Some are protesting because two meters and two weights in the attitude of the West towards the Ukrainian and the Cypriot. Both countries have been invaded and both countries have their own territories occupied by Russia and Turkey. Why so much help and support from the West in Ukraine, but so little help for Cyprus?
Most Cypriots conclude that the West is full of hypocrites who are simply looking out for their own interests. Today, it is in their interest to hit Russia, so they support Ukraine by all means. On the contrary, as far as the Turkish invasion is concerned, because they have interests with Turkey, they are selling out Cyprus.
Of course, not only ordinary mortals in Cyprus but also a large part of their leadership, including the President of the Republic Nikos Anastasiadis, the former Minister of Foreign Affairs Nikos Christodoulidis and several others, have this simplistic approach.
Bitter truths
The crisis in Ukraine today is evolving into an American-Russian war, between two traditional rivals representing two rival camps. East and West. The one who will prevail will also have the geostrategic control.
The crisis in Cyprus, as opposed to 1974, was an intra-western confrontation. It threatened to dismantle NATO's southeastern wing in the 1960s, almost disbanding it in 1974 after Turkey's invasion of Cyprus when Greece withdrew from NATO. It then turned Turkey on to Russia when the US imposed a military embargo on Ankara.
Admittedly, the position that management in the Ukrainian and Cypriot areas, as issues of invasion and occupation, should be treated the same in the context of a just human society, sounds good. On the other hand, in our daily life, when a stranger beats you on the street, you either counterattack or report him to the Police, demanding the imposition of measures against him. But when two members of the same family come to grips, the first solution is not to fight until the final victory, nor to call the Police. An effort is being made to solve the problem within the family.
Somehow, roughly, he could describe the West's efforts to reach a solution to the Cyprus problem, without of course always the efforts being acceptable or even fair. Especially when things get tough and there is no reconciliation.
Cyprus
Our country, after 1960, joined the Western Family. The Zurich-London Treaty, in the midst of the Cold War, was a solution of Western origin, hence the three guarantor powers were members of NATO. In Zurich, an attempt was made to bridge the differences between the Greek Cypriots and the Turkish Cypriots and to put an end to a Greek-Turkish conflict that had been raging since 1950, when it became clear that the end of British rule in Cyprus was approaching. The majority of Greek Cypriots (82%) until then demanded (Referendum-EOKA Struggle) Union with Greece, the minority of Turkish Cypriots (18%) demanded taxim, ie the division of Cyprus and a double Union. The solution of independence given in the context of an intra-western family settlement, unfortunately, did not satisfy anyone. As a result, we were led to the crisis of 1963/64, the civil conflict of the Greeks in Cyprus, the coup d'etat of the junta and the invasion of Turkey.
All this time, the Greek Cypriots, who based on the conditions of 1960 had the first say in Cyprus, showed inconsistency, inability to read the geopolitical conditions and a problematic sentimentality. They underestimated the Turkish Cypriots and led Turkey to a change of plan after 1963, aiming at a two-state solution. The Greek Cypriots also pushed Greece into adventures, because they could not recognize that the struggle for Union was finally over and that what we had before us was the building of a new independent state. The Greek Cypriots kept in their hearts an amulet of the brilliant heroes of the EOKA struggle, but a struggle that ended definitively, without being able to see and honor young heroes such as Misiaoulis and Kavazoglou, who died before their eyes in the struggle for independence.
With serious responsibility on the part of the Greek Cypriot side, in 1964 it reopened the Cyprus issue, no longer as an intra-Western issue, but as an international issue, calling on the Soviet Union to take action in the Security Council. The West saw the Soviets mingling in a sphere of their own influence, with Cyprus adding fuel to the fire by ordering Soviet SAM missiles, launching anti-Western propaganda with the assistance of AKEL, which accompanied it almost slavishly. As a result, Makarios is declared a Mediterranean Castle and the Americans and Westerners think of other ways to manage the problem. At the same time, the Soviets played their own game with the tool of internationalization of the Cyprus problem. What did they want? Simply dismantle NATO's southeastern wing, that is, bring Greece and Turkey into conflict, which guarded the doctrine of the Soviet Union's isolation from the Mediterranean through the Bosphorus and the Aegean. We do not put the Soviets on the bench because they were looking out for their own interests. In the Cypriot dialect, there is a proverb that explains them all: On the other hand, let's watch how the Soviets and the Russians react when the West tries to intervene in their own sphere of influence: They invaded Czechoslovakia, they leveled Chechnya, they divided Georgia, they recently humiliated Ukraine, and they recently humiliated Armenia. p>
After 1974
After the Turkish invasion, the Greek Cypriots, blind because they did not bother to proceed with a self-criticism, became more Soviet than the Soviets, shouting in dance “Makarios in Moscow”, which had been proclaimed our protector and savior. In fact, since 1978, the Soviets and today the Russians have been and are behind every failed attempt to resolve the Cyprus issue, within a Western context. In 1978, the Soviets forced the rejection of the American-Canadian solution plan, in 2004 they gave Tassos Papadopoulos protection to say the big NO, in 2017 they guaranteed Nikos Anastasiadis that he would not affect Crans Montana if he slammed them and left. p>
One here could argue that Turkey bears serious responsibility for all these failures for a solution to the Cyprus problem and will be right. Our responsibility, of course, is to see what we do as Greek Cypriots and Hellenism in general, to safeguard our interests and not to stay in the position of Turkey. Which, in fact, after 1974, did not take any initiative, but as many times as it was called by the West to talk, it put down its maxims and did so. In 2004 he accepted the Annan plan, in 2010 he accepted the Downer convergence, in 2016 in Mont Peléran he gave a map to 28.5% in terms of territory, in 2017 he agreed to open a debate on the abolition of guarantees. In the face of our refusal for a solution, our emotional and pointless efforts, Turkey reacts by consolidating new accomplishments each time: Karpasia, Morphou, today Varosi are lost, while the sovereignty in our EEZ is being questioned.
We lost a decade in the logic of the proposal of Spyros Kyprianou, who wanted to create costs in Turkey. In this logic are timeless parties such as DIKO and EDEK and in recent years President Anastasiadis and former Foreign Minister Christodoulidis, who spent 4 years at the Foreign Ministry with the aim of exposing Tsavousoglou, running him from behind in the corridors of the UN and in born to punish Ankara. Complaining together with the indicted Kotzias our negotiator Andreas Mavrogiannis in Crans Montana for “ultimate betrayal”, because he submitted proposals at the negotiating table in harmonization with the Guterres framework, which we accepted! On the other hand, the West, in the context of an intra-Western family settlement that it wants to give, wants neither to incur costs nor to destroy Turkey. He is pursuing a new line-up in the Eastern Mediterranean, from which he believes everyone can win.
Opportunities
Some of our compatriots, who are constantly protesting, claim that the West always supports Turkey. This is wrong. Let us never forget that the reason for Turkey to invade Cyprus was given by the Greek junta through the coup. In 2004, Cyprus received a huge political bonus and entered Europe. It was accepted into an organization in which Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots could resolve their differences, leaving the Europeans out of Turkey.
- The Greek Cypriots proved to be inconsistent, as the agreement provided for a solution to the Cyprus problem and EU membership as a catalyst for a solution. In the referendums of 2004, the Greek Cypriots said NO, on the contrary the Turkish Cypriots voted YES. In 2008, the EU further strengthened Cyprus by integrating it into the hard core of the euro, offering all possible arms assistance to the acquis communautaire for a European solution to the Cyprus problem.
- From 2014 onwards, we were offered in the context of an intra-western solution, the joint exploitation of natural gas. The then Vice President Biden came to Cyprus, brought with him giants like EXXON to drill, asked to become Tripartite with Israel in order to expand to Quartet with the participation of Turkey. The West, with nothing to do with us, making Cyprus a central hub for gas exploration in the Eastern Mediterranean, also looked to Turkey to become independent of Russian gas.
- Some political magicians, such as former Foreign Minister Nikos Christodoulidis, saw the Tripartite as an axis of shielding the Cypriot EEZ and as an alliance against Turkey. So instead of going for a win-win solution as our Western Allies asked us to do, we tried to isolate Turkey and cost it money, in addition to lying: That our gas will be sold expensively through EastMed, that we will sell it to Egypt and other aerologies. We know what followed. Our gas, 11 years later, remains unused in the Mediterranean, Turkey found an opportunity and entered our EEZ undisturbed, drilling. We showed inconsistency and superficiality at first and then unforgivable audacity. It is not enough that Nikos Anastasiadis did not keep the agreements with Ahmet Davutoglu and Biden in Davos, then with the spearhead of Nikos Christodoulidis we asked Europe for months to punish Turkey, trying to turn Brussels into a tool and untouchable tactics. As a result, our allies call the former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Cyprus “desk officer” and wandering “Joke”, while Nikos Anastasiadis, who started selling passports, “Trojan Horse” of the Kremlin in the EU.
Stakeholders
A consistent and predictable partner in a Union of States has the benefit, if it has the necessary political credibility. Cyprus (not only the left but also the nationalists) has been plagued by unsubstantiated anti-Westernism since 1960, mainly due to the lack of a serious political leadership that can diagnose its position and the real and long-term benefits for the people, within the involved interests of our other partners. This phrase was first used by Vassos Lyssaridis to convince us that our interests are linked to those of the Ba'ath parties in the region, namely the children of the Soviet Union, Gaddafi, Saddam and Assad. Our political leadership today, with Mr. Nikos Anastasiadis at the helm, is also aiming for unspecified destinations and is preparing to give the helm to the small snot of the Cypriot ship and a worthy follower of the policy of Mr. Nikos Christodoulidis.
