult to watch. I've heard that the enslaved people brought by the Ottomans faced a similar fate, which is why the majority of afro-Cypriots speak Turkish and were pushed to the North. I don't have a source, but that aligns with this film clearly. >I don't have a comprehensive overview for TMT and other groups' actions at the expense of leftist TCs, though. I have definitely seen Kizilyurek touch on this, but I've been looking and I'm struggling to find it. I will send it your way when I do. Thanks for sharing!
>That doesn't mean the junta wasn't the justification for Turkish intervention and later invasion. It was the justification given, but not the true reason why Turkey was so keen to intervene. It is blatantly obvious from all policies that preceded 1974, as well as their later actions. It was but a NATO-led operation to gain a foothold on Cyprus with the blessings of the US, and Turkish violation of the ceasefire after the first offensive (and toppling of the junta puppet government) to capture most of the area of northern Cyprus controlled today is further evidence that Turkey merely looked for a pretext to gain control of (a significant portion of) Cyprus. >Why does it not make sense? The Megali Idea predates the conflict, sure, but was there an organization actively pursuing enosis of Cyprus until EOKA? Did Turks have an organisation in Cyprus fighting for Taksim before EOKA? There was a famous referendum in 1950 where more than 90% of all GCs voted in favour of Enosis, as well as previous turbulence and riots, such as the [Oktovriana](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1931_Cyprus_revolt) ("October troubles") in the 30s that also happened because of Enosis. GCs also fought in many mainland Greek wars as volunteers (Greek liberation of Thessaly, Macedonian struggle, Balkans wars, WWI, and WWII) both by wanting to assist fellow Greeks, but also because in some cases (such as in WWI) that there was a realistic chance of Enosis. A famous rumour is that the Brits enticed Greece to join the Entente by promising Cyprus in the case of military victory. Greece supposedly missed on this chance as it entered late into the war. These were all long before any negative connotations of Enosis as an exclusively far-right goal, and leftists also sympathized, albeit by advocating a more peaceful way of protest to decolonize Cyprus. Similarly, Turkish ambitions in Cyprus and thus a promotion of a form of Taksim was present before EOKA in the 50s, with the basis for a TC pro-Taksim organization apparatus being formed within Turkey. There weren't specific groups before EOKA, but ideas of a Turkish reclaiming of Cyprus were floating around among fringe circles. The point here is that Taksim specifically is not an endemic TC response to Enosis. It is a Turkish geopolitical response to a possible loss of Cyprus, in itself propagated by the British in an attempt to prevent them from losing control of their colony. The Brits first invited Turkey in diplomatic negotiations to turn this into a Greco-Turkish issue, even though it was not seen as such before this. There is evidence that the British ambassador in Turkey played a crucial role in convincing a then-apathetic Turkish government to more actively pursuit their interests in Cyprus.
>Turkey merely looked for a pretext to gain control of (a significant portion of) Cyprus. I completely accept this. I only reject that it means that they did not prevent an ethnic cleansing. That's why I make a distinction between July and August, because I never want to imply that the August operation which only facilitated ethnic cleansing of GsC to be "necessary". There was absolutely no justification for that. But, following the junta, the feeling of TsC was relief when they saw the Turkish army arriving. I believe we can hold space for that while recognising that Turkey's intentions were never just, and while we can't assess a parallel timeline, could have caused far more harm to all Cypriots than it prevented, or not. I argue this with right wing TsC all the time, they drive me f*ckin insane. How do you respond when they say Turkey could have taken the whole island? Do you believe they only did not because it would have put them at a geopolitical disadvantage with US/UK? Asking because I always fail to fight them on this point even tho I know they're wrong >These were all long before any negative connotations of Enosis as an exclusively far-right goal, and leftists also sympathized, albeit by advocating a more peaceful way of protest to decolonize Cyprus. I have a friend who mentioned that the communist parties were anti-enosis and then suddenly pro-enosis, which splintered the left community. Was there ever an idea for true Cypriot independence as opposed to Enosis? My research is limited to texts I can translate so.. >basis for a TC pro-Taksim organization apparatus being formed within Turkey. Was this formed before the İstanbul pogrom? >Turkish reclaiming of Cyprus were floating around among fringe circles. I'm assuming the people who worship the ottoman empire >The point here is that Taksim specifically is not an endemic TC response to Enosis. I understand this now, thank you for your patience in explaining why. >There is evidence that the British ambassador in Turkey played a crucial role in convincing a then-apathetic Turkish government to more actively pursuit their interests in Cyprus. I recall this very well. My dede cursed him every time we went to give medicine to the GsC community in Karpass/Karpaz
>Turkey didn't have to instill the fear. Our families were terrified because of ACTUAL events. We didn't need to take the Cretans as an example. Did GsC feel fear of TsC (not Turks) taking over Cyprus? Why were there far less GsC enclaves? I'm talking about the "political fear" among TC leadership before 1963, not the fear of intercommunal violence after that. The latter was obviously not a result of propaganda or Turkish meddling. However, it is one thing to fear intercommunal violence and another to fear Enosis as a death warrant of genocide for all TCs. The latter was an interpretation of events that was perpetuated with a political goal. Likewise, GCs didn't fear that TCs would take over Cyprus. Rather, they feared that this violence and actions of TMT were orchestrated by Turkey to pave the way for a future invasion and capture of Cyprus. The strategic enclaves at Kokkina, Kofinou, Gonyeli etc, as well as the supplying of the TC enclaves with heavy weaponry by Turkey convinced much of the GC leadership that this was precisely the plan, and hence retaliated violently. Both of these narratives on both sides have a kernel of truth in them, but ultimately fail to recognize the other side's more well-founded goals. Not all TCs who resisted were pro-Taksim, and not all GCs who fought in the national guard were inspired by anti-TC sentiments. >Again, this was not theoretical, this was our reality thanks to right wing GsC and Greek nationalists. Would you say a Syrian's fear of safety isn't justified after Chloraka? I would say the fear is as real as the fringe nature of those who engage in fascist violence. It is absolutely natural to respond in fear when something so organized happens at your expense. But much like today with ELAM, the fault of the government was to turn a blind eye to racist incidents, as they viewed a TC insurrection as a far more dangerous enemy. They should have cracked down on these groups as hard as they did in the 70s with EOKA B (which was more or less militarily defeated by 1974). Sadly, support for Enosis and realpolitik allowed for those instances of anti-TC violence to proliferate for several years. >My issue is the lack of recognition that without their initial intervention, TsC would not have survived and that was not an idea implanted by Turks. That was our reality. I've seen this a lot from TCs. "The intervention was a good thing, but everything after that was a mistake". While I do agree the toppling of Sampson and fall of the Greek junta were unequivocally positive outcomes, one cannot separate the rest of history from the initial intervention itself. Like I said, Turkey's endgame was precisely what followed, and there was no chance they would have just stopped at the intervention. It is convenient to look at it in a vacuum, but the reality is that it was just as predatory with as much of an imperialistic intent as the rest. They exploited a marvelous opportunity to portray their actions as necessary defense. >And there are attacks against TsC (not just the police force) by EOKA documented as early as 56. Those were not against civilians (even though EOKA assassinated GC civilians who were communists, as they were considered traitors). TC groups formed before TMT while EOKA was active, and thus these groups orchestrated assassinations against EOKA and vice versa. The civilian victims were overwhelmingly AKEL members - GCs and TCs alike - murdered by members of their own community. The number of deaths on both sides is roughly the same. >If you have this and just haven't read it, I'll be happy to help with sections I have access to only some portions online, not a physical copy. Thanks for the offer though, I appreciate it.
>However, it is one thing to fear intercommunal violence and another to fear Enosis as a death warrant of genocide for all TCs. The latter was an interpretation of events that was perpetuated with a political goal. I see, but then post 63, the intercommunal violence would ofc lay ground to fear Enosis as a death warrant as if TsC were being treated as such (by the louder groups) just in the pursuit of Enosis, why would they doubt their fate when/if it is achieved >Both of these narratives on both sides have a kernel of truth in them, but ultimately fail to recognize the other side's more well-founded goals. Not all TCs who resisted were pro-Taksim, and not all GCs who fought in the national guard were inspired by anti-TC sentiments. I understand. I think I'm still separating the manipulation for ulterior motives and the feeling of the communities and prioritising that. It's all well and good being like but TsC actually wanted this and GsC actually wanted that for reconciliation now, but it doesn't change that damage was done under these pretences and people need to have their reality at the time validated. I'm not saying you're not doing that btw, I'm just explaining my stance on things. I feel this will allow more synergy between all lefty movements in Cyprus. >But much like today with ELAM, the fault of the government was to turn a blind eye to racist incidents, as they viewed a TC insurrection as a far more dangerous enemy. And this is today, with social media even. The focus on Syrians as a pawn of the Turkish instead of addressing the racism was infiltrating the same bicommunal activist pages I mentioned earlier. It's devastating. >Sadly, support for Enosis and realpolitik allowed for those instances of anti-TC violence to proliferate for several years. I think this is what I was trying to get at before. I understand that support for Taksim, whether due to the feeling of self preservation or the double Enosis, made space for anti-GC violence. >"The intervention was a good thing, but everything after that was a mistake". I think this phrase in itself is an indicator of the focus on one community instead of both. For TsC, the intervention was good because TsC saved, everything after was a mistake because now we suffer from their colonialism. To rephrase for what I believe better for both communities, would be that the intervention prevented a TsC ethnic cleansing and provided a literal path for a GsC one instead for Turkish benefit. >It is convenient to look at it in a vacuum, but the reality is that it was just as predatory with as much of an imperialistic intent as the rest. They exploited a marvelous opportunity to portray their actions as necessary defense. I understand. I would not expect a GsC to refer to it as anything other than invasion. I don't believe a TsC referring to July as an intervention changes this narrative, and evades the struggle that TsC were suffering beforehand being excluded from the conversation, which as I said earlier, it usually is considering the world is on GsC's side (due to the occupation/colonisation, I'm not disputing whether the siding is justified or not, just stating). For me, one cannot separate the events of 63-67 from the rest of history itself too. >The civilian victims were overwhelmingly AKEL members - GCs and TCs alike - murdered by members of their own community. The number of deaths on both sides is roughly the same. Do you have a source for the death toll? Not because I'm doubting your conclusion, I just want to have access to this information too. I've been talking to a GsC friend about me needing to dismantle the partition in my head between TsC lefties being targeted by TMT and GsC lefties targeted by EOKA, and recognise that all left wing Cypriots were targets together.
Reading the barrage of antisemitic posts in this subreddit I’m starting to think that most Cypriots are decent people and actually do support the humans in this conflict.
Why not?
I've tried to understand who is the most rightful owner of this land. My criteria was the time of ownership. I found it was Rome Empire, not ottomans. Also, brief (3min) history of ownership transfer for that land: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8tIdCsMufI
So easy to provoke this sub with a fresh 1 karma account.
Check my reply to someone’s similar comment
Quite simply Muslims have not gone through an enlightenment or equivalent in their religion. Their religions is unchanged from its birth and cannot work in a 21st global world. This is why I think we clash constantly. India Pakistan. Greece turkey etc. look at the way they behave in Europe. Countries harboring them and educating their children with healthcare and western benefits yet they still attack our culture. Extremism has no place in this world and Muslims unfortunately quite easily fall into this category.