By George Gregoriou
On February 13 the Turkish Ambassador to the United States responded to a NY Times editorial calling on Ankara to do its part to end the stalemate on the Cyprus issue. I responded to the Ambassador Nabi Sensoy’s letter with the following letter “to the editor” on February 14.

“The Turkish Ambassador Nabi Sensoy’s letter to the Times (2/13/06) suggests that Turkey is “already blazing this trail with new ideas to end the stalemate” on the Cyprus issue. This is news to the Greek Cypriots. What has been Ankara¹s policy on Cyprus since the invasion of 1974? Turkey still occupies the northern 37% of Cyprus and has brought in 130,000 settlers from mainland Turkey to change the demographics, which were 82% Greek and 18% Turkish (1960 census). In all its proposals, Turkey created a stalemate by insisting on a permanent military presence on the island and a political and territorial partition along ethnic lines.

Mr. Sensoy’s claim of “movement” is cosmetic only, to pave the way to qualify for membership in the EU. To become a member of the EU, Ankara has to cease occupying Cyprus, promote a settlement which is stable, functional, and democratic, acceptable to the Turkish and Greek Cypriot communities.

Turkey has other major issues, human rights, freedom of speech, and the on-going Kurdish problem. A 1/2 hour program for Kurds on Turkish TV “Our Common Heritage” (how to be “good” Turks) is hardly a solution. If Turkey wants a two-state solution in Cyprus, why not the same solution for the 15 million Kurds in Turkey.”

I do not expect The NY Times to print my letter. At any rate, I erroneously put the number of Kurds in Turkey to 15 million. The actual number is 20 million, according to Kemal Okouyan, head of the Turkish Communist Party (Rizospastis, (2/19/06). Okouyan¹s interview by Demetris Karagianni offers another perspective on the Cyprus problem. Karagianni asked: “In relation to the Cyprus problem, how do you see it?” Okouyan’s response was clear (my translation): “Our party from the very beginning opposed the EU solution, opposed the “Annan Plan” and supports a demobilized Cyprus, the departure of the Turkish forces and the closing of the British bases and [Cyprus] to be an independent state–either a federal or a unified state. But now things are moving in another direction, we are fearful. We are moving away from a solution. The people on the island–Turks and Greeks–have not been successful to organize and to unify themselves, and this is a real problem and it seems it will be too late. And the USA is playing a dangerous game, offering Cyprus to Turkey, and we believe this has something to do with the divisions in the Balkans. At the same time, unfortunately, whatever left exists in the Turkish Cypriot side, it has, in large measure, aligned itself with the imperialist logic of the USA and the EU. Unfortunately, things on the island are not going well and it is difficult for a really just solution, for a unified state of the two communities, with the departure of the settlers and according to international justice.”

Kemal Okouyan points the finger on the “Anglo-American-Turkey axis” {my words] as the real cause of the tragic events in Cyprus. Progressive people in Turkey (as in Greece and Cyprus0 want the outside forces and settlers (except for those who have made families in Cyprus) to pack up and leave, and a political solution which guarantees the civil liberties and civil rights to all citizens of Cyprus. Progressives are not suggesting that the Greeks and Turks in Cyprus abandon their “Greekness” or “Turkishness”. These identities and the political rights and civil rights of all Cyprus are to be guaranteed within a unified state.

Unfortunately, this is not the message sent to the Greek and Turkish Cypriots. Washington¹s geopolitical strategy to control the oil in the Middle East and the Caspian Sea, roll back the Russian influences in the former Soviet Union, and the strategic location of Turkey in the US imperialist chain are the real reasons why the Cyprus problem has been presented in the Western media and official government pronouncements as a difficult issue to solve. As it turned out, the “progressive” Talat is another Denktash and Anastasiadis of Synagermos is pointing the guns on Papadopoulos and Christofias for another “missed” opportunity to settle the Cyprus problem, through the Kofi Annan Plan? Capitulation, we were defeated, salvage what we can get, our plots of land (τα χωράφια μας) or permanent partition!

Washington is determined to have its way. The rumor has it that the White House is spending millions of dollars on propaganda, to lure tourism, direct commercial flights, and investments in the occupied northern Cyprus. The White House policy is to end the isolation of the Turkish Cypriots. The White House is fixated on punishing the Greek Cypriots for rejecting the «Kofi Annan Plan», a plan inspired and written by the Anglo-Americans to serve theirs and Ankara’s interests. That is why the half-hearted pressures from Athens and Nicosia in the last half-a-century on Republicans and Democrats, and the lobbying activities of the Greek-American community, have had little impact on the White House, the State Department, and the Pentagon. The US military is still in Greece, and so are the US spying facilities in Cyprus.

The policy in Athens has been to beg Washington and London and to hold hands with Ankara in Turkey¹s path to be in the EU. This policy to “civilize” the Turkish leadership is not working, unless one sees that the permanency of the status quo is preferred to a de facto and de jure partition of Cyprus. If Turkey does become part of the EU in 10 or 15 years, can the Greek Cypriots afford to wait that long? The influx of new settlers continues unabated, and so are the attempts to end the self-imposed isolation of the occupied north. Given the anti-Islamic current in Europe and the protests, riots, and deaths in the Muslim world over the cartoon on prophet Muhammad, the possibility exists that Turkey will not become part of the EU. Hence, staying the course because our present choice is between A or B (permanent partition down the road or accept an offer which legitimizes the partition now) or waiting for Turkey to be civilized on its path to the EU, which may never happen, may not be the best policy for the Greeks to follow, now or in the distant future. There is more to A or B policies, between Scylla and Carybdis. There are also C,D,E, & F policies. Playing it safe with the status quo, the Turkish occupation, until the “resurrected” Kofi Annan Plan is put on the table again, in the near or distant future, is not an option. We would never know until we have tried alternative paths for our survival.

George Gregoriou
Professor, Critical Theory and Geopolitics
The Wm Paterson University
Wayne, New Jersey 07470
e-mail: gregorioug@wpunj.edu