One Radical Planet

🔒
❌ About FreshRSS
There are new available articles, click to refresh the page.
Before yesterdayYour RSS feeds

Θέκλα Κυρίτση (ΚΙΙΦ): Η εμφάνιση γυναικείων κινημάτων στην Κύπρο (1878-1940)

By Θέκλα Κυρίτση

Θέκλα Κυρίτση (ΚΙΙΦ): Η εμφάνιση γυναικείων κινημάτων στην Κύπρο (1878-1940)

ΚΙΙΦ: Το Κέντρο Ισότητας και Ιστορίας του Φύλου αποτελεί μια πρωτοβουλία που δημιουργήθηκε από ομάδα γυναικών και αντρών με κοινό ενδιαφέρον στα θέματα ισότητας και ιστορίας του Φύλου. Όσες και όσοι συμμετέχουν στο Κέντρο εργάζονται εθελοντικά με σκοπό να συνεισφέρουν …

Μαρία Μαρσέλου (ΓΡΑΝΑΖΙ): Φεμινιστικό Κίνημα και Ταξική Πάλη

By Μαρία Μαρσέλου

Μαρία Μαρσέλου (ΓΡΑΝΑΖΙ): Φεμινιστικό Κίνημα και Ταξική Πάλη

Απο τα πλαισια της κοινωνίας και της εργασίας εως τους κόλπους της οικογενειακης ζωής οι γυναίκες παλευουν με την άνιση αντιμετώπιση κ τον σεξισμο. Η ιστορία του φεμινιστικου κινήματος εχει να μας διδάξει πολλά και να καταδείξει οτι η ανισοτιμια των δυο …

Eleana Alexandrou: In a nutshell

By Eleana Alexandrou

Eleana Alexandrou: Spoken Word Performance “In a nutshell”

Thisis not a rap song It’s my attempt to sing song I’ musing math and ping pong with a hint of pro-te-sting

A short performance of crafted text and language by dancer and performance artist Eleana Alexandrou. This presentation is part …

RoofTop Theatre: Can I sculpt you?

By RoofTop Theatre

RoofTop Theatre

Stavros Karayiannis: When the Body Re-members

By Stavros Karayiannis

Stavros Karayiannis: When the Body Re-members

This is a dance performance that explores a space where orientalism and postcolonial subjectivity encounter Judith Butler’s theories of gender and Leo Bersani’s questions on masculinity. Informed by theoretical discourse, the costumes and choreography of this piece evoke rites of transformation and …

Φανερωμένης 70: Αστικές Λεπτομέριες - ΛΟΥΝΑ

By Φανερωμένης 70

Φανερωμένης 70: Αστικές Λεπτομέριες - ΛΟΥΝΑ

Οι Αστικές Λεπτομέρειες - ΛΟΥΝΑ, βασίζονται στην ενεργοποίηση ξεχασμένων χώρων της πόλης και επιδιώκουν μέσα από εικαστικές δράσεις και συνεντεύξεις να αισθητοποιήσουν καταστάσεις και εποχές της πόλης και να ενεργοποιήσουν τη δημόσια μνήμη.

Ηχογράφηση:

Φωτογραφίες:

Βίντεο

Nikolas Krstić: Young Women's Experience With Mainstream Pornography

By Nikolas Krstić

Nikolas Krstić: Young Women’s Experience With Mainstream Pornography

Audio Recording:

Slides:

Nikolas Krstić

Nikolas KrstićNikolas Krstić

Aydın Mehmen Ali: Writing as Resistance and as Activism

By Aydın Mehmen Ali

Aydın Mehmen Ali: Writing as Resistance and as Activism

A young woman is raped at a roadblock outside Famagusta as she escapes military invasion. Love stories across ethnicities, time zones, barriers, generations, spanning London, Jamaica, US. A journey to find a friend lost in the wars and divisions. Young migrant …

Buket Özatay: Photo Exhibition "Women Behind The Bars"

By Buket Özatay

Buket Özatay: Photo Exhibition

Audio Recording:

  1. Genders and Power Welcome address
  2. Elena Vasiliou: Thinking with prison beyond criminology
  3. Buket Özatay: Women Behind The Bars

Elena Vasiliou’s Slides:

Photo Exhibition Video:

Buket Özatay

Buket Özatay

Elena Vasiliou

Elena Vasiliou

Cinsiyetler ve Güç Vol. 4

By Syspirosi Atakton

Cinsiyetler ve Güç Festivali dört yıldır üst üste düzenlendiği gibi bu yıl da Lefkoşa tabanlı anarşist, otorite ve baskı karşıtı bir grup olan Sispirosi Atakton tarafından organize ediliyor. Bu yılki amacımız cinsiyetlerin, birçok sosyopolitik ve kültürel farklılık kategorileri ile kesişerek sayısız şekillerde ve keyfi olarak oluşturduğu sistemik güç eşitsizliklerinin, ve …

Φύλα τζιαι Εξουσία 4 Πρόγραμμα

By Syspirosi Atakton

Το φεστιβάλ Φύλα τζαι Εξουσία οργανώνεται για τέταρτη συνεχή χρονιά που την Συσπείρωση Ατάκτων, μιαν αναρχική, αντί-εξουσιαστική ομάδα που εν ενάντια σε κάθε μορφής καταπίεση τζαι η οποία εδρεύκει στην Λευκωσία. Σκοπός μας ένει να συζητήσουμε τζαι θεωρητικά να επεκταθούμε πάνω στους μυριάδες τρόπους με τους οποίους τα φύλα, στις …

Genders and Power 4 Programme

By Syspirosi Atakton

Genders and Power festival is being organized for fourth consecutive year by Syspirosi Atakton, an anarchist, anti-authoritarian, anti-oppressive group rooted in Nicosia. This year our aim is to discuss and elaborate on the ways genders, in their intersections with multiple sociopolitical and cultural categories of difference, interact in myriad ways …

Venezuela # happeningnow

By Levenshtein

Από τους φίλους μας που συμμετέχουν στην διαδήλωση στο Καράκας, ενάντια στην αμερικανική επέμβαση.

Με ομιλητή τον αληθινό πρόεδρο της χώρας.

The post Venezuela # happeningnow appeared first on Αγκάρρα.

This week at Kaymakkin: Antifa Kahvene: Female-fronted Hip Hop Night

This week at Kaymakkin: Antifa Kahvene: Female-fronted Hip Hop Night no kitchen this saturday

This week at Social Space Kaymakkin
 

Antifa Kahvene: Female-fronted Hip Hop Night


Friday at 20:00

Bild könnte enthalten: eine oder mehrere Personen und Getränk

(EN follows)

Τουντην Παρασκευή το Antifa λευkoşa αννοίει το Kaymakκιν για μια βραδια γυναικείου χιπ-χοπ. Κοπιαστε για κουβέντα, ποτό τζιαι χορό!

Μπύρες, κοκτέιλς τζιαι ποτά σε τιμές αλληλεγγύης

********************************************
This Friday Antifa λευkoşa will be opening Kaymakκιν for a female-fronted hip hop night.
Join us for chat, drinks and dance!

Beers, drinks and cocktails in soli-prices
 


About Kaymakkin


Kaymakκιν, located in the old neighbourhood of Kaymakli*, is an attempt to create a common space, open to individuals and groups aiming for political, social, and cultural intervention. It is the outcome of the realisation of the need for a space where we can spread and exchange ideas, form networks and interact in Nicosia. It is a self-managed space, and its operation relies on self-organisation and collective action. Kaymakκιν is managed by an assembly of individuals and collectives through direct democratic and horizontal organisational structures and consensus decision-making processes. Against the dominant rationale of hierarchy and the exercise of power “from above”, against capitalism and neoliberalism, we organize outside a commercial framework and the logic of profit. read more...

Address: Archiepiskopou Makariou III No. 127, Kaimakli

Kaymakκιν address is 127, Archiepiskopou Makariou III Avenue, in the old neighbourhood of Kaimakli, southern Nicosia. It’s situated on the corner of Makariou III Avenue and Vasileos Pavlou Street, around 50 metres after Platanos Café, and before the Saint Barbara Church Square.

It can be reached via car, or the City Bus 148. It’s a 10 minute bicycle ride from the Walled Town of Nicosia, or alternatively a 30 minute walk.

Copyright © 2019 Kaymakkin Social Center, All rights reserved.


Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list.

Email Marketing Powered by Mailchimp
  • February 20th 2019 at 09:55

This week at Kaymakkin: Update on the Zapatista Movement

This week at Kaymakkin: Update on the Zapatista Movement & saturday kitchen is back!

This week at Social Space Kaymakkin
 

Οι Ζαπατίστας έννεν μόνοι/ες!

The Zapatistas are not alone!

Friday at 20:00



(English text follows)
Τούν’ την Παρασκευή, η συλλογικότητα Ραμόνα αναλαμβάνει τον καφενέ του Καϋμακκιού τζαι προσκαλεί σας σε μιάν παρουσίαση ενημερωτικού χαρακτήρα σχετικά με τις εξελίξεις στην επαναστατημένη γη των Ζαπατίστας, μετά την εκλογή του νέου «αριστερού» προέδρου του Μεξικού, Αντρές Μανουέλ Λόπεζ Ομπραδόρ.
Συγκεκριμένα θέλουμε να σας μιλήσουμε για το «Τρένο των Μάγια», ένα μεγαλεπήβολο σχέδιο τουριστικής ανάπτυξης, το οποίον απειλεί στο πέρασμά του τα σημαντικόττερα μνημεία και οικοσυστήματα του Μεξικού εισβάλλοντας σε περιοχές διάφορων κοινοτήτων ιθαγενών καθώς τζαι των Ζαπατίστας.
Εννα ακολουθήσει συζήτηση για οποιεσδήποτε απορίες ή ιδέες υπάρχουν για την αλληλεγγύη μας στους Ζαπατίστας.
Στο κλείσιμο της συζήτησης, εννά συνεχίσουμε με μουσικές της περιοχής τζαι ποτά σε τιμές αλληλεγγύης
¡¡¡L@S ZAPATISTAS NO ESTAN SOL@S!!!
Οι ΖΑΠΑΤΙΣΤΑΣ ΕΝΕΝ ΜΟΝΟΙ ΤΟΥΣ!!!

Παρασκευή 15/2, στις 20:00
 

(English Text)
This Friday, Ramona collective will host the Kaymakkin kahvene and invites you in an informative presentation on the developments at the Zapatista rebel territory, after the election of the “left-wing” president of Mexico, Andres Manual Lopez Obrador.
More specifically we want to talk to you about the “Mayan Train”, a touristic development megaproject which in its pass threatens the most important monuments and ecosystems of Mexico, while invading in the territories of several indigenous communities as well as those of the Zapatistas.
A discussion will follow for any questions or ideas with regards to our solidarity to the Zapatistas.
At the end of the discussion, we will continue with central and south American music and drinks in solidarity prices.
¡¡¡L@S ZAPATISTAS NO ESTAN SOL@S!!!
THE ZAPATISTAS ARE NOT ALONE!!!

Friday 15/2 at 20:00

Saturday Kitchen is back! This Saturday at 13:30

Χορτόσουπα - Vegetable soup
Πουρκούρι με σάλτσα μανιταριών - Pilaf with mushroom sauce
Xόρτα Βραστά - Βoiled Vegetables
Σαλάτες - Salads

Η συμμετοχή σας τζαι οι εισφορές σας κρατούν το Kaymakkin ανοιχτό! Υour contribution keeps Kaimakkin open!


About Kaymakkin


Kaymakκιν, located in the old neighbourhood of Kaymakli*, is an attempt to create a common space, open to individuals and groups aiming for political, social, and cultural intervention. It is the outcome of the realisation of the need for a space where we can spread and exchange ideas, form networks and interact in Nicosia. It is a self-managed space, and its operation relies on self-organisation and collective action. Kaymakκιν is managed by an assembly of individuals and collectives through direct democratic and horizontal organisational structures and consensus decision-making processes. Against the dominant rationale of hierarchy and the exercise of power “from above”, against capitalism and neoliberalism, we organize outside a commercial framework and the logic of profit. read more...

Address: Archiepiskopou Makariou III No. 127, Kaimakli

Kaymakκιν address is 127, Archiepiskopou Makariou III Avenue, in the old neighbourhood of Kaimakli, southern Nicosia. It’s situated on the corner of Makariou III Avenue and Vasileos Pavlou Street, around 50 metres after Platanos Café, and before the Saint Barbara Church Square.

It can be reached via car, or the City Bus 148. It’s a 10 minute bicycle ride from the Walled Town of Nicosia, or alternatively a 30 minute walk.

Copyright © 2019 Kaymakkin Social Center, All rights reserved.


Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list.

Email Marketing Powered by Mailchimp
  • February 12th 2019 at 14:43

Κάτω τα χέρια από τη Βενεζουέλα | Venezuela’dan Ellerinizi Çekin

By Levenshtein

ΟΛΟΙ ΣΗΜΕΡΑ ΕΞΩ ΑΠΟ ΤΗΝ ΑΜΕΡΙΚΑΝΗ ΠΡΕΣΒΕΙΑ

ανακοίνωση του Παγκύπριο Συμβουλίου Ειρήνης.

Εκδήλωση καταδίκης του ιμπεριαλιστικού πραξικοπήματος στη Βενεζουέλα

Το Παγκύπριο Συμβούλιο Ειρήνης διοργανώνει εκδήλωση καταδίκης του ιμπεριαλιστικού πραξικοπήματος στη Βενεζουέλα τη Δευτέρα, 11 Φεβρουαρίου, ώρα 17:00, έξω από την Αμερικάνικη Πρεσβεία.

Καταδικάζουμε την ιμπεριαλιστική επέμβαση στα εσωτερικά της Βενεζουέλας με στόχο την ανατροπή του Προέδρου Νικολάς Μαδούρο και αναγνώριση του παράνομου αυτοανακηρυχθέντα προσωρινού προέδρου, Χουάν Γκουαϊδό από τις ΗΠΑ, την Ε.Ε. και των συμμαχικών τους κυβερνήσεων στη Λατινική Αμερική. Απότερος στόχος των μεθοδεύσεων αυτών δεν είναι άλλος από τον έλεγχο των πλούσιων αποθεμάτων πετρελαίου και άλλων φυσικών πόρων στη Βενεζουέλα.

Καταγγέλουμε τις απειλές για στρατιωτική επέμβαση και τους στέλνουμε το μήνυμα «Κάτω τα χέρια από τη Βενεζουέλα!».

Εκφράζουμε την αμέριστη αλληλεγγύη μας και στήριξη στο λαό της Βενεζουέλας και των δυνάμεων εκείνων εντός της χώρας που αγωνίζονται για την υπεράσπιση της κυριαρχίας. Ο λαός της Βενεζουέλας, όπως και κάθε λαός έχει το δικαίωμά του να αποφασίζει από μόνος του για το μέλλον του χωρίς ξένες επεμβάσεις, έχοντας ο ίδιος αποκλειστική ευθύνη της επιλογής της εξουσιάς του.

ΠΑΓΚΥΠΡΙΟ ΣΥΜΒΟΥΛΙΟ ΕΙΡΗΝΗΣ
KIBRIS BARIŞ KONSEYI
CYPRUS PEACE COUNCIL

The post Κάτω τα χέρια από τη Βενεζουέλα | Venezuela’dan Ellerinizi Çekin appeared first on Αγκάρρα.

Khora’da İndirim

By admin
Khora Yayınları, her ayın fırsatı olarak belirlenen 3 kitaptan oluşan bir seti ve ayın kitabı olarak seçilen bir kitabı %50 indirimle satışa sunuyor. Şubat ayı Devam »

AKP’li Bakan kktc’yi ‘Kuzey Kıbrıs Türkiye Cumhuriyeti’ Yaptı, Kıbrıslı Türk ‘Yetkililer’ Dinledi

By admin
Bugün gerçekleşen kktc sulama iletim tünelinin temel atma töreninde yaptığı konuşmada TC Tarım ve Orman Bakanı Bekir Pakdemirli, kktc’yi ısrarla “Kuzey Kıbrıs Türkiye Cumhuriyeti” diye adlandırırken, başta kktc Tarım Devam »

💾

Hükümet Yabancı Siyasal Partilerin Ülkedeki Yasal Statüleri İçin Çalışma Yapacaktı: Sonuç Sıfır!

By admin
Özellikle T.C’deki AKP iktidarı döneminde kktc’de yabancı partilerin yapılaşma faaliyetlerinin sıklaştığı görülmekte. Türkiye’de faaliyet yürüten bazı partiler gerek temsilcilik binaları  gerekse de kktc/Kıbrıs  eklentili isimlerle sosyal Devam »

Zorlu Töre ve Ersin Tatar kktc AKP Teşkilatının Toplantısına Katıldı: UBP’de Yalakalık Bitmiyor!

By admin
Geçtiğimiz günlerde AKP Kıbrıs Gençlik Kolları’nın  UBP’ye yaptığı  ziyaret sonrasında UBP Genel Sekreteri  Hasan Taçoy’a yakın ilgisinden dolayı teşekkür etmesinin ardından UBP Genel Başkanı Ersin Tatar Devam »

AKP’ye Yalakalıkta Sınır Yok: UBP’den, AKP Kıbrıs Gençlik Kolları’na Teşekkürlük İlgi

By admin
AKP Kıbrıs Gençlik Kolları’nın, UBP Genel Merkezi’ni ziyaretine ilişkin yaptığı paylaşım ülkemizdeki siyasilerin AKP’ye yalakalıkta birbiriyle yarıştığını adeta belgeliyor. AKP Kıbrıs Gençlik Kolları’nın sosyal medya hesabındaki Devam »

Eğitimin Gelişmesi, TC ile Kaynaşmaya Feda Olsun: Hükümet, Eğitimin Geliştirilmesi Kalemini Çanakkale Kampı İçin Harcıyor

By admin
Bakanlar Kurulu 17 Aralık 2018 tarihinde aldığı bir kararla, “Eğitim ve Öğretim Hizmetlerinin Geliştirilmesi ve Katkı Projesi” için ayrılmış olan 380,000 TL’yi, Çanakkale Gençlik Kampı Devam »

💾

εκδήλωση 14/12: το αντισεξιστικό κίνημα σε Κύπρο – Ελλάδα – Ευρώπη

By granazi
Λίγες μέρες μετα τη δολοφονία της Ελένης στη Ρόδο από δύο συνομηλίκους της άντρες, όταν αρνήθηκε να έρθει σε σεξουαλική επαφή μαζί τους, λίγους μήνες μετά τη δολοφονία του ακτιβιστή οροθετικού Ζακ Κωστόπουλου και της 20χρονης τρανς London Moore (20ου τρανς θύματος για το 2018 στις ΗΠΑ) και λίγες μέρες μετά την αθώωση του Ιρλανδού …

Gericiler Hediye Dükkanı Gibi: Yardım Edilmiş Yoksullar İstiyorlar

By admin
ADL Özel Türkiye’de devam eden  gerici AKP iktidarı süresince ülkemizde daha örgütlü hale gelen gerici örgütler, sadaka kültürü üzerinden kitlelerle temas kurma arayışına devam ediyor. Devam »

Μέσα στον πύρινο εφιάλτη της Καλιφόρνια

By granazi
  της Regina Johnson για το socialistworker.org μετάφραση: Γρανάζι Η Regina Johnson γράφει από την Καλιφόρνια για τις πραγματικές αιτίες της πιο θανατηφόρας πυρκαγιάς στην ιστορία της πολιτείας και για τις συμφορές που εκτείνονται πολύ μακρύτερα από τις περιοχές στις οποίες οι φλόγες συνεχίζουν ανεξέλεγκτες φωτο: Το Bay Area περιβάλλεται από καπνό από την καταστροφική φωτιά (Melinda Stuart …

Bağımsızlık Yolu: “Derinya ve Aplıç Yetmez, Tüm Kıbrıs’ı İstiyoruz”

By admin
Bağımsızlık Yolu Genel Sekreteri Münür Rahvancıoğlu, Aplıç ve Derinya kapılarının açılmasıyla ilgili açıklama yaptı. Açıklama şöyle: “Bugün Aplıç ve Derinya bölgelerinde karşılıklı geçiş için yeni Devam »

ο σοσιαλισμός κάνει τον Trump να τρέχει πανικόβλητος

By granazi
Οι οικονομικοί σύμβουλοι του Donald Trump κυκλοφόρησαν μια περίεργη έκθεση που επιτίθεται στον σοσιαλισμό. Οι σοσιαλιστές μπορούν να πάρουν μόνο ένα μάθημα από αυτό: κερδίζουμε. του Miles Kampf-Lassin για το Jacobin (μετάφραση γρανάζι)   Αν θες να αποδείξεις ότι η αυξανόμενη δημοτικότητα του σοσιαλισμού αποτελεί μια πραγματική απειλή για τη διοίκηση Trump -και για την κυριαρχία …

Ο εκφασισμός του κυπριακού σχολείου

By granazi
Μαθητές- στρατιωτάκια να εκτελούν παραγγέλματα- ενός μάλλον ελαμίτη συμμαθητή τους-με βήμα στρατιωτικό, ξερνώντας εθνικιστικά-μιλιταριστικά συνθήματα. Αυτό τι σας θυμίζει πιό πολύ κυπριακό σχολείο ή φασιστικές παρελάσεις της εποχής του μεσοπολέμου; Νομίζω πως η απάντηση είναι δεδομένη. Κι΄ όμως το σκηνικό αυτό διαδραματίστηκε σε σχολείο της Λεμεσού και μάλιστα τη μέρα που γιορταζόταν στα σχολεία η …

ΔΙΑΜΑΡΤΥΡΙΑ ΓΙΑ ΤΑ ΨΗΛΑ ΚΤΙΡΙΑ

By granazi
  ΠΡΩΤΟΒΟΥΛΙΑ ΕΝΕΡΓΩΝ ΠΟΛΙΤΩΝ ΛΕΜΕΣΟΥ Δελτίο τύπου ΔΙΑΜΑΡΤΥΡΙΑ ΓΙΑ ΤΑ ΨΗΛΑ ΚΤΙΡΙΑ ΕΝΩΝΟΥΜΕ ΔΥΝΑΜΕΙΣ ΣΑΒΒΑΤΟ 27 ΟΚΤΩΒΡΙΟΥ 2018 11:00 π.μ. ΓΕΦΥΡΑ ΓΣΟ ΠΑΡΑΛΙΑΚΟΣ ΔΡΟΜΟΣ Είμαστε μια ανεξάρτητη ομάδα ενεργών πολιτών υποστηριζόμενη από περιβαλλοντικές και άλλες οργανώσεις. Αγαπούμε και νοιαζόμαστε για την πόλη μας και έχουμε σαν γνώμονα το καλό της πόλης μας, το δημόσιο συμφέρον, …

THE TURKISH CYPRIOT COMMUNITY IN HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE AND THE CHANGES IN ITS STRUCTURE AND IDENTITY

By myislandcyprus.blogspot.com


Ahmet Djavit An


Abstract


The paper provides information about the factors that endanger the existence of the Turkish Cypriot community and its identity due to the continuous occupation of the northern part of Cyprus by the Turkish army. The main emphasis is on the changes that have been taking place since 1974. It starts with the demographic changes caused by the constant colonization and transfer of Turkish settlers and then deals with the consequent formation of settlers’ organizations and the increasing religious propaganda that rose especially after the AKP’s rise to power. In addition to this massive colonization process, we also observe the increase of the criminality rates, drug abuse and sex tourism.



I.     HISTORICAL BACKGROUND


Ottoman Rule


The origins of the Turkish Cypriot community dates back to the Ottoman conquest of the island in 1570-71. The commander of the Ottoman Army, Lala Mustafa Pasha, left a number of soldiers in Cyprus. The official Ottoman sources mention about a total of 3.779 soldiers, who later brought their families to Cyprus. An additional 1.689 families were settled in Cyprus after a firman was issued by the Sultan, realizing that the island needed human resources for labour.  In the following years, other Turkish families from Konya, Kırşehir, Çorum, Samsun, Çankırı, Eskişehir, Ankara, Darende and Uşak settled in the towns which were surrounded by fortified walls or had castles (Nicosia, Famagusta, Limassol, Paphos and Kyrenia) and in the deserted Latin villages. The census taken shortly after the conquest revealed a taxable population of some 85.000 Greeks, Armenians and Maronites and also 20.000 Turkish settlers, mostly campaign veterans, who were given land by Lala Mustafa Paşa.[1] 


As we can see from the Ottoman tax lists, which are kept in the archives of the Cypriot Archbishopric, some villages converted from Christian into Moslem religion from 1825 to 1832.[2] Some others, who were practicing both religions as Crypto-Christians (Lino-bambakians), returned to the Christian religion, after the British rule started. In 1908, their number was less than 1.200, decreasing from the number at the time of British occupation.[3]


The Moslem population, which brought the Turkish-Islamic culture to Cyprus from Anatolia, lived peacefully with the Christian population of the island during the Ottoman period. The Anatolian settlers intermingled with the Greek Cypriots and cooperated with them in every field of life. Although the two communities belonged to different religions and had other ethnic distinctive features, they lived harmoniously, influencing each other, as they worked side by side in the rural and urban areas.


British Rule


Establishment of British Rule


When the island’s administration was taken over by the British in 1878 and the first census was done in 1881, the total population was 185.630. 137.631 were Christian Greek Cypriots, 45.458 were Moslem Turkish Cypriots and 2.541 were other nationalities i.e. Roman Catholics (1.275), Maronites (830) and Armenian (174).[4]


The first printing house was soon established, allowing newspapers to be published both in Greek and Turkish. In this context, the weekly “Zaman” newspaper was first printed in 1891, while the first book in Turkish language titled “Müsameretname” (Evening Tales), was published and in 1893. Until 1914 the number of books published in Cyprus reached 600, 550 of them being in the Greek language.[5] 


Cyprus was annexed by Britain in 1923 (Lausanne Treaty), declaring it a Crown colony in 1924. In the same year, an organisation under the name “Kıbrıs Türk Cemaat-ı İslâmiyesi” (Cyprus Turkish Community of Islam) was established that was later (1931) changed to Kıbrıs Türk Milli Kongresi” (Cyprus Turkish National Congress).


Attempts to Formalize the Turkish Cypriot Identity


The British colonial administration had abolished the parliament in October 1931 after a nationalist rebellion of the Greek Cypriots. During these oppressive years all the national symbols of Greece and Turkey[6] were banned and no text books were allowed to come from the mainlands. In the 1930’s the British colonialists strived to prevent the concept of Cypriotism from leaving behind both Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot nationalisms. According to Palmer, the British Governor, the only way to stop or postpone this development was to establish a new administrational structure, which would provoke inter-regional difference of identity. In a secret report sent to London on October 23, 1936, he claimed that:


“In order to have ease in the future on the island, we have to continue the administration on the basis of exceptis excipiendis (opening the way to exceptions), on the basis of districts. Thus the concept of Cypriot nationalism -which will be emerging as a new concept after Enosis becomes an eroded value- should be pushed away as much as possible and left in the dark. Now it is almost not living. Cypriots are either their district’s “nationalists”, or they are Greek or Turks”.[7]


It is in this period that we see one of the first articles that dealt with the identity of the Turkish Cypriots. Ulviye Mithat, who wrote in one of her articles in the Turkish Cypriot newspaper “Ses” (Voice), dated August 24, 1935, underlined the cultural problems of the Turkish Cypriots in those years as follows:


“As I heard, the cultural part of the history of Cyprus belonging to the Greek Cypriot community is completely protected. The Greek Cypriots recorded their cultural history in various works and prepared them for the coming generations. On the other hand, the Turkish Cypriots have not even thought of this subject! They also neglected every period of the history of Cyprus. Where is a history of literature? Where is a history of administration? Even their general history was written in a simple text book. The only article written up to now about our cultural history is the short article about the history of the Lycee, which was published last year in the journal of the Lycee. We need an article immediately about the development of our elementary schools which are the cradle of our culture”.


 The article mentioned by Ulviye Mithat was the one written by her husband, history teacher of the Lycee, Mustafa Mithat Bey, titled “Lisenin Tarihi” (History of the Lycee), and published in the “Kıbrıs Erkek Lisesi Mecmuası, 1933-1934 Yıllığı” (Journal of the Cyprus Boys’ Lycee, 1933-1934 Almanac) (107-127).[8]


In 1938, a book was written by İsmet Konur titled “Kıbrıs Türkleri” (The Turks of Cyprus) and was consequently published by the Remzi Bookshop in Istanbul. This book was banned in Cyprus by the British colonial regime.[9]


During the British period, although there were some political restrictions, the Greek Cypriot community developed better than the Turkish Cypriot community in the fields of economy, education, culture and social life. Additionally, the bourgeois movement came from Europe through Greece. The Turkish Cypriots were open to the modern way of life because of their coexistence with the Greek Cypriots.  That is why they were ready to adopt Atatürk’s reforms (modern dress, Latin alphabet, secularism etc.) quicker than the Anatolian Turks.


Although there was a difference of mentality and psychology between the Turkish Cypriots and the Greek Cypriots, they did not have big disagreements. The development of their ethnic-national awareness was more rapid during the British rule as the middle-class grew in the towns. The enosis movement of the Greek Cypriots and the Greek defeat in Western Anatolia hastened the polarization of the two communities.


During the Second World War, we see an awakening of the Turkish Cypriot community. The formation of the first Turkish Cypriot political party was in 1942 under the title “Kıbrıs Adası Türk Azınlığı Kurumu” (KATAK, acronym for the “Organisation of the Turkish Minority in the Island of Cyprus” in Turkish). The separate ethnically-based trade-unions started in those years, because of the pro-enosis policy of the Greek Cypriots.


New literary journals and newspapers were also published in this period.[10] The first delegation of Turkish teachers from Turkey visited Cyprus in 1948. The leaders of the Turkish Cypriots living in Turkey came to Cyprus in 1949 and helped the Turkish Cypriot political parties, football clubs and organizations to unite and to establish the “Federation of Turkish Cypriot Associations”.


The number of books published by the Turkish Cypriots from 1878 to 1939 was 120, whereas from 1940 to 1963, 205 books were published. This shows the intellectual activity of the Turkish Cypriots in the fields of both politics and culture in the two periods.


Final years of the British Rule


After the Second World War, the sporadic assimilation of the Turkish Cypriots had stopped because of the emerging nationalism among the Turkish Cypriot elite. The Turkish Cypriot landowners and the leaders, who cooperated closely with the British colonial government, were unable to catch up with the development, achieved by the Greek Cypriot commercial bourgeoisie. The Turkish Cypriot leadership preferred to start the notorious “from Turk to Turk campaign” only with the help of the underground organisation TMT, with the aim of building the economic and political base for the partition of the island between the two communities.


During the turbulent years of anti-British terror the Turkish Cypriots were used as colonial police in order to fight against the EOKA rebels, who aimed at the union (enosis) of the island with Greece.

In this period, we see one of the first scientific researches about the Turkish Cypriot community, which was done by Professor Charles Fraser Buckingham of Islamic Studies at Manchester University. His first article was titled "The Cypriot Turks" and was published in the Journal of Royal Central Society (April 1956-No.43, pp.126-130). His second article was titled "The Turks of Cyprus" and was published in the Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland (December 1957-Vol 87, Part II). He also wrote "Islam in Cyprus", published in The Islamic Quarterly (July 1955-Vol II, No 2, pp 153-141) and "Islam and Turkish Nationalism in Cyprus", published in Die Welt des Islam (1958, Vol V, No 1-2, pp 65-83).


Republic of Cyprus


The Republic of Cyprus declared its independence on August 16, 1960 and the first official census was taken on December 11, 1960. The number of Turkish Cypriots at that time was 104.320. Adding the 475 Moslem gypsies and other Moslems, the total came to 104.942. The number of Christians was 473.265.[11]


The Turkish Cypriot underground organization, the TMT, continued to be active also after the foundation of the Republic of Cyprus in 1960. TMT killed in 1962 the two advocates, Ahmet Gürkan and Ayhan Hikmet, who were trying to organize the opposition around their newspaper “Cumhuriyet” (Republic) against the partitionist policy of the Turkish Cypriot leadership. Another Turkish Cypriot, the AKEL activist Dervish Ali Kavazoglou was murdered by the TMT in 1965 and the political opposition was supressed for a while. After 1967, the graduates of the secondary schools, who were forced to stay in the enclaves and do military service, were allowed to go abroad for higher education. Intellectual activities were limited during the 1960’s, because of the limited freedoms inside and outside the Turkish Cypriot enclaves. The number of books published during this period was only 187, including the official propaganda books.[12]


At the end of 1963, the Turkish Cypriots had withdrawn from the structure of the Cypriot state after the outbreak of inter-communal clashes and no census covering the Turkish Cypriots could be conducted thereafter. According to the study of a Canadian researcher, Richard A. Patrick, who served as an officer in UNFICYP, entitled "Political Geography and the Cyprus Conflict 1963-1971", published in 1976, there were a total of 119,147 Turkish Cypriots living in the Turkish Cypriot settlements on the island.



II.  INITIAL CHANGES IN THE STRUCTURE AND IDENTITY OF THE TURKISH CYPRIOT COMMUNITY


The Partition of the Island and the Arrival of the First Turkish Settlers


In 1974, Cyprus experienced two tragedies, the first one was the coup of the Greek fascist officers against the President of the Republic, Archbishop Makarios. The other one took place five days later, as the Turkish troops occupied one third of the northern part of the island. The excuse was to restore the constitutional order before the coup. These two traumatic events effectively divided Cyprus and its population. During the military occupation of the northern part of the island, the Greek Cypriots fled to the southern part of the island, where the legitimate government of the Republic of Cyprus had complete control.


Shortly after the division in summer 1974, the following information was provided in a report prepared by Ahmet Sami, the “Secretary-General of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Justice of the Autonomous Turkish-Cypriot Administration", dated October 20, 1974:


"A total of 83.719 Turkish Cypriots live on the territory of the `Autonomous Turkish Cypriot administration'. There were 32.039 Turkish Cypriots left in the south. Approximately 10.000 of them are in the SBA, 4.200 in Limassol and in its villages, 12.000 in Paphos district, 2.630 in the Larnaca district, and 3.209 in the villages of Nicosia district. It was stated in the same report that until October 19, 1974, about 12.000 Turkish Cypriots had moved to the north".


According to the information given above, there were 71.719 Turkish Cypriots living north and 44.039 Turkish Cypriots living south of the partition line, making a total of 115.758. This essentially confirms the estimates published in the Patrick study.


Turkish settlers were first brought in from Anatolia in October 1974 on the pretext that "they would work in the hotels and gardens left behind by the Greek Cypriots". But the real aim of Turkey was to colonize the occupied northern part of the island by using similar traditional methods, which were implemented by the Turkish nationalist “Unity and Progress Association” (İttihat ve Terakki Cemiyeti) and which ethnically cleansed Anatolia from the Armenians and Greeks, before the foundation of the Republic of Turkey.


In January 1975, the families of Turkish military personnel, killed in Cyprus during the war of 1974, were settled in the north. They were granted citizenship by the decision of the “Council of Ministers” of the Turkish Cypriot Administration and they were given the houses and the properties of the Greek Cypriots, who were forced to leave their ancestral homes. This practice was extended further to granting houses and plots of land to anyone wishing to settle in Cyprus. Thus the first massive wave of immigration from Turkey was initiated after the signing of a “Protocol of Agricultural Workforce” in February 1975. A top secret directive[13] was issued under the title “Directive related with the fulfilment of the deficit of work force in the Turkish Region of Cyprus, prepared after the demand of the Cyprus Turkish Federated State”. It was stated there that even if all the Turkish Cypriots, who used to live in the south of the divide, would come to the north, there would not be enough workforce. Therefore the northern part would be populated as soon as possible.[14] To this effect, an announcement was made through the Directorates of Settlement and Governorships in 14 provinces of Turkey, including the Black Sea region (Trabzon, Samsun, Rize); the Aegean region (Manisa and Denizli) and the Mediterranean region (Antalya, Mersin, Silifke).


A secret document published with the above Directive revealed that a number of families were settled in the Turkish occupied part of Cyprus: 81 families from Karakeşli village, 115 families from Silifke and 129 families from Taşkıran village of Trabzon. Other groups from Adana, Antalya, İçel, Denizli and other provinces were settled in a similar way.[15]


Those, who were willing to settle in the Turkish occupied part of the island, were sent to the island voluntarily. They were mainly from rural areas and they were settled in the villages, abandoned by the Greek Cypriots. These Turkish settlers were given enough agricultural land to cultivate and some animals. They were not allowed to leave their settlements at least for five years. Otherwise all would be taken from them. Those, who could not get accustomed to the new local conditions returned to Turkey later, but a great majority stayed. According to the above study by Kurtuluş and Purkis, 82.500 Turkish settlers were settled in the occupied part of Cyprus from 1975 to 1979, but 20-25% of them returned to Anatolia.[16]


On June 10, 1976, Zaman newspaper reported Rauf Denktash's response to those in the north, who criticized the way the resettlement was being conducted, as follows: "It was a matter of uprooting and resettling about 80 thousand people. This magnificent mission was accomplished by human beings, who could make mistakes". Denktash's statements confirmed that as early as 1976 the number of Turkish settlers was almost identical with the number of Turkish Cypriots resettled from the south to the north.


According to an article published in Zaman newspaper on August 9, 1977, Hakki Atun, “Minister for Settlement and Rehabilitation” of the "Cyprus Turkish Federated State”, had declared that 20.934 families, i.e. 83.650 Turkish Cypriots were settled in the north from 1974 to 1977. As the number of Turkish Cypriots coming from the south was 44.039, the remaining 39.611 persons must have been settlers transferred from Turkey.


A complementary provision was adopted in 1981 to the “Law of Citizenship” opening the way to Turkish settlers to be granted the citizenship of the separatist Turkish Cypriot statelet if they reside in the Turkish occupied part of Cyprus permanently for at least one year, or if they made or could make an important contribution to the economy or social and cultural life, or if they rendered services to the security forces.


Turkish Settlers at the End of 1983


Turcification Policy


In the draft "Second Five-Year Development Plan" prepared by the State Planning Department and published in September 1983, it was stated that 91.225 persons were re-settled from 1974 to 1982 on the territory of the "Cyprus Turkish Federated State”. As the number of Turkish Cypriot refugees coming from the south was 44.039, the number of Turkish citizens settled in northern Cyprus can be estimated as 47.186. No official statistics were ever published.


The Turkish Cypriot population in 1960 was 104.942 and in 1974 it was 115.758. As of 1974, however, reference to the numbers of the "Turkish Cypriots" also included the Turkish settlers. It was clear that the number of Turkish settlers was constantly rising. A census taken on 26.5.1990 to determine the number of voters before the next general election showed that the "Turkish Cypriot" population had reached 173.224. Turkish Cypriot leader Rauf Denktash ultimately revealed why detailed population statistics were never disclosed: "If we disclose them, they will know who came from where!”[17]


Increasing Crime Rates


The second wave of immigration of the Turkish settlers was in the 1980’s, especially after the declaration of the so-called “Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus” (“TRNC”) in 1983. A “Labour Force Agreement” was signed between governments of the “TRNC” and Turkey in 1987 and another agreement was signed in 1991, which allowed their citizens to enter into both states without a passport, but only by showing their Identity Cards.[18] This time, there was no incentives, but tolerance for all the good and bad activities.


The new regulation made it easy for everyone to come to the occupied area and parallel to this the crime rate increased considerably. This open-door policy was strongly criticized first by the Turkish Cypriot leader Dr. Fazıl Küçük in his newspaper “Halkın Sesi” and later by the two opposition parties, the Republican Turkish Party (CTP) and the Communal Liberation Party (TKP). These political parties were against the influx of Turkish citizens as illegal labour force from Turkey and were afraid that their presence will increase and harm the texture of the Turkish Cypriot community.[19] The first detailed article about the dangers of increased number of Turkish settlers in Northern Cyprus was published in the “Söz” (Word) weekly magazine (Issue: 26, April 11, 1986) under the title “Are we heading to the hegemony of those, who have an education of elementary school level and below?” In this article, statistical information was given about the level of education, the number of marriages, the partnership permits granted to the Turkish citizens and the criminality rate among them.


The same subject of demographical changes was dealt in further issues of the same magazine. For example, from 1977 to 1984, a total of 14.915 Turkish citizens were granted permission to work in “Northern Cyprus”, according to the 1984 Statistical Yearbook. If each one was considered to represent a family of at least 3 people, this meant 47.745 persons. This was in line with the number of Turkish citizens, who had been resettled. Even assuming that some of them left and returned to Turkey, it could be argued that with the most optimistic estimate, about 40.000 Turkish immigrants were settled in northern Cyprus until 1984.[20]


There was a great turmoil among the Turkish Cypriots, who entered into a new stage of survival or extinction, after the influx of the Turkish settlers from the mainland. The increasing number of Turkish settlers were also granted the citizenship of the “TRNC” and this was seen as a real threat to the existence of the indigenous Turkish Cypriots. After all, there were socio-cultural differences between the native Turkish Cypriots and the Turkish settlers coming from various parts of Anatolia.[21]


Soon the Turkish settlers started to form their own political parties and to take part in the general elections as well. Thus the Turkish settlers became a sensitive issue for the Turkish Cypriot political parties. Türk Birliği Partisi (TBP, Party of the Turkish Union) was established in 1982 and Yeni Doğuş Partisi (YDP, New Revival Party was established in February 1984 by a former military officer, Aytaç Beşeşler.


These parties were collaborating with the Turkish embassy in Nicosia and they supported the nationalist right wing governments and also the colonization policy of the Turkish Cypriot leadership.


Threats to the Turkish Cypriot Identity


This policy of Turcification has been intensified, since the AKP is in power, acquiring an anti-secular point of view. Turkey has been implementing a new policy to change the secular traditions of the Turkish Cypriot community and to make them more Moslem by financing the constant construction of mosques. While in the period from 1974 to 2002 a mere nine mosques were built, since 2002, a total of 39 new mosques were built. The Turkish Cypriots perceive these Islamization activities with concern. For example the Trade union of Turkish Cypriot Teachers (KTÖS) issued a statement criticizing the ongoing Koran courses and new schools for religious education:


“There are 192 mosques in the “TRNC”, whereas there are 160 schools, 21 health centers and 17 hospitals. Each university wants to build a mosque and these plans increased the controversies. […] They say that they got permission from the Ministry of Education, but there are Koran courses ongoing in the mosques, without permission and controls. If the government does not have the power to control these places, they should resign".

AKP’s anti-secular campaign, also manifests itself through a constant attempt to enhance non secular training. In particular, in 2014 out of the 260 imams, who were paid from the budget of the “Prime Ministry” of the “TRNC”, a mere 13 of them were on permanent staff- list. Another 120 imams received their salaries from the Turkish Embassy in Nicosia”.[22]


The influences from mainland Turkey became more intense through the organs of the mass media, which promote this policy of Turkification of the occupied part of the island. There are Turkish students and graduates working in the Turkish Cypriot media organs (30 radio stations, 7 TV channels and 18 newspapers.) The mainland Turkish TV channels are relayed through a Turkish satellite and can be watched free of charge. The local Turkish Cypriot TV channels are watched only at a rate of 17%, getting almost no advertisement from the main Turkish companies that export goods worth 2,3 million dollars every day to the “TRNC”. 


In 2015, Turkey exported to the “TRNC” goods worth of 851 million dollars, whereas the “TRNC” exported to Turkey goods worth of a mere 62 million dollars! In the period from January to September 2016, the exported goods from the “TRNC” to Turkey had a total value of 83.873.287 dollars, whereas the imports from Turkey had a value of 1.026.953.811 dollars.[23]


All the Greek geographical names were changed into Turkish and the old names are not used anymore. The Turkish Cypriots were forced by law to get a surname as it is the case in Turkey. “Mersin 10” was adopted as the postal code of the occupied area of Cyprus as if “Northern Cyprus” is a province of Mersin-Turkey. The Turkish Lira was used as means of transactions instead of the Cyprus Pound and the exchange rate was officially fixed as 1:36 for many years, in spite of the high inflation rate of the Turkish Lira in those years.    


Turkish Cypriots’ Reaction to the Turkification Policy


Initial Reactions


The awareness of Cypriotism in the cultural field has led to new studies about the Turkish Cypriot history, literature, culture and folklore, which became the popular subjects for research among the Turkish Cypriot elite. From 1974 up to 1996, over 1.500 books on these subjects were published, a striking trend, which went parallel to the political struggle by the opposition political parties for more democracy and economic progress. The Turkish Cypriots started to ask the question “Who are we and what are the differences between us and the Turkish settlers coming from Turkey?”


The problem of protecting the original Cypriot identity against the cultural assimilation, which gained importance from our subject’s point of view, forced the Turkish Cypriot intellectuals to think of this situation constantly and to take various actions against it.


Defending the Turkish Cypriot Identity


Since 1974, the Turkish Cypriots have been focusing more attention to the struggle of repossessing and developing their own cultural identity. Initially, discussions in this direction started under the roof of some political parties. Later activities included those of cultural associations and personal researches.


The first comprehensive meeting for the definition of the qualities of the Turkish Cypriot culture took place in Nicosia from February 1-4, 1983 with the participation of cultural and artistic organizations and personalities. This meeting was also supported by the responsible “Minister for the Cultural Affairs”. More than 200 persons participated at this Advisory Meeting on Culture and Art and 24 papers were submitted. The activities were carried on in 10 separate commissions on Language and Literature, History, Music, etc. During this meeting, the Cypriot culture in general and the Turkish Cypriot culture in particular were discussed intensively. Only a part of the discussions was published in the Söz daily newspaper, along with my three articles for these meetings (January 31 to February 12, 1983).[24]


Right after the advisory meeting, Halk Sanatları Derneği (Has-Der, The People’s Arts Association) organized in Nicosia on February 25, 1983 the First Folklore Symposium. This was one of the first scientific steps forward in the crystallization of the ethnic-national consciousness of the Turkish Cypriots. All the papers, submitted to the Folkloric Symposia from 1983 to 1986, were published in a book by the “TRNC Ministry of Culture and Tourism” in 1986, which was a huge gain.


Other panel discussions and publications concerning the identity research were later conducted, these however, reflected the official ideology, adopting chauvinist views, e.g. “The importance of the identity of the Turks, living in Cyprus, its necessity from the geographical, historical, national-religious and political point of view” (December 1990)[25] and a book titled “The Identity of the Turkish Cypriots” (1990) published by the “Ministry of National Education and Culture”. The latter made the following assertions:


“We, in other words, the Turkish Cypriots of today, are not, as the Greek Cypriots allege, the remnants of the invaders, but the real owners of the island... The Turkish Cypriots are the oldest people of the island with their history and culture and as a national people, they are different from the Greek Cypriot people and have all the rights that the Greek Cypriots have”.[26]


Meanwhile, the Turkish Cypriots are more willing to stress their cultural differences with Turkish citizens and settlers. For example, nowadays, they started to use more frequently the Greek Cypriot or Turkish Cypriot local words as names of the restaurants that serve local dishes: “Gafgarıt, Galbur, Piron, and Garavolli”. A lot of villages organize every year festivals (panayır) with the names of local products (Walnut, Orange, Strawberry, Date etc.) and perform the Cypriot folkloric dances with local music. Theatre plays are staged with Turkish Cypriot accent by the folkloric associations. Many webpages and Face-book groups are established, where Cypriot identity is possessed and propagated.                


The Council of Europe and the Population in the Occupied Area of Cyprus


The Spanish parliamentarian, Alfonse Cuco, Rapporteur of the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Demography of the Council of Europe (CoE), prepared a report on the "Structure of the Cypriot Communities" dated April 27, 1992 which was discussed by the Parliamentary Assembly of the CoE. According to this Report, from 1974 to 1990 the population in the areas controlled by the Republic of Cyprus increased by only 13,70% whereas the increase in the northern part was 48,35%.[27] The same Report mentions that UN Representative Camilion had informed Cuco that 40-45 thousand Turkish civilians had been transferred to the island.[28]


In 1997, the number of Turkish settlers and their children living in the occupied area had not been declared officially. Yet, based on the statistics of outgoing and incoming passengers, I was able to estimate that the number of the Turkish settlers in Northern Cyprus about 100.000 persons.[29] The same process was repeated in 2009, resulting into the following estimation: 198.101 Turkish citizens were staying in the occupied area and 46.546 Turkish Cypriots were staying abroad. Since then, the immigration statistics are not published anymore in detail.


The First Official Turkish Cypriot Census


Twenty two years of Continuous Colonization: The First Official Census


The results of the first official census conducted by the Turkish Cypriot authorities on December 1996 and evaluated by the State Institute of Statistics in Ankara, were publicized two years later. According to this data, the de facto population of northern Cyprus was 200.587 and the de jure population was 188.662.[30]


The difference between the two was explained by Ahmet Bulunç, Adviser of the State Planning Department, who stated that on the day of the census 11.925 persons had declared that their permanent residence was outside the “TRNC”.


The results of the census were as follows:


Total population                            200.587 (100%)


Citizens of the “TRNC”                 164.460 (82%)


Born in the “TRNC”                       137.398


Born in Turkey                                 23.924


Born in a 3rd country                         3.138


Citizens of Turkey                            30.702 (15%)


Citizens of a 3rd country                    5.425 (3%)


The number of Greek Cypriots living in the north was 384 and the number of Cypriot Maronites was 173.


No data was given about those, who were citizens of both the “TRNC” and the Republic of Turkey or about those, whose parents were born in Cyprus. The indigenous Turkish Cypriots were already a minority in the occupied north in 1996 and their number was estimated not to exceed 100,000. The numbers of those with double citizenship already exceeded those of the Turkish Cypriots.[31] The census did not specify the number of children born in the “TRNC” to Turkish parents. There was no mention of the approximately 35.000 Turkish soldiers in Cyprus, nor of their dependents. It is further estimated that in addition there were about 25.000 or 30.000 illegal workers, pushing the total of the de facto population even higher. According to information provided by sources, who would like their identity to remain undisclosed, approximately 46.000 people have been granted “TRNC” citizenship since 1974 and 20-25.000 of those do not live permanently in the “TRNC”.[32] This number includes famous Turkish politicians, such as Kenan Akin, who originates from mainland Turkey and was the “TRNC” “Minister of Agriculture and Forestry”, disclosed that there were 60.000 mainland settlers in the “TRNC”.[33]


CoE Report on Colonisation by Turkish settlers of the occupied part of Cyprus


The report of the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Demography of the CoE (May 2, 2003, Doc 9799), prepared by Finnish parliamentarian, Jaakko Laakso, informs us that:


“2. It is a well-established fact that the demographic structure of the island has been continuously modified since the de facto partition of the island in 1974 as a result of the deliberate policies of the Turkish Cypriot administration and Turkey. Despite the lack of consensus on the exact figures, all parties concerned admit that Turkish nationals have been systematically arriving in the northern part of the island. According to reliable estimates, their number currently amounts to 115.000. (. . .)


4. In particular, the Assembly expresses its concern at the continuous outflow of the indigenous Turkish Cypriot population from the northern part. Their number decreased from 118,000 in 1974 to an estimated 87.600 in 2001. In consequence, the settlers outnumber the indigenous Turkish Cypriot population in the northern part of the island. (...)


5. In the light of the information available, the Assembly cannot accept the claims that the majority of arriving Turkish nationals are seasonal workers or former inhabitants who had left the island before 1974. Therefore it condemns the policy of "naturalization" designed to encourage new arrivals and introduced by the Turkish Cypriot administration with full support of the Government of Turkey.


6. The Assembly is convinced that the presence of the settlers constitutes a process of hidden colonization and an additional and important obstacle to a peaceful negotiated solution of the Cyprus problem.


36. The aim of the Turkish-Cypriot administration's policy towards the settlers has been to promote their permanent establishment on the island. The settlers are granted housing, land or other properties on special terms. They are issued with a "concession certificate" which they are not entitled to sell or pass to a third party until a period of 20 years has elapsed.


37. The most important measure for the settlers has been the possibility of acquiring Turkish-Cypriot nationality. In 1975, the Turkish-Cypriot administration passed Act No. 3/1975, under which nationality could be given to anyone who requested it and, in particular, to members of the Turkish armed forces who had served in Cyprus and their families.


38. In 1981, complementary provisions were established according to which Turkish-Cypriot nationality can be granted to persons permanently resident in the northern part for at least one year, those who made or could make an important contribution to the economy, or social and culture life, and those who have rendered services to the security forces.


39. Along with citizenship, the settlers get a whole series of political rights including the right to vote and set up political parties”.


III.  ADDITIONAL CHANGES IN THE STRUCTURE AND IDENTITY OF THE TURKISH CYPRIOT COMMUNITY


Citizenships Granted to Settlers: No Official Number


Although there is no reliable official number of the citizenships granted to the Anatolian settlers, a member of the “Parliament”, Arif Albayrak (CTP), disclosed in 2003 that the number of citizenships granted from 1974 to 2003 was a total of 53.904.


Birlik newspaper gave the following details of the citizenships, granted after 1994 (numbering 17.293) by the “cabinet” decision: 3.675; by the approval of the “Ministry of Interior”: 7.272; third generation: 2.246; by matrimony: 1.971; citizens of a third country: 1.142; Bulgarian Turks: 987.


The CTP was very critical of this practice, when they were in the opposition, but granting of “TRNC” citizenship to the Turkish settlers continued during the period of the CTP governments (2013-2016) as well. 796 people were made citizens by the decision of the “cabinet” of the “TRNC”. (A total 3.916 persons, including the natural routes.)


During the period of UBP-DP coalition governments (2016-2017), 7.200 citizens of Turkey were granted the citizenship of the “TRNC”. If each person is multiplied by 4 (wife and at least 2 children), this number makes 28 thousand new citizens.


According to the “Ministry of National Education and Culture” of the “TRNC”, the percentage of the pupils, who originate from Turkey and study at the schools in the occupied area, is 26%. The mother tongue of 4,3% of them is not Turkish.


Since the population in the occupied area is rapidly increasing every year, the number of schools, teachers and classes has become insufficient. There are 113 “state” primary schools and 19 lyceums. In the 2016-2017 educational year the number of pupils in each class reached to 45 and the excessive number of students in the classes made the teachers, not to show enough interest in each student.


The Turkish Cypriot secondary school teachers’ trade union (KTOEÖS) proposed that new lyceums should be built in each of the cities Nicosia, Famagusta and Kyrenia. The Turkish Cypriot primary school teachers’ trade union (KTÖS) argued that three new primary schools are needed in Famagusta, one in Nicosia, two in Kyrenia and one in Karpasia. The KTÖS said there are 160 schools compared to 192 mosques in the northern part of Cyprus, complaining that more money was being poured in religious affairs at the expense of education. The union issued a statement after learning that the authorities were preparing to shut down two elementary schools, one in the Famagusta area and the other in Morphou area. KTÖS criticized the proposed amendment to the legislation on the religious affairs department, which will open the way for Koran courses for children and increase the budget of the department that will allow more recruitment from Turkey. This amendment had the support of the “Minister of Education and Culture”, Berova, who at the same time claimed there was no money for teachers or building new classrooms.


Further Transformation in the Demographical Character in the Occupied Area


The economic situation in the “TRNC” was very bad after the bankruptcy of some of the local banks in 1999. A third wave of Turkish settlers and workers came after the voting of the Annan Plan in 2004, which opened the way for the plunder of the Greek Cypriot lands through an unpresented construction boom. The economy of the “TRNC” developed 50% from 2002 to 2007, but after the global crisis the economic activity diminished. The economic grow from 2008 to 2016 was approximately 1,3%.[34]


Many construction workers arrived at the “TRNC” in order to find a job and later some of them brought their families as well. This caused also a shortage in the infrastructure of the cities. Recently, the union of Turkish Cypriot Constructors announced that the annual need for housing in the “TRNC” is about 800 units, but in the last three years, more than 6.500 housing units were built.[35]


Growing Number of University Students


Parallel to the influx of Turkish settlers, there is another channel of sending Turkish Citizens to the occupied area of Cyprus. After 1974, there was only one institution of higher education, “The Institute of High Technology”, which was turned into “Eastern Mediterranean University” in 1988. This university in Famagusta had only 2.279 students (1.112 from Turkey, 719 from the “TRNC” and 438 from third countries) in the first academic year.


After 29 years, there are now 14 universities in the “TRNC”, with a total of 93.292 students (52.135 from Turkey, 27.538 from third countries and 13.619 from the “TRNC”). 18 more universities have received their licences and they will be functioning in the coming years. But those, who have more students (87.099) are the old ones, established by the Turkish Cypriot Foundations or private persons: Eastern Mediterranean University (1988-Educational Foundation), Near East University (1988-Private), Lefke American University (1990-Foundation), Girne American University (1985-Private), and International Cyprus University (1997-Private).


According to the State Planning Department of the “TRNC”, the total revenue coming from the universities was in 2013, 535,6 million dollars, in 2014, 589,8 million dollars and in 2015 636,2 million dollars. This amount makes almost half of the budget revenues of the “TRNC”.[36]


Hüseyin Angolemli, a member of the “Parliament” from the TDP (Communal Democracy Party), stated that the foreign workers are brought to the country with student status, since there is no infrastructure of the universities and that these people do not go to the school, but work as cheap labour force. Even the bar-girls are brought from abroad with student status.[37]


Havadis newspaper reported that almost 20.000 students do not go to the classes and prefer to work in the construction sites, restaurants and cafes for a daily wage of 35-40 TL. There are others, who practice prostitution.[38] There are also commissioners, who get 500 dollars from each student and 500 dollars from the university.[39]


The Report of the Higher Studies Workshop, organized by the YÖDAK (Organization for the Higher Education and Accreditation) stressed that the higher education institutions have increased the number of their students, but they could not be institutionalized according to the universal standards for universities and that the quality of education is not good. YÖDAK does not have an authority to enforce anything. The state policy gives importance only for growth in quantity, but not in quality. Politics is interfering the affairs of the universities. There is a destructive and unjust competition among the universities and ethical rules do not function. The salaries and wages are low, the standards of admission requirements are low and not strict. There is possibility to work with a student visa and there are also chances for scholarships.[40]


Apart from the scholarships given by the universities themselves, the Ministry of Youth and Sports of Turkey gives educational credits to 22.517 university students and 405 scholarships for the “TRNC” through its Institution for Higher Education, Credits and Dormitories. There are three dormitories serving the university students from Turkey: Bülent Ecevit Dormitory (built in 2011, with 962 bed capacity), Necmeddin Erbakan Dormitory (built in 2013 with 769 bed capacity) and Teacher Refika Dormitory (built in 2016 with 1.000 bed capacity, but only for female students).[41]


 On the other hand, Turkey is also active to give religious education especially for the settlers’ children and other young people, who are sent with scholarships from Turkey to the “TRNC”:


“At the moment there are 600 students at the two theological faculties, one at the Near East University (YDU) and the other one at the University of Social Sciences [Sosyal Bilimler Üniversitesi], while another 800 pupils attend the Theological Colleges. Almost all of the students and teenage pupils are from Turkey who came to the occupied areas with scholarships while a small number are the children of the Anatolian settlers; the teachers are all coming from Turkey. The newly established Hala Sultan Theological College is part of the big complex with a boarding house, a large mosque, conference rooms and shops that will cost 80 million dollars. The Hala Sultan Mosque with its four tall minarets – a small replica of the Selimiye Mosque in Edirne – will be ready by 2017 at a total cost of 30 million dollars. Another large mosque with six minarets is being constructed at the Near East University and is expected to be completed by 2017”.[42]


India issued a manifesto calling the students and their parents not to go to the “TRNC” universities. The government of Nigeria started to follow these universities more closely on the ground that the “TRNC” could become a country of crimes, since it is not under the control of the Interpol.[43]


The CEO of the American University of Kyrenia (GAÜ), Asım Vehbi made the following assessment about the universities in the “TRNC” to the columnist Sait Gürsoy:


“There are about 300.000 people living in the “TRNC” now. Today, over 75.000 students from 120 different countries and academics from 50 different countries are in the “TRNC” at an important point in the context of internationalization. Universities continue their strategic sector position by directly contributing to the “TRNC” economy. The budget of the “TRNC” is 4 billion TL. The contribution of the universities to the economy is 3,1 billion TL. In the “TRNC”, where there is 1 student for every 5 persons, the contribution made to the economy has reached very large numbers. If we think that 71 percent of contributions go directly to the public, we can say that the “TRNC” is rapidly advancing towards being an educational island”.[44]


Social Problems Created by Increased Population


Implications


On the other hand, there are many disadvantages of having so many students, settlers, workers and so-called tourists, coming to the occupied area of Cyprus without any control. Every day the mass media is full of reports about the increasing number of theft, prostitution, rape, murder, wounding, drug offences. The great majority of the convicted persons are Turkish citizens.


From January 2006 to December 2016, a total of 5.818 cases were filed in the Supreme Criminal Court. Their breakdown is as follows: 19 murders, 525 attempted murder, assault with grave injuries, 508 cases of using weapons, explosives and knife, violence and threat and 2.157 drug offences. 2016 was a record breaking year.[45]


In 2016, 20.491 legal cases were filed and 13.730 of them were about money lending without payments.[46]


According to the Nicosia Police Directorate, 1.026 crimes were committed in the district of Nicosia over a period of nine months. 732 crime files were sent to the court. 562 criminal files were demanding for more than three years’ imprisonment, 464 files of misdemeanour for up to 3 years' imprisonment.[47]


Turkish Foreign Minister, Mevlut Çavuşoğlu announced lately that there were 5.531 Turkish citizens sitting in the prisons of 147 countries and 218 of them were in the “TRNC”.[48] According to the legislation in force, if a Turkish citizen is convicted to an imprisonment at the courts of the “TRNC” and later s/he is sent to Turkey, the person can be free after staying in prison less than the half of the time of the “TRNC”, i.e. 8 years imprisonment in the “TRNC” means 3 years imprisonment in Turkey.[49] The central prison in Nicosia is not sufficient and there are 440 convicts living in the dormitories with a capacity of 175 persons.[50]


Teenager crime rate is also high among the settlers’ children. According to the Activities Report of the Supreme Court Secretariat for 2010-2015, 553 children were convicted in a total of 511 cases. It is noteworthy that children under 16 years of age are taking part in an increasing number of crimes. The highest incident rate was in 2012 with burglaries, murder attempt, murder, assault, wounding, keeping guns and explosives.[51] From 2005 to 2016, 1.373 children, aged less than 16 years old, were convicted. They were involved mainly in theft incidents.[52]


Casinos


The Chairman of Casino Managers union, Ahmet Arkın, announced on August 20, 2015 in a press conference that there are 28 casinos in the “TRNC”. These provided 600 million dollars annually as input to the economy and that the industry needed more interest and legal support, so that it could continue to work and develop in the desired conditions.


B

et Offices

There are a total of 5 bet companies operating legally in the “TRNC” and 48 bet offices. The state gets 1 million Euros from each company with up to 10 branches and these bet offices are taxed with millions of Turkish liras. There are 25 illegal gambling and illegal betting websites detected by the police.[53]


Night Clubs


According to the US Report on Women-trafficking, there were a total of 334 women working as “consomatris” (artistes) in the 35 night clubs in the “TRNC” (2016). Most of these sex-workers were from Moldovia (128), Ukraine (53), Morocco (30), Belorussia (26), Russia (25), Kazakhstan (17), Kenya (14) and other countries. These night clubs provide 20-30 million TL to the state budget annually. From 1997 to 2002, 3,927 sex-workers had worked in the “TRNC”.[54]


Although routine health checks are conducted at the State Hospitals, according to statutory legislation for women working in nightclubs, there are increasing number of sexually transmitted diseases. While prostitution is forbidden by law, soldiers and students are not allowed to enter the nightclubs for the purpose of this service. Some years ago, “peace operations” were organized in order to control the night clubs and men, who were bargaining with women, working as "artistes" in nightclubs, were also being detained on the pretext of "prostitution." Tens of people were taken into custody on the grounds that it was a "mafia" structure. The media covered the problems caused by the night clubs, while Ertuğrul Hasipoğlu the Health “Minister” was against the closure of these night clubs. He reminded the opinion of an ex-“Minister”, who said: “If I close the night clubs for 40.000 soldiers and 40.000 students, will they not handle us?” The use of such a sentence had disturbed the military and one university rector issued an angry announcement to the “Minister”.[55]


Sex tourism combined with gambling in the casinos and entertainment with pop stars, who come from Turkey every weekend to perform at the 5 star hotels with casinos, is very popular with the Turkish tourists.  


According to the “Annual Activity Report of the Courts” in the occupied area of the Republic of Cyprus, 131 cases of rape or sexual assaults went to trial at the “Supreme Criminal Court” within the last ten years. However, the paper reports that it has been a serious increase of this crime in the last 3-4 years: 2013 (7 cases), 2014 (15 cases), 2015 (21 cases), 2016 (29 cases).[56]


Results of the Last Official Census in the “TRNC”


According to the 2011 Population and Housing Census, there were 286.257 permanent residents (de-jure) in the “TRNC”, excluding the Turkish Army personnel. Out of this population, 150.483 (52,6%) were male and 135.774 (47,4%) were female. It was announced by the “Undersecretary of State Planning Department” Ali Korhan that the number of Cyprus-born (north or south) people living in the “TRNC” was 160.207. The number of people born in Turkey, who were permanently residing in the “TRNC”, was 104.641.


The total number of Turkish Cypriot citizens, who declared that they had single or double citizenships amounted to 190.494 (66,5% of the resident population). Of the total, 136.362 persons (71,6%) had only “TRNC” citizenship and 38.085 (20%) had double (“TRNC” and Turkish) citizenship.


Since this last census, there have been many births, deaths and many people left or arrived at the country and no one knows the real number of the population today in the Turkish occupied northern part of the island.


The total population in 2013 in “Northern Cyprus” was 301.988 according to the Economic and Social Indicators 2014, published by State Planning Department of Northern Cyprus in December 2015.


Growing Number of Population and Voters in the “TRNC”


When the first general elections were held in the occupied area on June 20, 1976, the number of voters was 75.724, out of a population of 130.136. During the general elections of December 6, 1998, the number of voters grew up to 120.758, out of a population of 188.662. The last official number of voters was announced in 2017 as 180.949 by the Supreme Electoral Council.


Unfortunately there is no official number disclosed for the population, living in the occupied area of Cyprus under the so-called “TRNC”, which is only recognized by Turkey. The “TRNC” State Planning Department made an estimate based on the population of 294.600 in 2011 and gave the number as 342.587 persons for 2016. On the other hand, there are active mobile telephones in the “TRNC” two times more than this number.


Meanwhile, the same Department estimated that the non-institutional civil population was 245.828 in 2016 and the number of work-force was 118.387.  This number does not include those, who go to school and are below 15 years of age and those in the private hospitals, pensioner homes, army barracks and prisons.


The Turkish settlers and the Turkish university students living in the occupied area participated lately in some Turkish electoral processes and their registered number was announced officially by the Turkish Embassy in Nicosia. During the general election of May 15, 2015 in Turkey, there were 91.588 Turkish citizens, who were eligible to vote and living in the “TRNC”.


This number rose to 95.366 during the general election of November 1, 2016. For the last referendum of “Constitutional Amendments” in Turkey, on April 15, 2017 there were 104.509 Turkish citizens living in the “TRNC” and had the right to vote at the Turkish “Embassy” in Nicosia.[57]


Recent Involvement in the Internal Affairs of the Turkish Cypriots by Turkey


On June 18, 2014, an agreement was signed between Turkey and the “TRNC”, which provided for the opening of an “Overseas Coordination Office” by the Turkish Ministry of Youth and Sports in the “TRNC”. This office would manage all projects and programs related to sports, such as the renovation of sporting facilities, organization of sports camps, as well as the management and allocation of student housing facilities throughout the “TRNC” with its annual budget of 13 million Turkish Lira.  However, the majority of the Turkish Cypriot youth organizations rejected this deal by establishing the “We reject Platform” (Reddediyoruz). They believed that this agreement had a hidden Islamic agenda and it caused debates over “the sovereignty of the TRNC” and Turkey’s position as a guarantor state.


Specifically, the deal refers to an internal protocol signed on February 25, 2015, between the Turkish Ministry of Youth and Sports and the Turkish Directorate of Religious Affairs. And herein lies the crux of the problem according to the “We reject Platform”, the youth movement stimulated by this controversial deal.


The protocol of the deal ascribes various responsibilities and services to both state bodies and attributes all sports, youth activities and institutions (such as sports facilities and camps, student dormitories, etc.) as directly related to young people’s moral and spiritual development.


Zeki Çeler, a spokesperson from the youth movement fighting this deal, explained that any religious event or activity, such as “Holy Birth Week” or “Koran” recitation courses, would be in coordination with sports-related events and activities. The times of sports education will be coordinated with the daily prayer times, there will be specific courses that teach how to perform the namaz or “Koran” reading. It is basically for the youth to adopt certain moral and religious norms and values and this will be executed through direct collaboration between the Turkish Ministry and the local religious representatives. The idea is to spread religion into sports, youth centers and programs.”


Çeler also criticized the lack of consultation with either the “TRNC” government or local researchers and community needs. “The deal has clauses that give diplomatic rights, privileges to the assigned officials. It completely transfers the fate of young people to the hands of this office”, he added.


The Agreement Regarding the Establishment and Activities of an Overseas Coordination Office of Youth and Sports Ministry Between the Governments of Republic of Turkey and the “Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus” (Ratification) Law was enacted on June 13, 2016 and was sent to the “Office of the President” on June 14, 2016 to be promulgated in the Official Gazette and entered into force.


The Platform took to the streets again in mid-June, when the deal was to be voted on in “Parliament”. The wave of protests grew rapidly and lasted for several days. Meanwhile, under pressure from this growing protest movement, “President” Mustafa Akıncı referred the said Law to the “Constitutional Court”.


On August 3, over a thousand Turkish Cypriot protesters took to streets of Nicosia once again in order to march against increasing Turkish state control over the future social and cultural lives of Turkish Cypriot youth.


On August 5, 2016, the “TRNC” Constitutional Court decided that article 3 (1) (G) of the agreement contravened the constitution, while all the other articles did not. It was a victorious moment for all social movements, which saw this agreement as a threat that failed to recognize the “TRNC”s so-called sovereignty and the socio-cultural structure of the Turkish Cypriot community.


Article 3 (1) (G) provided that the office will ensure the construction, operation, repair and maintenance of the campuses, which operate or will operate in the “TRNC” by the General Directorate for Credit and Dormitories and the modernisation of all existing campuses and that it will implement the protocol, which was signed on February 10, 2012 with the “TRNC”s competent ministry and was put to effect upon approval by the “cabinets” of both countries. It also provided for the preparation of additional protocols, if necessary. The people rejected the deal so emphatically that many have begun to associate the resistance as a more general rejection of Turkish involvement in the “TRNC”s domestic affairs. In fact, Turkish Cypriot politics heavily centre around the question of Turkey remaining on the island as a guarantor state or not. Following the Court’s decision, the “We reject Platform” won what they set out to achieve: “President” Akıncı sent the deal back to the “Parliament” along with the Court verdict. The “Parliament” approved the agreement with a small amendment.


The “education secretary” of the Turkish Cypriot Teacher’s trade union (KTOS), Burak Mavis issued a written statement in June 2017 and condemned the “amendment law for the religious affairs department”, which was discussed recently in the assembly and stated that “they would not accept the religion to become a political instrument, neither the education to become a religious instrument”.


Pointing out that in the last 15 years the Turkish Cypriot community had no chance to recover from the reactionary facilities, which derive from the secular life model, Mavis recalled that they will continue their struggle against those, who are exerting efforts to put religious pressure on the community. “The religious communities, the religious movements and the associations with enormous economic activities make propaganda”, Mavis said, adding that they violate “people’s personal lives”.


In short, Turkey’s military, economic and political presence has already changed the demographical structure in the occupied area of Cyprus and turned the Turkish Cypriots into a minority in their own home country. In the near future, the Turkish settlers can be represented in the so-called “Assembly of the TRNC”, according to the ratio they reached in the population, as Erdoğan envisaged during his first visit to the occupied area.


Latest Data 2015-2017


As of December 2015, the number of workers, who had consecutive work permits in the “TRNC” was 20.762. While at least 12 consecutive work permits were required to get citizenship during the CTP government, now Turkey demands that those Turkish individuals, who have at least six consecutive work permits, should be granted citizenship. There are at the moment 8.627 persons, who have at least 6 consecutive work permits. If these Turkish citizens would be granted citizenship, they will be with their spouses and children 34.500 persons. The “Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister”, Serdar Denktaş said: "During the UBP-DP government, we gave 7.200 citizenships. But if this number should be 27.000 (as Erdoğan demanded), we shall be granting further citizenships".


According to the official numbers announced by the “Ministry of Labour and Social Security of the TRNC”, there were 12.500 registered unemployed persons and 42.000 registered foreign work-force. Most of them were not qualified workers. There were 92.976 socially insured workers and the number of retired persons from the “Social Insurance Department” increased in one year by 1.300 persons. There were approximately 34.500 pensioners.


The National Unity Party-Democratic Party (UBP-DP) coalition government announced on June 14, 2017 the number of the persons, who had been granted the citizenship of the “TRNC” from April 2016 to March 2017 as 4.603 persons. The statement noted that 372 of these persons became citizens with a decision of the “cabinet” and 1.904 with the approval of the “Ministry of Interior”.


IV. CONCLUDING REMARKS/ EPILOGUE


Since 1974, due to the constant occupation of the northern part of Cyprus by the Turkish army and the massive colonization by the Turkish settlers, the Turkish Cypriot community faces serious problems.  Despite the Turkish efforts, not to allow official and clear information about this issue, this paper provided extensive evidence by recording the settlers’ actual numbers and by developing their main typologies, such as workers, families of Turkish military personnel and students.


The demographic changes caused by this enormous transfer of settlers turned the Turkish Cypriot community into a minority, in the northern part of Cyprus. To make matters worse, the rate, with which these demographic changes occur, indicates that the Turkish Cypriot community will be facing an existential threat.


These demographic changes have severe social implications: increase of the criminality rates, drug abuse and sex tourism. Furthermore, this continuous colonization process has been going hand in hand with a Turkification policy, whose features have been endangering the Turkish Cypriot culture. Crucial aspects of this Turkification process were recorded, such as the control of the media by Turkey, the increasing religious propaganda and the attempts to diminish Turkish Cypriot’s secularism. In this context, the attempts of the Turkish Cypriots to react to Turkey’s involvement in their internal affairs came mainly from intellectuals and the teachers’ unions who strived to prevent cultural assimilation.


The recent Turkish general elections (June 2018) along with the Constitutional Referendum (April 2017) enabled Erdoğan to maximize his political control over Turkey. As the deterioration of the Turkish economy intensifies, there will be serious consequences in both Turkey and the Turkish Cypriot community. Given the asymmetrical nature of the relation between Turkey and the Turkish Cypriot community, these latest developments are expected to enable Turkey to intensify its control over the latter.



[1] Ahmet Djavit An, Origins of Turkish Cypriots, Cyprus Today, Vol.XLVI, No.2, April-June 2008.


[2] Theodoros Papadopoulos, The very last transfer to Moslem of the Rural Population in Cyprus, Cyprus Today, July-December 1967 and January-March 1968.


[3] Roland L. N. Mitchell, A Muslim-Christian Sect in Cyprus, The Nineteenth Century and After, Vol.LXIII, Jan.-June 1908, 751-762.


[4] Theodore Papadopoulos, Social and Historical Data on Population (1570-1881), Nicosia 1965, 78-79.


[5] Ahmet An, Kıbrıs’ta Türkçe Basılmış Kitaplar Listesi (The List of the Turkish Books Printed in Cyprus), Ankara 1997, 3-4.


[6] The role of the mainland Greek and Turkish nationalism as an external factor, the formation and the consolidation of the Turkish Cypriot leadership during the process starting from the beginning of the 1900’s as a Muslim community and turning into a Turkish community in the 1950’s, are dealt extensively in my book “Kıbrıs Türk Liderliğinin Oluşması: Dinsel Toplumdan Ulusal Topluma Geçiş Süreci (1900-1942)” (The Formation of the Turkish-Cypriot Leadership-The Process of Making a National Community out of a Religious Community (1900-1942), published in Nicosia in 1997.


[7] Quoted in Ahmet An, “Kıbrıslılık Bilincinin Geliştirilmesi” (The Development of Cypriot Awareness), Lefkoşa 1998, 43.


[8] Mustafa Mithat Bey, who wrote “Muhtasar Kıbrıs Tarihi” (The Concise History of Cyprus) (1926), had published in 1930 a 73-paged book “Muhtasar Kıbrıs Coğrafyası ve Muhtasar Kıbrıs Tarihi” (A Short Geography and A Short History of Cyprus for the Schools) in Turkish together with the geography teacher, İbrahim Hakkı Bey, published in Birlik Printing House in Nicosia.


[9] Söz newspaper, 18 October 1938.


[10] See the article “40 Yıl Öncesi Düşün Yaşamımızdan Örnekler” (Examples from the Turkish-Cypriot Thought in the Journals of the 1940's), in the book by Ahmet An, “Kıbrıs Türk Kültürü Üzerine Yazılar” (Articles on Turkish Cypriot Culture), Nicosia 1999, 91-122.


[11] Census of Population and Agriculture 1960, Government Printing Office, Nicosia, 1962.


[12] Ahmet An, Kıbrıs’ta Türkçe Basılmış Kitaplar Listesi (The List of the Turkish Books Printed in Cyprus), Ankara 1997.


[13] This directive was dated May 2, 1975 and bore number 97. A mere fifty copies were printed.


[14] Mehmet Ali Birand, Diyet, İstanbul 1979, 85 & 92.


[15] The details of this settlement were recorded by two Turkish scholars, Hatice Kurtuluş and Semra Purkis, who focused on the economic, social and spatial integration problems of the Turkish settlers in Northern Cyprus. Their findings were published in 2010 in a book edited by Besime Şen – Ali Ekber Doğan, “Tarih, Sınıflar ve Kent” (History, Classes and City), Dipnot Yayınları, İstanbul 2010, 465-506.


[16] Mehmet Ali Birand, ibid, 60.


[17] Yeni Düzen newspaper 23 July 1993.


[18] “TRNC” Official Gazette, 30 July 1991, Issue No: 20945.


[19] Yeni Düzen and Halkın Sesi newspapers, 31 July 1991.


[20] Söz weekly magazine, Nicosia, No.55 and 56, 31 October 1986 and 7 November 1986.


[21] See “Kuzey Kıbrıs’ta Türkiyeli Göçmenlerin Kültür Farklılığı” (Cultural differences of the Turkish settlers in Northern Cyprus), “Kıbrıs’ta Sosyalist Gerçek” (Socialist Truth in Cyprus) journal, Nicosia, No. 77 (Special issue), August 2002.


[22] I have dealt with this subject in my article under the title “The Development of Turkish Cypriot Secularism and Turkish Cypriot Religious Affairs”, published in “Eastern Mediterranean Policy Note, No. 8, 10 July 2016, Cyprus Center for European and International Affairs, University of Nicosia. For more on the “Written Evidence” regarding the number of the Turkish Cypriots who remain in Cyprus and the role of Turkey see: http://myislandcyprus.blogspot.com.cy/2015/04/additional-material-to-written-evidence.html


[23] Havadis newspaper, 8 February 2017.


[24]These were: 1. The Origins of Cypriot culture from historical and ethnological point of view, 2. Changes in the ethnic and cultural structure of Cyprus after 1571, 3. Cultural and folkloric interactions between the two main ethnic-national communities living in Cyprus.


[25] Summaries of the contributions were published in Halkın Sesi newspaper, 26 December 1990.


[26] Ali Nesim, ibid, 13.


[27] Draft Recommendation, Paragraphs 2 and 3


[28] Cuco Report, 27 April 1992, Doc. 6589, Paragraph 85


[29] Ahmet An, "Kıbrıs nereye gidiyor?" (Quo Vadis Cyprus?), İstanbul 2002, 324


[30] Yeni Düzen newspaper, 28 November 1997


[31] Ahmet An, "Kıbrıs’a Taşınan Türkiyeli Nüfusun Durumu” (The Status of the Mainland Turkish Population Transferred to Cyprus), Afrika newspaper, 3, 4, and 5 September 2003.


[32] Avrupa newspaper, 31 January 1998.


[33] Avrupa newspaper, 6 June 1998.


[34] Necdet Ergün, Kıbrıs Postası newspaper, 26 January 2017.


[35] Kıbrıs newspaper, 28 January 2017.


[36] Havadis newspaper, 21 November 2016.


[37] Kıbrıs newspaper, 25 April 2017.


[38] Havadis newspaper, 10 April 2017.


[39] Kıbrıs newspaper, 4 April 2017.


[40] Kıbrıs newspaper, 24 November 2016.


[41] Kıbrıs newspaper, 10 February 2017.


[42] Ahmet Djavit An, Eastern Mediterranean Policy Note, No. 8, 10 July 2016,Cyprus Center for European and International Affairs, University of Nicosia.


[43] Kıbrıs Postası newspaper, 2 November 2016.


[44] Sabah newspaper (İstanbul), 10 June 2015.


[45] Kıbrıs newspaper, 19 April 2017.


[46] Havadis newspaper, 24 April 2017.


[47] Kıbrıs newspaper, 27 September 2016.


[48] Kıbrıs newspaper, 7 March 2017.


[49] Advocate Barış Mamalı, Kıbrıs newspaper, 25 April 2017.


[50] Kıbrıs newspaper, 25 August 2016.


[51] Kıbrıs newspaper, 23 January 2017.


[52] Kıbrıs newspaper, 22 April 2017.


[53] Havadis newspaper, 9 March 2017.


[54] Kıbrıs newspaper, 27 November 2016.


[55] Milliyet newspaper (İstanbul), 18 March 2013.


[56] Yeni Bakış newspaper, 2 June 2017.


[57] Yeni Düzen newspaper, 9 April 2017.


(Published in the "Policy Paper Series", No. 2/2018  -  October 2018 by the Cyprus Center for European and International Affairs, University of Nicosia)

  • October 31st 2018 at 23:15

MR. ANASTASIADES WON THE PRESIDENCY FOR A SECOND TERM

By myislandcyprus.blogspot.com

The first round of Presidential elections in the Republic of Cyprus was held on 28 January 2018 with the participation of nine candidates. The incumbent President Nicos Anastasiades received 35.50 percent of the votes, while AKEL backed independent Stavros Malas got 30.25 percent. DİKO leader and candidate Nicolas Papadopoulos was the third candidate, who garnered 25.74 per cent and lost the chance to be in the second round. The voter turnout in the first round was 71.88%, which was the lowest for a presidential election and abstention reached 28.1%.

            Since no candidate secured 50 plus one vote, the run-off election was held one week later on 4 February 2018 between President Nicos Anastasiades and independent Stavros Malas. The winner was Nicos Anastasiades (71 years old), who received 55.99 per cent of the votes (215.281) and will stay in his post on a second five-year term.  Independent Stavros Malas (51 years old) lost the election to his rival with 44.01 per cent (169.243). The turnout in the second round was a little bit higher than the first one, 73.97%. Abstention votes reached 26.03%, invalid votes 2.65%, blank votes 2.99%.

            President Anastasiades told his followers after the results were announced that he was willing to reactivate the inter-communal peace talks, which collapsed in Switzerland last July. The AKEL criticized the President’s handling of the Cyprus problem especially during the election campaign that he bears the responsibility for the failure of talks.  Mr. Anastasiades said: “The biggest challenge we face is reunifying our country. I will continue to work with the same determination in a bid to achieve our common goal – ending foreign occupation and reunifying our state. There are no winners or losers, just Cyprus.”

            Now that Mr. Anastasiades gained more of the centrist voters, he assured his supporters that he was willing to cooperate with everyone in order to achieve the common goal – ending the Turkish occupation and reunifying the island. Mr. Anastasiades repeated that he would seek a peace deal that doesn't include Turkey's demands for a permanent troop presence and the right to intervene militarily in a federated Cyprus.

            The inter-communal talks have been going on since June 1968. The two communities living on the island, Turkish Cypriots (18%) and Greek Cypriots (80%), were trying to reach an agreement on a new constitution for the island republic, first on a unitary basis until 1974 and then on a federal basis since 1974, when the island was occupied by Turkish troops after a failed coup d’Etat against President Makarios.

            Turkish Foreign Minister, Mevlut Cavusoglu, told in an interview with the Greek Cypriot Kathimerini newspaper on 4 February 2018 that the new Cyprus negotiations under UN parameters could only begin, when Greek Cypriots change their mentality and are willing to share power with their counterparts in the North of the island.

After the United Nations Security Council renewed the mandate of the U.N. Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP) for a period of six months on 30 January 2018, Turkish daily Hurriyet Daily News reported that Turkish Foreign Ministry underlined in a written statement that any process in the coming period for the resolution of the decades-old Cyprus problem should be based on “current realities” and on the fact that Turkish and Greek Cypriots have differing conceptions of a new federal state.

            Actually, here is the crux of the matter: “Current realities” are the partition of the island since 1974 with the proclamation of a breakaway state on the Turkish occupied northern part, which is ethnically cleansed from the indigenous Greek Cypriots and has more than 300,000 Anatolian settlers. Instead of a garrison of 650 Turkish soldiers, which was a part of the Treaty of Establishment of the Republic of Cyprus in 1960, there are at present more than 35,000 Turkish troops stationed in the occupied area. What else Turkey wants now for the so-called security needs of the Turkish Cypriots, who are afraid of possible future attacks by the Greek Cypriot nationalists, to have a permanent sovereign base in the Northern part, similar to the one, proposed originally in the Acheson Plan of 1964. This has been a part of the Natoization plans of the island!    

            The Turkish Cypriot side went further in the inter-communal talks and asked the four freedoms for the Turkish nationals, who would remain in a re-united Cyprus. If this is accepted, it will open the way for an uncontrolled migration from Turkey to Cyprus or to the other EU member states. This possibility was already dealt in an article by Christoph B. Schiltz in German daily “Die Welt”, dated January 9, 2017, which stated that many bureaucrats in Brussels started to ask questions like "Will Erdogan step into the EU through Cyprus? Will Cyprus be Erdogan's Trojan Horse?"

            Since most of the constitutional issues are agreed upon, the issues of security and guarantee of the new Federal Republic is the most important aspect of the next phase of the inter-communal talks, which could be resolved with an international conference, with the participation of the five permanent members of the United Nations.

            In the new five-year term of President Nicos Anastasiades, I hope that a compromise can open the way to a genuine federal solution. The longer the partition lasts, the more the division solidifies.   

            Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has been trying to influence the secular Turkish Cypriot community through religious and nationalist activities in the occupied area. The Turkish Cypriots have increased their complaints against the cultural and demographic changes, the alienation and islamization, designed by the occupying power, Turkey. (*)  


            (*)Erdogan expressed his anger to the criticism of the Turkish Cypriot “Afrika” newspaper, which published an article on 21 January 2018 saying that Turkey’s operation in Syria was like Turkey’s invasion of Cyprus. When Erdogan was informed about this, he called “on my brothers in North Cyprus to give necessary response”. The result was an attack by a group of local and Anatolian fascists against the office of the newspaper and against the “Parliament”.

This extreme nationalism and culture of intolerance is foreign to the secular Turkish Cypriots. That’s why around 5,000 Turkish Cypriots attended a march defending peace and democracy. The march was organised by the Trade Union Platform, which represented more than 20 Turkish Cypriot trade unions and associations. It was also backed by the New Cyprus Party, the United Cyprus Party and the Socialist Liberation Party, which are not represented in the “Parliament”. The demonstrators marched towards the ‘parliament’ building and chanted ‘shoulder to shoulder against fascism’, and for solidarity, democracy and peace.   


(published in In Depth – Special Issue – Bimonthly Electronic Newsletter, Cyprus Center for European and International Affairs, University of Nicosia, Volume 15, Issue 1 – February 2018)       


  • February 20th 2018 at 18:31

EARLY GENERAL ELECTION DID NOT SOLVE THE PROBLEM OF COALITIONS

By myislandcyprus.blogspot.com

      The 14th general election in the northern part of Cyprus, which has been under Turkish military occupation since 1974, took place on 7 January 2018. Since 1974, this area has been ethnically cleansed from the Greek Cypriot population and the demographic structure has been changed through the settlers brought from Anatolia. A breakaway state was declared in 1983 on this territory occupied by the Turkish troops and this illegal state is recognized only by Turkey.

      In 42 years since 1976, 39 governments have been formed in this occupied area and the National Unity Party (UBP) took place in 24 of them. The UBP, supported by the separatist Turkish Cypriot leadership and its underground organization TMT, has been in power for 29 years. In the last elections, the majority of the votes went to the UBP.

       In the table below, you can see the names of the political parties that participated in the last three general elections, the percentage of votes they received and the number of seats they won in the 50-seat-parliament, shown in parentheses. The increasing number of the voters and the decreasing number of participation are also significant:


19.4.2009                   28.7.2013                    7.1.2018

UBP                                       43.97 (26)                   27.30 (14)                   35.57 (21)

CTP                                        29.34 (15)                   38.37 (21)                   20.97 (12)

DP                                          10.6 (5)                       23.11 (12)                     7.83 (3)

TDP                                                -                                  -                            8.61 (3)

  HP                                                 -                                  -                         17.10 (9)

YDP                                                -                                  -                           6.96 (2)

Number of voters                   161.373                      172.803                    190.553

Actually voted                       131.349                      120.287                    125.900

Participation (%)                     81.70                          69.61                        66.07


       As you can see from the table above, the National Unity Party (UBP) raised the number of seats from 14 to 21. The second party is the Republican Turkish Party (CTP), which used to be in opposition to the traditional Turkish Cypriot leadership and was on the left, lost 9 parliamentarians and won only 12 seats. The Head of the Democratic Party (DP) is Serdar Denktaş, the son of Rauf Denktaş, who was the founding President of the “Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus” (“TRNC”). The number of the seats of his party has fallen from 12 to 3, despite he was in the coalition government with the UBP before the election. Only three seats went to the Communal Democracy Party (TDP), which is close to the President of the “TRNC”, Mustafa Akıncı, who represents the Turkish Cypriot community in the present inter-communal negotiations.

         There are two newly formed parties that could gain seats in their first endeavour. The People’s Party (HP), founded by Kudret Özersay, an academician, who took part in the previous negotiation team, gained 9 seats with a significant success. Prior to the formation of his party, Özersay had a stance that supports the traditional Turkish politics in the Cyprus problem and he was leading the “Clean Community Association”, bringing forward demands such as fighting corruption, transparency and good governance. 2 seats are won by the Revival Party (YDP) that represents mainly the settlers brought from Anatolia.

      It was the first time that a new electoral system was implemented and it was adopted in the parliament that allowed all settlements to be identified as a single constituency, with a mix of party lists and independent persons, as well ticking a mixed cross-party list.

        As you can see from the table above, the number of those, who went to the ballot-boxes in the last general election was the lowest. Meanwhile, the rate of invalid votes has reached the highest level with 11.7%. 67,653 voters (33.8%) did not go to the ballot-box. Besides the fact that the new electoral system has not been adopted by a significant portion of the voters, the people are not satisfied with the policies of the existing political parties and this may have increased the proportion of those who abstained from voting. There were already 379 candidates from 8 parties and 9 independents. We have to consider also that 17,000 new citizenships were granted to the Anatolian settlers before the elections, which was strongly criticised by the oppositional parties.

       The illegal state, which was created by the occupying power Turkey and was defined by the ECHR as “a subordinate local administration of Turkey”, violated the Article 49(6) of the “Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949. According to this article, “The occupying power will not transfer a part of its civilian population to the region it occupies, nor will it send through exile.” Unfortunately, Turkey, have sent since 1974 more than 300 thousand civilian population as settlers to the occupied northern Cyprus and this practice continues until today.

         In the booklet of “The Basic Economic and Social Indicators”, the “State Planning Organization of the TRNC” gives the population as 326,158 in 2015, whereas the “High Electoral Council” declared before the recent elections that the population of the “TRNC” was 230,747, out of which 190,553 are eligible to vote. De facto population was supposed to be 299,514 in 2016.  

        The local government granted the settlers the citizenship of the “TRNC” and distributed them the homes and the agricultural land that had been abandoned by the Greek Cypriots in 1974. They were given the right to vote together with the indigenous Turkish Cypriots for the general and local elections so that the collaborationist governments could maintain their power. Furthermore, they took part also in the voting of the Annan Plan.

        When we evaluate the results obtained in this early general election, we can see that the right-wing and non-solution political parties have won the majority of the votes. The positive outcome of 60:40 on the Annan Plan is now reversed and the parties that are in favour of a non-solution have a superiority with 70:30. In the campaigns run by the political parties before the last early election, which was held six months after the failure of the last round of the inter-communal talks in Switzerland, there was no debate whatsoever about the solution of the Cyprus problem. Although mainly the internal issues have been raised, no political party has presented a convincing project for their concrete solution.

       The new distribution of seats in the parliament indicates that a coalition government will be formed, rather than a stable government. The authorities in Ankara have already begun to work in order to transform the existing parliamentary regime in the occupied area into a presidential regime, similar to the one in Turkey.

      AK Party Istanbul deputy Burhan Kuzu shared the following statement in his twitter account related to the elections held in the “TRNC”: “Today, there was an election in the TRNC. A majority government did not emerge. Three governments were formed in the last four years. Obviously, this system doesn’t work in the TRNC. My recommendation is that they should go to the Presidential System. As a scholar who has studied 40 years the architecture of bringing this system to Turkey, I’m ready to give them my service.”  

       Already the Directorate of the Aid Mission of the Turkish Embassy in Northern Nicosia and the “Prime Ministry of the TRNC” commissioned the Economic Policy Research Foundation of Turkey to look into the existing electoral system in the “TRNC” and a report was published in April 2013. Under the title “The State of the TRNC Functional-Institutional Review Study”, the report reads as follows: “In case of a revision of the electoral system, it is recommended that the election districts in accordance with the district boundaries should be abandoned and that a single constituency be formed to cover the entire territory of the TRNC.” (pp. 23-24)

      Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Çavuşoğlu gave a statement after the election results were announced and asked the Turkish Cypriot politicians to stop saying that they will not participate in a certain coalition government, which was regarded as a clear order and a message sent to the public. A group of Turkish Cypriot Trade Unions issued a protest declaration and condemned Çavuşoğlu’s interference with the internal affairs of the Turkish Cypriot community. 
      In the coming days, Turkey’s socio-political engineering plans, which will be applied in the occupied part of Cyprus, will become clearer. 

UPDATE:

     On 19 January 2018, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan expressed his anger against Afrika newspaper, which wrote that Turkey’s military operation in Syria was similar to Turkey’s invasion of Cyprus. Erdogan reacted to Afrika’s main title with this call:  “What is necessary must be done by our friends in North Cyprus!” One day later, on 20 January 2018, an angry mob of ultra-nationalist Turkish settlers from the AKP’s youth organization, which had the support of some civilian organizations and ‘municipalities’, gathered outside the building of the Afrika newspaper and threw stones and eggs against its windows. Two protesters climbed on the balcony and removed the paper’s signboards from the wall in front of police’s eyes. The protesters attempted also to enter into the building, but the police prevented them.  The demonstration was turned into a lynching operation with slogans such as “Allah is most great.” Protests were made as well against the Turkish Cypriot leader Mustafa Akinci, who came to attend the first session of the ‘parliament’ on the opposite corner of the Afrika’s office.  He was jeered by the mob outside Afrika, when he approached to calm down the situation, but he was forced to get in his car and leave the scene with the help of his bodyguards. 

     The crowds were dispersed by riot police, but they then made their way to the ‘parliament’ where ‘deputies’ were being sworn-in after the elections on 7 January 2018. Two men managed to climb on top of the building from which they waved Turkish flags and a flag frequently waved at rallies by supporters of Turkey’s nationalist Good Party.

     CTP’s ‘deputy’ Dogus Derya was booed during her swearing-in by Nationalist Unity Party lawmakers and the protesters in the ‘parliament’. She reacted shouting “Shoulder to shoulder against fascism”. This caused the reaction of Bertan Zaroglu, ‘deputy’ with the settlers’ Revival Party (YDP), who threw a paper to Derya, something which caused tension in the room.  All these incidents were watched through a live broadcasting on television and shocked the ordinary Turkish Cypriots.

       A “Peace and Democracy March” was held on the evening of 26 January 2018 under the pouring rain in Nicosia in order to protest against the violent attacks by the ultra-nationalists. Around 5,000 Turkish Cypriots took part at this march, which was organized by the Trade Union Platform that represented 21 organizations. It ended up in front of the ‘parliament’ and Afrika newspaper, where a declaration of the Platform was read.

      On 2 February 2018, the prime minister-designate Tufan Erhurman presented his cabinet to the President Akinci. The cabinet, which was approved by Akinci is made up of following members: Tufan Erhurman (CTP), Prime Minister; Kudret Ozersay (HP), Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs; Aysegul Baybars Kadri (HP), Minister of Interior; Serdar Denktas (DP), Minister of Finance; Cemal Ozyigit (TDP), Minister of National Education and Culture; Zeki Celer (TDP), Minister of Labour and Social Security; Filiz Besim (CTP), Minister of Health; Tolga Atakan (HP) , Minister of Public Works and Communications; Fikri Ataoglu (DP), Minister of Tourism and Environment; Ozdil Nami (CTP), Minister of Economy and Energy; Erkut Sahali (CTP), Minister of Agriculture and Natural Resources.

       In the meantime, CTP Famagusta ‘deputy’ Teberruken Ulucay has been elected as the speaker of the parliament, while Zorlu Tore from the main opposition UBP has been elected as the deputy speaker. The government received the vote of confidence on 15 February. While 27 deputies voted in favour of the new government, 22 deputies voted against it. One MP did not attend the session. According to the constitution, no party or group of deputies can table a motion of no confidence for the first three months after a vote of confidence is secured.

      The six men, charged for the attacks against Afrika newspaper and the ‘parliament’ building, have been sentenced on 21 February 2018 to between two and six months in prison. Judge Tacan Reynar, who was presiding over the case, found all of the six accused guilty of the charges of unlawful assembly, rioting, causing damage to property and inflicting intentional harm.

     On 7 March 2018, contacts were held in Ankara by ‘prime minister’ Tufan Erhurman (CTP) and ‘foreign minister’ Kudret Ozersay (HP) with Turkish Prime Minister Binali Yildirim, Deputy Prime Minister Recep Akdag and President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

    Havadis newspaper reported on 9 March 2018 that “everything was discussed” during these meetings and described as “interesting at first sight” the fact that the ‘finance minister’ Serdar Denktas (DP) was not included in the Turkish Cypriot delegation. A full harmony was exhibited on the Cyprus problem. The privatization of the “telecommunications authority”, the decrease of the number of “municipalities” and the “citizenship” were issues to which the government in Ankara attached importance. 
   Dogan News Agency reported on 13 March 2018 that President Erdogan asked for more “citizenship” to be given up to one million so that the population of the occupied area would be able to compete economically with the same population of the Greek Cypriots!

(published in In Depth, Bimonthly Electronic Newsletter, Volume 15, Issue 2 - March 2018, Cyprus Center for European and International Affairs,  University of Nicosia) 
  • January 15th 2018 at 15:02

EXTERNAL ASPECT OF THE CYPRUS PROBLEM

By myislandcyprus.blogspot.com

In the “Special Issue: The Cyprus Problem” of the “In Depth” bimonthly Electronic Newsletter, published in February 2017, I dealt with the internal aspect of the Cyprus problem under the title “Uncertainties at the Cyprus negotiations.” In this issue, I shall point out the uncertainties about the external aspect, mainly the security and the guarantee issues in a possible agreement.


INTERNAL SECURITY

According to the new guarantee formula that the Greek Cypriot side has brought to the table, first 75% of Turkish troops will be withdrawn and the remaining 25% will be withdrawn within a predetermined time (e.g. 18 months) under UNFICYP supervision. (The Turkish Cypriot side did not accept this. They insist that the Turkish Cypriot constituent state, whenever it is needed, should have always the unilateral right of calling Turkey for intervention.)


Internal security was organized in three stages: First, there will be a police force at the constituent state level, comprising 60% Greek Cypriot and 40% Turkish Cypriot policemen, who will serve at their desks, i.e. 5,000 in the south and 3,100 in the north.


The second phase is at the federal level, with 500 police officers at a proportion of 50: 50%, units with the authority of using weapons would serve in emergency response and in federal criminal investigation bureau. The local police of the Turkish Cypriot state will ask for help from the federal government if it is difficult.


In the third stage, the UN Security Council will have an international police force of 2,500 people. This police force will provide personnel from the EU countries outside Greece and the UK and from third countries outside Turkey. This multinational police force to be formed immediately after the settlement will not interfere in any way with the internal arrangement of the United Cyprus and it will function for five years and will be placed on the border between the two constituent states, after the Turkish troops have withdrawn completely from the island. According to Article 6 of the UN Constitution, there will be only light weapons and no authority to interfere with conflicts.


The international police force will only be activated if there is a threat and international peace is in danger. This is a comment by the Security Council based on political criteria and interests and it requires a number of other measures, such as implementing the 7th Article, the economic embargo before the military measures and/or the sea and air bombings.


EXTERNAL SECURITY AND GUARANTEES

Great Britain and Greece, three of the NATO countries that guaranteed the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of Cyprus in 1960, seem eager to give up their rights in the new era.


Greek Foreign Minister Kotzias made a proposal to sign a Treaty of Friendship and Stabilization between Greece, Cyprus and Turkey. Through this treaty, it was announced that safety valves could be added to various subjects.


Turkey, on the other hand, requires a structure, as in 1960, not only for the United Cyprus Republic, but also for the constituent states, in which the territorial integrity, security and constitutional order are guaranteed. Three Turkish formulas have been put forward regarding the guarantees:


1. A formula, in which NATO is involved,

2. The guarantee of a Turkish base within the Turkish Cypriot province and commanded by the Turkish commander,

3. The Turkish guarantor will remain for only the Turkish Cypriots after the settlement. In this regard, no agreement has yet been reached.


SOVEREIGN MILITARY BASE

It is understood that Turkey's proposal is not to assure the physical security of the Turkish Cypriots or the implementation of the resolution, but rather to raise the geo-strategic demands of her own country. Although Turkey had leaked to the press that she wanted to limit her right to interfere with island’s internal affairs, only to the Turkish Cypriot province, but later Turkey wanted to keep a sovereign military base within the Turkish state to be formed in the northern part of the island. This would be commanded by a Turkish commander and its duration would not be fixed.


Turkish President Erdogan wanted to give the message that Turkey will always stay in Cyprus with guarantees and her troops, in a statement he gave immediately after the end of the five-party conference in Geneva in the middle of January 2017. Erdogan demanded that the closed territory of Famagusta be given to the Greek Cypriot side, while the territory of Kokkina and Morphou would be combined and given to the Turkish Cypriot side. "Do not wait for Karpasia and the shoreline" he added. This meant that the Pirgo-Dilliria regions would be given to the control of the constituent Turkish Cypriot state.


According to the Greek Cypriot press, the occupation army has recently developed facilities in the Kokkina region and the Republic of Cyprus also was asked for some facilities, but these requests were rejected. After this rejection, 250 concrete and other materials were transported by sea to this region. According to the evaluations made, this development of the region is related to the military base the Turkish side wants to establish in Cyprus in case of a solution. According to the Turkish proposal, this base will be sovereign and 2,500 troops will settle here.



RECOGNIZING THE RIGHT OF FOUR FREEDOMS TO THE CITIZENS OF TURKEY, THE CITIZENS OF A NON-EU MEMBER

It was described as "very serious", when Turkey demanded, especially during the discussions on the Cyprus issue, that the EU's 4 freedoms (free movement of people, goods, services and capital) should be granted to Turkish citizens and the Greek Cypriot side stated that it did not consider this demand to deal with Cyprus negotiations.


President Nicos Anastasiades sent a letter to the European Commission on January 30, 2017, saying that "Ankara made a blackmail with her demand for 4 freedoms" and, if recognized, "this will have very serious and unprecedented effects not only on Cyprus, but also on the EU and its member states".


The newspaper wrote that Anastasiades received positive responses from the European countries, saying that so far some EU member states were against to the granting of 4 freedoms to Turkish citizens and Bulgaria responded in the same way the day before.


The Fileleftheros newspaper, dated 4 April 2017, informed that a joint procedure of Washington, London, Brussels and the UN Secretary General's Special Adviser on Cyprus Espen Barth Eide was being followed that the demand for the recognition of 4 freedoms would be recognized for the Turkish citizens after the settlement of the Cyprus problem.


Under the title of "The US has 4 freedoms in the background", the Fileleftheros newspaper, based on the information it received, reported that the United States was included in the "game" of support for the request of the Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, through Jonathan Cohen, Deputy Undersecretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The newspaper claims that Cohen gave the EU the opinion that the Turkish request should be fulfilled and that Brussels does not oppose this view and that, based on the same information, he also claimed that the issue of equal treatment for the Turkish citizens was also on the agenda, whereas they are not aware of the rights the Greek citizens in Cyprus have acquired from the EU membership.


The newspaper also said that in case the EU demands, Cohen would be able to provide equal treatment for Turkish and Greek Citizens in Cyprus by "simulating exercises" through the combination of previously applied models, including "Kaliningrad" or "Portugal". He was also informed that preparations could be made for that. It has also been suggested that Brussels will act in a way that Cyprus will have a special status in the EU, in accordance with "previous models".


Regarding the free movement of goods, the newspaper claimed that Turkey is working on the combination of "Customs Union with the EU" and "Providing mutual facilities" between the Federal Republic of Cyprus and Ankara.


In its news comment on 5 March 2017, the Fileleftheros newspaper wrote under the title "EU: Four Freedom with the Portuguese-Brazilian Model" that there are hopes for the creation of a perspective for the resumption of the negotiations on the Cyprus issue, if the influential circles in Brussels examine the “similar examples” for the realization of the Turkish demands for 4 freedoms for her citizens in Cyprus.


The newspaper wrote that the influential circles worked on the example of Portugal, which provided the privileged treatment of the EU, before allowing it to join the EU, by granting work permits to workers from Brazil depending on the special relationship between the two countries.


The newspaper reported that there is a significant difference between the Portuguese example and the situation in Cyprus and that Portugal was not an EU member, when it demanded this privilege, whereas Cyprus has been an EU member state since 13 years.


After a blockage of the inter-communal negotiations, the Greek Cypriot press wrote that the UN has prepared some important bridging proposals between the external security aspect of the Cyprus problem and the internal constitutional aspect, like the rotating presidency. We shall be seeing the results, when the two leaders meet in New York.



(published in In Depth, Bimonthly Electronic Newsletter, Volume 14, Issue 3- June 2017, Cyprus Center for European and International Affairs,  University of Nicosia)

  • June 27th 2017 at 22:25

AN OVERVIEW OF THE CYPRUS PROBLEM

By myislandcyprus.blogspot.com


The Cyprus problem has been the legacy of the British colonial “divide and rule” policy. When the British occupied the island in 1878, ending a 300-year period of Ottoman rule that had begun in 1571, the British preferred to keep the existing structures of education in Cyprus. The Christian Greek Cypriot and the Moslem Turkish Cypriot schools were kept separate from one another. There were two Boards of Education, which ensured that the curriculums of the two communities mirrored those in Greece and Turkey respectively. Thus the nationalism of both Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots did not originate from the local historical circumstances, but the nationalist ideas were imported to the island through the teachers, books and newspapers that came from Greece and Turkey. This nationalism was encouraged by the British colonial administration and the British tried to disseminate it among the unconscious masses of people in accordance to their traditional policy of ‘divide and rule’.
           Following the annexation of Cyprus by the British Empire in 1914, the new Republic of Turkey gave up all of her rights on Cyprus, when the Treaty of Lausanne was signed in 1923. This was confirmed in 1925, when Britain declared Cyprus as a Crown Colony – a status it retained until 1960.

The Communist Party of Cyprus, which was established in 1926, had a political programme of acquiring independence of the island and it was envisaged to become a part of the Socialist Balkan Federation. But after the nationalist rebellion of the Greek Cypriots in 1931, the British banned all the political activities and abolished the Legislative Council, where a Turkish Cypriot member voted together with the Greek Cypriot members some months ago.

             During the Second World War, the Greek Cypriots and the Turkish Cypriots fought and served together, on the side of Great Britain, on various fronts and at home, they organised  themselves in the same trade unions against the difficult economic conditions. In 1941, the Progressive Party of the Working People of Cyprus (AKEL) was established and it adopted a policy for the union (enosis) of the island with Greece. This was the biggest obstacle for the cooperation with the Turkish Cypriots, who saw it as a danger to their existence.

            In 1955, the Greek Cypriots started a terror campaign against the British colonial administration with the final aim of union of the island with Greece. It was in 1955 that Turkey was made again a party to the Cyprus problem with the London Conference and in 1956 Turkey and the collaborationist Turkish Cypriot leadership adopted the British plans, which aimed at the partition of the island (taksim) as a political solution.

The Turkish Cypriot youth became auxiliary police and commandoes in order to fight against the Greek Cypriot fighters. When the Greek Cypriot underground organization, the EOKA, killed the Turkish Cypriot members of the security forces, the Turkish Cypriot underground organization, the TMT, began to kill the Greek Cypriots in retaliation.

Both organizations were anti-communist oriented and they killed also progressive Cypriots. The TMT killed in 1958 some members of the progressive Turkish Cypriot trade unions and forced the others to resign from the common trade unions, thus destroying the foundations of the common political struggle.

            At the end of the conflict, neither the Greek Cypriots’ aim for enosis, nor the Turkish Cypriots’ aim for taksim were materialized, but a limited independence was given to a new partnership Republic of Cyprus, which was established in 1960. The British maintained their sovereignty over the two military bases. Both enosis and taksim policies were banned in the constitution. The guarantors of the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of the new state were members of the NATO, i.e. Britain, Greece and Turkey and they did not want to see a Cypriot state, free of their influences.

            The Turkish Cypriots, having 18% of the island’s population, were given 30% share in the administration of the new Republic of Cyprus. This was not digested by the Greek Cypriots. Archbishop Makarios, the President of the Republic, did not believe in the idea of creating a new Cypriot nation. He told to an Italian newspaper that the London Agreements created a new state, but not a new nation. On the other hand, the Turkish Cypriot leadership did not believe in the new partnership Republic and continued its separatist policies.

Two Turkish Cypriot advocates, Ahmet Gurkan and Ayhan Hikmet, started to publish on the day of independence a weekly newspaper, called “Cumhuriyet” (The Republic), where they waged with other progressive Turkish Cypriots a struggle for the cooperation of the two main communities in Cyprus in the new state. For the first time, the ideas of Cypriotism were being propagated through an oppositional newspaper and later they established a political party. The writers of the “Cumhuriyet” newspaper were supporting the independence of Cyprus, condemning the aim of union of the island with another nation or state and they wanted that Cyprus should belong to its own people, the Cypriots. Unfortunately these staunch supporters of the Republic of Cyprus were killed by the TMT on 23 April 1962, on the pretext that they served the interests of the Greek Cypriots. In 1965, Dervish Ali Kavazoglu, who was a Turkish Cypriot member of the Central Committee of the AKEL, was murdered together with his Greek Cypriot trade-unionist friend. He was against the partitionist policies of the Turkish Cypriot leadership and for the friendship and cooperation of the two communities in Cyprus. These actions of intimidation silenced the democratic opposition within the Turkish Cypriot community.

In the 1960’s, contrary to the processes in Europe, many African and Asian states were formed before the consolidation of a nation. In the case of Cyprus, this fragile partnership lasted only three years. In December 1963, the President of the Republic, Archbishop Makarios tried to change the 13 points of the constitution by abolishing the veto power of the Turkish Cypriot Vice-President Dr. Kuchuk. The inter-communal clashes started and at the beginning of 1964, the Turkish Cypriots withdrew from the state apparatus. This conflict of nationalisms between the pro-union Greek Cypriot leadership and the pro-partition Turkish Cypriot leadership complicated the solution of the ethnic-national question in Cyprus. The unity of action and aim of the Cypriots could not be developed under a common shared aim and this was exploited by the imperialist powers.

            On 21 December 1963, inter-communal clashes started and the underground organizations, which had their connections with the foreign powers, became influential again in both communities. The Greek Cypriot leadership was aiming the union of the island with Greece and the Turkish Cypriot leadership was planning to create the conditions for the partition of the island. Now Cyprus problem was once again on the international arena.

            We read in a working paper, prepared by Donald A. Wehmeyer, a US legal adviser, on 11 December 1963 that a Treaty of Joint Sovereignty between Greece and Turkey was proposed. Wehmeyer added to his memorandum “Outline of Possible Cyprus Settlement” an important ingredient for a solution, which would be more attractive to Turkey: Cyprus should be divided into provinces. Certain provinces would be administered mainly by Turkish Cypriots and this would create an illusion of partition or federation. (Claude Nicolet, United States Policy Towards Cyprus, 1954-1974: Removing the Greek-Turkish Bone of Contention”, Germany, 2001, p.226 and 229)
Salahi R. Sonyel writes that the British government hit upon an interesting solution, which was the reconstruction of Cyprus as a federal solution:

“Thus on 3 January (1964), Sir Francis Vallat asked H.G.Darwin, a constitutional expert, to produce a paper examining the possibility of dividing Cyprus into a Turkish and a Greek area, which might be formed into a federal state. Even if such a plan was feasible a number of problems were foreseen in its application. Darwin composed a memorandum, in which he suggested a federation of two states, one predominantly of Greek, and the other of Turkish populations. He also suggested an exchange of population in order to realise the Turkish state. The capital of the Turkish state would be Kyrenia.” (Cyprus, The Destruction of a Republic and its Aftermath, British Document 1960-1974, Extended second edition, Ankara 2003, pp.78-78)

In the summer of 1964, Makarios rejected the Acheson Plan, which was discussed in Geneva and which envisaged the union of Cyprus with Greece on the condition that a military base would be given to Turkey in Karpas peninsula. President Makarios was re-elected in 1968 with his new policy of “feasible solution”, instead of enosis.

We read again from Nicolet’s book: “Acheson was fully indulging himself in studying the different proposals that had emerged in Washington throughout spring of 1964. In Brands’ words, “he was ready to devise a plan that would eliminate the Cyprus problem by eliminating Cyprus.” A suggestion he was particularly intrigued with was Don Wehmeyer’s scheme of 24 April, providing enosis with an illusion of partition or federation to the Turks by the establishment of certain provinces to be administered by Turkish Cypriot eparchs, as he cabled to Ball on 8 July. (Nicolet, ibid, p.257)

And this was finally realized with a so-called “controlled intervention” (Nicolet, ibid, p.213)  in the summer of 1974, which was decided by the Deputy Foreign Minister of Greece, Christos Ksantopoulos-Palamas and the Turkish Foreign Minister, Osman Olcay. The two ministers met on 3-4 June 1971 during the NATO ministerial meeting in Lisbon and discussed how to get rid of Makarios and put an end to the independence of the Republic of Cyprus by partitioning the island through “double enosis”.

            As the imperialist foreign powers and their tools on the island were against the independent development of the Republic of Cyprus, which followed a non-aligned foreign policy, they were continuously inciting nationalistic and anti-communist feelings among the island’s population. We observe again in this period that a Cypriot consciousness could not be developed to a sufficient degree.

From 1968 until 1974, various rounds of inter-communal negotiations were carried out without signing a final agreement.  A de facto situation was created by an aborted coup d’Etat against President Makarios, organized by the fascist Greek junta and its military forces in Cyprus on 15 July 1974. This created an opportunity for Turkey to intervene five days later to the internal affairs of Cyprus. Turkey occupied the 37% of the northern part of the island and on 16 August 1974, on the 16th anniversary of the foundation of the Republic of Cyprus, the island’s territory was partitioned into two regions, one in the North for the Turkish Cypriots and the other in the South for the Greek Cypriots.

In a declassified Secret Memorandum sent from Helmut Sonnenfeld, Counselor of the US State Department to Secretary Henry Kissinger on 14 August 1974, the directive was the following:

“Assuming the Turks quickly take Famagusta, privately assure Turks, we will get them a solution involving one third of the island, within some kind of federal arrangement.” (Cyprus Weekly, 10 August 2007)

            The Greek Cypriots were forced to leave the occupied areas and the Turkish Cypriots living in south of the cease-fire line were transported to the northern part. A bi-regional, ethnically cleansed geographical division was attained de facto. It remained to form a de jure central government for the “federation”, which was the aim of the Turkish government since 1964. The new state of affairs forced the Turkish Cypriots to have closer relationship with Turkey. The Turkish Cypriots became under the direct influence of the mainland Turkish economy, politics and culture.

            The Autonomous Turkish Cypriot Administration declared first on 13 February 1975 the “Cyprus Turkish Federated State” and then announced a unilateral declaration of independence on 15 November 1985, under the name “Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus”, on the Turkish occupied territory of the island. This was condemned immediately by a resolution of the Security Council of the UN. Several rounds of inter-communal talks could not bring the two communities together under a bi-communal federal umbrella and the island remains since 1974 partitioned, occupied and colonized. Besides the Turkish Occupation Army of 40,000 troops, there are more than 250,000 Anatolian settlers, living in the northern part of the island and most of them are given the citizenship of the “TRNC”. Northern Cyprus has become a colony of Turkey, where the number of the indigenous Turkish Cypriots are estimated to be around 120,000.
            We observed that especially after 1974, two different identities have emerged: One in the north of the divide, possessing the separatist “TRNC” as an expression of Turkish Cypriots’ nationalist identity and another one in the south of the divide, as the sole owner of the Cypriot state, which has distinctively a Greek Cypriot character.
            In order to reach at a common goal, there should be common political parties of Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots, seeking common political aims. The full equality of all the communities living on the island in the fields of politics, economy and culture could only be achieved through common political parties, which will fight for a democratic federal state and against all kinds of separatism and discrimination.

            A correct policy for the solution of the problem of nationalities is indispensable and this is the responsibility of the party of the working class, the AKEL. Unless the AKEL review its policy for the Turkish Cypriots and turn to them, no step forwards could be achieved with the existing nationalist policies and this would consolidate the partition of the island.  

            Another point of view, which should not be overlooked is that the solution of the problem in the concrete conditions of Cyprus depends on one hand on the elimination of the influences of imperialism and neo-colonialism and the military bases and on the other hand to decide how to solve the internal question of nationalities, which I see as the main issue. But the determining factor here is not the difference between the two communities. On the contrary, it has to be stressed that the class struggle in the whole country and in the international arena will be decisive.

It seems that the following fear of the imperialists is still valid, first mentioned in the 1989 International Yearbook of Communist Affairs: “If the north and the south of Cyprus will be united in a future “Federal Cyprus”, the electoral power of the Greek and Turkish communists can win the majority of the votes in any Presidential elections of such an unusual government. But here the crucial problem is not, as the bourgeois circles suggest, “which   community will govern the other one”, but “which class will have the power in his hand on the whole of the island.


(Paper read at the Emergency 4th Euro-Mediterranean Workers’ Conference, organized by Balkan Socialist Center “Christian Rakovsky” and the RedMed web network, in Athens-Greece, on 26-28 May 2017)



  • May 30th 2017 at 09:46

UNCERTAINTIES AT THE CYPRUS NEGOTIATIONS

By myislandcyprus.blogspot.com

In Cyprus, which has been divided since 1974 as a result of the occupation of the northern part of the island by Turkey, a new set of the intercommunal negotiations have been going on since mid-May 2015 between President Anastasiades and Turkish Cypriot leader Akıncı, in order to reunite the island under a federal umbrella, but there are some uncertainties, which draw attention as follows:  


1. The two sides have agreed that the constituent federal states shall have the right to enter into agreements with foreign governments and international organizations on matters falling within their jurisdiction. These areas cover culture (including arts, education and sports), tourism and economic investment (including financial support).


According to the information given to the Turkish Cypriot press, the constituent states may only want the Federal Foreign Office to be in operation, if they need it! But the Greek Cypriot side said the Federal Ministry of Foreign Affairs will not need to ratify, as the agreements will involve the entire state in a cooperative effort with the constituent state.

Since the education is left to the powers of the constituent states, it is a matter of debate how federal state citizens will be educated in a federalist and unifying manner, whereas the nationalistic prejudices have been strong for many years. This issue is important in the context of the dependencies of the Turkish Cypriot statelet on Turkey in all aspects since 1974.


2. The Turkish Cypriot side has accepted in the past that the proportion of the territory of the constituent federal state in the north could fall from today’s 36% to 29% +. The Greek Cypriot side has prepared two maps, which envisage that 28.5% of the territory will be left to the Turkish Cypriot side, but the talks on territory have not yet ended.


The Greek Cypriot side suggested that if the establishment of cantons in the areas of Karpasia and Maronite villages were accepted, Morfou could also be a special administrative area for the central government.


The Turkish Cypriot does not accept the creation of special territories, mass population migrations and the reduction of the coastline. (According to official data of the Central Command of the British Sovereign Base Areas, 316.19 km of the coastline of Cyprus is controlled today by Southern Cyprus and 420.55 km by Northern Cyprus.) Moreover, it insists that the borderline between the two constituent states must be flat!


3. According to the agreement reached on the population, there will be 800,000 Greek Cypriots in the south and 220,000 Turkish Cypriots in the north. However, the Turkish side wants to add 30,000 Turkish Cypriots living abroad to this 220,000.


An interesting point is that Mr. Anastasiadis, in response to the question put by the Chairman of the Citizens’ Alliance, Georgos Lillikas, about the source of the number of accepted 220,000 Turkish Cypriot citizens, answered that the number of Greek Cypriots registered in the Statistical Office of the Republic of Cyprus was deliberately increased from 667,000 (2011 Census) to 800,000 in order to provide legitimacy to the 100,000, who are Turkish citizens!


According to the latest official census, conducted in 2011 in the occupied territory, the number of permanent residents is 286,257. The number of those born in Cyprus (“TRNC” and Southern Cyprus) was 160,207 (56.0%) and 104,641 (36.6%) were born in Turkey. As it is known, after 1974, Turkey moved population to the occupied territory in order to change the demographic structure of the island and this is contrary to the 1949 Geneva Convention. It is a fact that these settlers, who were granted citizenship of the “TRNC”, also voted for the Annan Plan, but this does not mean that they are legally located in the island.


On the other hand, President Anastasiades said that the number of Turkish Cypriots registered as Cypriot or have a passport or ID card is 117,544 and that there are at least 12,500 Turkish Cypriots, who did not apply or did not sign up, and thus the number of Turkish Cypriots reached 130,000.


Anastasiades said that the total number of Turkish nationals, formed by mixed marriages and their born children, did not exceed 90,000, but later he said that this figure was “a wrong number spelled out” and led to reactions. Anastasiades told that about 40,000 Turkish settlers will stay in the island and that this figure is much less than the Greek Cypriots had accepted in the past.


,In addition, Anastasiades noted that 25,000 Turkish Cypriots living in the United Kingdom have not applied to the Republic of Cyprus and that the number of Turkish Cypriots, included in the figure of 220,000, has increased to 155,000. It was estimated that the total number of mixed marriages and their children was 25,000 this time, making a total of 180,000 Turkish Cypriot population. Thus, he reduced the number of Turkish settlers, who would gain legitimacy, to 40,000.


Akıncı stated that the number of Turkish Cypriot citizens is taken as 220,000 persons, instead of 286,257 as mentioned above and he explained that all the “TRNC” citizens will be citizens of the new federal state and the EU in the future without difference of origin. Underlining that the work permits of the non-citizens will be renewed and they will continue to work, Akıncı emphasized that the work-force required by the economy will continue to be in Cyprus. He stated that the wish of the Turkish Cypriots is that the needed workforce should remain in the island.


The New Birth Party, formed by the settlers from Turkey, directed the following questions to Akıncı: "Anastasiades said 90,000 people will stay. Who are meant by the words, those who originate from Turkey? How are they determined? What is the status of the spouses in mixed marriages and what will happen to the children born in “TRNC”?


According to the Greek Cypriot press reports, it is estimated that between 90 and 120 thousand citizens of the Republic of Turkey will remain in the island. If it is the case, the Turkish Cypriots will be a minority in their own constituent state. In order to find out the real composition of the population, it is necessary to have a census, monitored by UN or another reliable organization.


This issue is important also for the EU. Because, if the composition of the population in the northern federal state is dominated by the settlers of Turkish descent, the impact of Turkey, which is not a member of the EU, may be decisive in Cyprus's foreign policy issues and this will cause dispute within the EU. Already, many bureaucrats in Brussels have asked "Will Erdogan step on to the territory of the EU through Cyprus? Will Cyprus be Erdogan's Trojan Horse?" Moreover, Turkey has demanded that four freedoms should be valid for its citizens in Cyprus that will remain to be a EU country after the solution.


4. The number of Greek Cypriots, who will live in the federal state in the north, has been constrained in terms of four freedoms and the ethnic cleansing after the 1974 war has also become permanent. The Turkish Cypriot side explained that there is difference between the legal domicile and the right of abode, which has no political or other right. Moreover, for any person, who would apply for "internal citizenship", s/he should be able to know and to use the native language in the North perfectly. Apart from the right to stay, for example, there will be no political right to vote. "Domestic citizenship", i.e. legal residence will be entitled maximum up to 20% of the population of the Turkish Cypriot constituent state. It is thought that thus, the majority of the Turkish Cypriot population in its own state will not be threatened in any way.


MORE DISPUTES

There are 183 topics, which have not yet been agreed upon, as reflected in the minutes of the negotiations. Among these are some of the demands of the Turkish Cypriot side:


1. Although there has already been a rapprochement in the idea of a “single ticket” for the election of the President and the Vice-President, the Turkish Cypriot side has clearly indicated during the process of negotiating the subject of “Governance” that "Cross voting" is a package with the subjects of “Rotating Presidency” and the choice of the ministers to be preferred by both communities. Thus a cleavage was formed.


2. The Turkish Cypriot side believes that the subject of Primary Law is not yet closed. However, Peter van Nuffel, EU Commissioner in Charge of the Negotiations, said that the Final Agreement must be approved in the national parliaments of the EU member countries, which is a very difficult argument.


3. The Turkish Cypriot side insisted on the FIR for having two separate air traffic control centres. The Greek Cypriot side did not discuss this and suggested that there should be two control towers for approaching 20 km to the airport.


4. It was agreed that the casinos would be under federal juristiction. However, according to the convergence reached, the operating conditions and rules will not be applied to the existing casino facilities in the occupied area.


5. The Turkish Cypriot side has not yet provided the required data for organizations such as the IMF and the World Bank that are examining the economic aspect of the solution.


FINAL UNDERTAKINGS

After the political agreement is reached there are technical issues that need to be discussed and resolved. Some of them are: The writing of the constitutions of the constituent states and the federal state, which should be in harmony with each other, the list of international agreements, the federal laws and even the detailed writing of the coordinates of the territory. Besides the ones mentioned above, it has been reported that the UN provided a list of 103 items, including flag, anthem, civil servants, demining, etc., which should be realized before the agreement. Of course, once the internal aspects of the Cyprus dispute are resolved in this way, securing the newly established order, if necessary, by the UN or the EU, will be discussed at an international meeting. 


(Published in "In Depth", Bimonthly Electronic Newsletter, Special Issue: The Cyprus Problem, Volume 14, Issue 1- February 2017, © 2016 Cyprus Center for European and International Affairs • University of Nicosia)


  • March 2nd 2017 at 18:10

THE FIRST BI-COMMUNAL MOVEMENT FOR AN INDEPENDENT AND FEDERAL CYPRUS

By myislandcyprus.blogspot.com
The first founding meeting of the “Movement for an Independent and Federal Cyprus” took place in Ledra Palace Hotel in Nicosia on 23 and 24 September 1989 with the participation of 25 T/Cs and 36 G/Cs. The participants discussed the ways of rapprochement and more contacts between the two communities in Cyprus. The joint press release of the meeting was published both in the T/C and G/C press and the meeting was flash news at the CyBC-TV.

            The Second Meeting of the Movement took place on 20-21 January 1990, where the participants approved the following basic views and principles, which were later published, in Greek, Turkish and English languages as a leaflet.


MOVEMENT FOR AN INDEPENDENT AND FEDERAL CYPRUS

Views and Basic Principles


1.We are concerned about our future

Every Cypriot citizen in our times is deeply concerned about the future of his country.

We have all lived through the tragic moments of our history – the armed and bloody conflicts, the forced displacement of people, the immeasurable human suffering, the partition of our country.

For years now we all have experienced the consequences of this violent separation – the uprooting, the uncertainty, the lack of contact and communication between Greek-Cypriot and Turkish-Cypriot citizens.

The separate existence of the two communities and the separate organization of daily life leads them to consider the absence of each other as the norm. The new generation is raised with an image which presents the other community as the enemy – magnifying the crimes of the other side while minimizing the crimes of its own.


2. We acknowledge our share of common responsibilities

We believe that every Cypriot citizen fully comprehends that the root of our problem and suffering are quite complex. Undoubtedly, foreign interests and intervention share a substantial part of the blame.

We believe, however, that every sincere Cypriot also acknowledges a collective blame and responsibility. For it is the internal contradictions and weaknesses of our society that have made outside intervention possible.

The lack of common objectives, the antagonism between Turkish and Greek Cypriots – instead of a common, liberation struggle against colonial rule, undermined the prospect of a free and democratic common future.

The outcome of all this was a Constitution that was imposed on us and a “crippled” independence, where divisions, antagonism and suspicion among Greek and Turkish Cypriots were institutionalised. The final blow came from the persistence of separatist ideologies (Enosis and Partition) even after the establishment of the fragile Independence.


3. We must condemn both the violence and the separatist ideologies of the past.

All Cypriot citizens would agree that foreign meddling in our affairs should be put to an end and that we ourselves should be those to decide our own fate, our own future.

But this alone is not sufficient. In order to be able to proceed together towards a common future, with shared goals, we must begin by acknowledging and condemning whatever separated us in the past.

It is high time that each community acknowledges and irrevocably condemns the violence it used against the other in the past. For the ordinary citizen, the victim of violence whichever direction it came from, this violence was equally painful and caused the same grief.

It is high time each community recognized the consequences of its own separatist ideology and condemned it thereof. What is called for today is not an ideology that separates people, but one that can unite them together, that could form the basis of a common struggle.

This is the only way through which we can “cleanse” ourselves from our bloody and violent past – so that henceforth we may sincerely join forces together bringing about reconciliation and shaping a shared and peaceful future.


4. Federation – our common future

The continuation of separation and antagonism does not promote our own common interests, but only serves the enemies of the independence of Cyprus.

            The struggle for a common future, in a united country, is not a matter of sentimentalism or utopia – but a basic, imperative, historical and political need, a sheer matter of survival.

            In a common country the survival of Greek and Turkish Cypriots crucially depends on the survival of the Turkish Cypriots, and vice-versa.

            All Cypriot citizens have a right to live in a federated and united Cyprus, under conditions of freedom, democracy and security.

A federal solution is, under the present circumstances, the only guarantee for the independence of Cyprus. It should not be looked upon simply as a solution of necessity; it is at the same time our only hope for a just and peaceful common future.

            A federal solution has the potential of transcending our past history of violent conflict, which built the walls of separation between Greek and Turkish Cypriots.

The pursuit of a federal solution constitutes a common goal, a path towards a common future. A future, which will secure some measure of autonomy for each community, whilst also ensuring a unified character for the Cyprus Republic, preventing permanent separation and estrangement.

The future federation, for which we must strive, should be based on the principles of justice and viability. It should establish the right of every Cypriot to live in a democratic system, irrespective of race, ethnic identity, religion, sex or colour, under conditions of security and equal opportunities for development.

Federation is not a magic formula which will be introduced by outside forces, and which will automatically solve all of our problems. No one system or constitution can by itself secure our future. The most important is the good will of the people. Federation should be regarded as the expression of our collective determination for a joint struggle/effort by all Cypriots.


5. The mobilization of citizens is an imperative need

The dangers from the continuing impasse of the Cyprus problem are only too obvious. The reappearance of mistrust and chauvinism, as well as thoughtless pseudo-patriotism on either side, are the consequences of the present stalemate.

            Real and constructive patriotism nowadays means resistance to mistrust, fanaticism and chauvinism.

            Every Cypriot should stand against the reactionary forces in both communities which are attempting to undermine the effort for a common future – expressed, in our days, in the pursuit of a federal solution. It is only with the active participation of the people of Cyprus that independence, democracy and a common peaceful future can be achieved.

            The mobilization of ordinary citizens and the dialogue between Greek and Turkish Cypriots should become a conscious political choice and action, a matter to be undertaken independently – of and beyond any formal and official procedures.

            It is nowadays imperative to cross over from passive awaiting to active political participation in the struggle of shaping our common future.



  • November 29th 2016 at 08:33

THE DEVELOPMENT OF TURKISH CYPRIOT SECULARISM AND TURKISH CYPRIOT RELIGIOUS AFFAIRS

By myislandcyprus.blogspot.com


Ahmet Djavit An


The origins of today’s Moslem population on the island
After the conquest of the Cyprus in 1570-71, the Ottoman commander Lala Mustafa Pasha left a small garisson on the island.  The official Ottoman sources refer to a total of 3,779 soldiers, many of whom, later, brought also their families.[1] Some of them even married the widows or daughters of the fallen Latin notables; an example is the last Lusignan Cornaro Lady of Potamia Castle who married the cavalry soldier Ibrahim Menteshoglou; their family has survived to the present day with the families of Menteshoglou and Bodamializade.
A census, taken shortly after the conquest, revealed a taxable population of some 85,000 Greeks, Armenians and Maronites, as well as 20,000 Turkish settlers, mostly campaign veterans, who were given land by Mustapha.[2] According to the Ottoman Register Book of 1572, 905 villages were inhabitated and 76 villages were deserted.[3] Thus the Ottomans did not build new villages and inhabited the empty ones, which mostly kept their old names while a few were given new Turkish names. The Sultan, realizing that the island needed human resources for labour, issued a firman which was sent to the Kadıs (local judges) of six Anatolian provinces: Karaman, Ichel, Bozok, Alaiye (Alanya), Teke (Antalya) and Manavgat. One in every ten families living in those provinces was ordered to transfer to the island, which meant a total of 5,720 families; at the end, only 1,689 families settled in Cyprus.[4]

According to the Register Book of 1581, there were plans to transfer 12,000 families, but eventually only 8,000 families were transported. In the following years, other Turkish families from Konya, Kirsehir, Chorum, Samsun, Chankiri, Eskisehir, Ankara, Darende and Ushak settled in the towns,[5] which were surrounded by fortified walls or had castles (Nicosia, Famagusta, Limassol, Paphos and Kyrenia), and in the deserted Latin villages.

Later the Anatolian settlers, who were mainly Turkmen artisans and villagers, intermingled with the Greeks of the island and cooperated with them in every field of life. Although the two communities belonged to different religions and had dissimilar ethnic distinctive features, they lived harmoniously, influencing each other as they worked side by side in the rural and urban areas.[6] In the course of 300 years of coexistence, during the Ottoman domination, some Christian Greeks converted to Islam in order to avoid high taxation. In some other cases, some Anatolian Moslems converted to Christianity.[7] Analysing the situation, Ronald C. Jennings wrote:


In the decades following the Ottoman conquest of Cyprus many of the island’s Christians converted to Islam.Contemporary observers and modern scholars have attributed that conversion to official compulsion, but no contemporary local sources substantiate that view except a few travelers embarrassed at the circumstances (as Venetians or Christians) who had no way of guessing how the new converts really felt. Although the level of conversion cannot be measured precisely, there are several indicators of its extent. In 1593-1595 32% of the adult male Muslims whose names and fathers’ names were cited as legal agents (vekil) were converts, as were 28% of those names as witnesses to legal cases and 41% of those named as instrumental witnesses. More than a third of such Muslims appearing in court at that time were converts. What the highest proportion ever reached was or when it was reached can only be conjectured, but obviously the intensity was temporary.[8]


There was another category of Cypriots, called Linobambaki that they were Crypto-Christians. This community of Cypriots was living in villages like Louroudjina (originally Laurentia), Potamia, Monagria, Ayios Sozomenos and some villages of Tylliria that were formerly estates of the Latins, who converted en masse to Islam.[9] Theodoros Papadopoullos gave an example of conversions from Christianity into Islam between 1825 and 1832, when in 16 villages, the percentage of the previously Christian population changed into a Moslem religion. By 1960, nine of them (Marki, Givisilin, Melounda, Kouklia, Sinda, Prastio, Malunda, Kantou, Platanissos) were all Moslem, two villages (Skoulli, Monagri) were all Christian, and the remaining five villages (Denia, Flasou, Palekithro, Syngrasi, Moniatis) had one third of their village population as Moslems.[10]

            Paschalis M. Kitromilides pointed out that the names of Christian Saints borne by several Turkish villages, especially in the Paphos and the Karpasia regions, offer a convincing indication of Islamization. These are the following Turkish Cypriot villages: in Paphos district, Ayyanni (Agios Ioannis), Aynikola (Agios Nikolaos), Ayyorgi (Agios georgios); in Limassol district, Aytuma (Agios Thomas); in Nicosia district, Aybifan (Agios Epiphanios); in Famagusta district, Ayharida (Agios Chariton); in Karpassia; Hirsofu (Agios Iakovos), Ayandroniko (Agios Andronikos), Ayistar (Agios Efstathios), Aysimyo (Agios Symeon).[11] Kitromilides notably wrote:


It should be made clear in this connection that this sort of evidence is not cited here in order to question the Turkish Cypriots’ Turkishness – which as is the case with modern national identity generally, has to do more with the states of consciousness and less with the ‘purity’ of ethnic origins.[12]


The Moslem identity of the Turkish Cypriots

After the conquest of Cyprus in 1571, the traditional Ottoman settlement system brought a new ethnological and cultural element to the island. The Anatolian Moslems had a different religion, language and culture than the island’s Christian population. The Latin Catholic Church did not oppress the Orthodox Christians anymore, and the Latins (Lusignans and Venetians) were allowed to stay in Cyprus if they would choose the religion of the conqueror, Islam, or the religion of the local Cypriot Orthodox people.[13] According to the Ottoman millet system, there were two millets in Cyprus. One was the Moslem millet and the other was the (Christian) Rum[14] millet. The Orthodox Christian Church and its Archbishop was responsible from the Christian population and later he was given the right to collect the taxes for the Ottoman governor. 

The Moslem community was mainly Sunni-Islam following the Hanefi sect. There were a Muftü for religious affairs, a Chief Kadı appointed from Istanbul for judicial matters, and a Mulla as the deputy of the Ottoman Governor.  From 1571 up to 1839, when a legal reform (Tanzimat) was proclaimed, the Moslem sacred Sheri Law was applied for the Moslem population; the Sheri Laws derived mainly from verses of the Koran and from traditions of Prophet Mohammed. Sometimes the Orthodox Christians themselves applied to the Sheri Courts in order to solve their disagreements with the Moslems in Cyprus. The Anatolian settlers believed in Islam, but they were not all following strictly the Sunni sect; some followed other sufi orders. For example, the tanners in Nicosia had their own lodge, called “Ahi Revan Dede”, a kind of “lonca” (professional syndicate). 

Right after the Ottoman occupation of Cyprus in 1570, various Vakfs[15] were created for the assistance of the Moslem community in their religious, social and cultural needs. Since the Ottoman conquerer of Cyprus, Lala Mustafa Pasha, was a devotee of the Mevlevi order, a Tekke[16] was built in Nicosia, near the Kyrenia gate, soon after the conquest; the Mevlevi Tekke functioned until the beginning of the 1950’s. Another Tekke of the Jelveti order was built in Famagusta, which had a library founded by Kutup Osman Efendi, the Grand Şeyh of this order. Aziziye Tekke, within the municipality market of Nicosia, founded in the name of the Müftü of the Ottoman Army that conquered Nicosia in 1570, was following the Rifai order. C. F. Beckingham wrote in 1955:


The dervish orders, which still have secret adherents in Turkey, were not strong in Cyprus. At present there is one Mevlevi tekke in Nicosia. […] Most Cypriot Muslims would prefer to close the tekke and use its income for the repair of mosques, the payment of hocas and religious education. It is felt that the Mevlevi ritual has lost all religious significance and has become, as one Muslim said, ‘a floor-show for tourists’.[17] (The text continues with a new paragraph here)


Formerly other dervish orders had a few adherents. There were Qadiris in Nicosia at the time of British occupation and there was once a small Bektaşi community in Larnaca; these have now disappeared. In Turkey many of the dervish orders were, or became, xenophobe. Their comparative absence from Cyprus, doubtlessly, helped the spread of modern ideas. The general character of Cypriot Islam is liberal and tolerant, and in this the Mufti reflects the attitude of the community. The social changes associated with Ataturk’s revolution were introduced into Cyprus without encountering the opposition of mullas, as they did in some parts of Turkey. (17) [Is this your text or Beckingham’s text? Quoted from Beckingham, same article, word by word]

When the British occupation began in 1878, the administration of Evkaf (Moslem pious organization) was entrusted to two delegates; a British, and a Moslem Turk who was appointed by the “Sublime Porte” (Ottoman Empire). The annexation of Cyprus (1914) and the Treaty of Lausanne (1923) brought a change in the status of the island; when the post of the Turkish delegate vacated in 1925, after the death of Musa İrfan Bey, the appointment was made by the British authorities (Colonial Office), which was subsequently confirmed by a British Order-in-Council in 1928.[18] The Moslem members of the Legislative Council, led by Hacı Hafiz Ziyai Efendi, protested to the British colonial government and claimed that the Caliph should appoint the director of Evkaf, and that the Cyprus Kadı should be considered as the head of Evkaf.

Vedjhi Efendi, who was the Kadı of Cyprus, supported this thesis. Already in 1902, the governor of Cyprus informed the Kadı by telegram that the management of the Evkaf would be carried out by the Kadı of Cyprus; advocate Fadıl Korkut wrote that he was among the congregation when this telegram was openly read in the Agia Sophia Mosque in Nicosia. Vedjhi Efendi was not able to take the necessary steps to implement the transfer of administration to Evkaf, since he got a mental disease; eventually Hacı Hafız Ziyai Efendi withdrew from the Legislative Council and become the Müftü of Cyprus. The Turkish Cypriot delegate of Evkaf, Musa İrfan Bey, who was appointed in 1903, started to behave as the leader of the Moslem community by using his authority at the Evkaf. He also adopted a policy of allocating the Moslem memberships of the Legislative Council to the candidates of the Evkaf. He gave 10,000 pounds credit to the candidates from the Evkaf Treasure, but later there were difficulties to get the Evkaf money back.

When Numan Efendi was appointed to the post of Kadı of Cyprus in 1907, he demanded again to get the administration of Evkaf to his office. It was in this year, when Dr. Hafız Djemal Bey (Lokman Hekim) settled in his own country and started to publish a newspaper and more than 20 booklets for the enlightenment of the Turkish Cypriot community. He also opened his Cyprus Industrial School in Nicosia, where young boys were taught various handworks and they used to sell their products in the Friday Market. In the evening classes, people were taught foreign languages. But the reactionary circles fought against him until he left the island for good in 1909.  

A National Council (Meclis-i Milli) convened under the leadership of Müftü Ziyai Efendi on 10 December 1918 in order to raise the demands of the Turkish Cypriots in the Paris Conference, where the Greek Cypriots would participate. We read from its resolution that Müftü Ziyai Efendi was elected as the head of the millet (reis-i millet), defining the Müftü for the first time as the leader of the Turkish Cypriot community. But the British local government did not allow him to go abroad.

When the “Organization of Islam Community” (Cemaat-ı İslamiye Teşkilatı) was established in 1924, as the first political association of the Turkish Cypriots, it demanded that the administration of the Evkaf should be handed over to a commission to be elected among the community. There was no positive outcome and when Münir Bey was appointed as the Turkish delegate of Evkaf in 1925, after the death of İrfan Bey, the government had two delegates, instead of one. Evkaf should have been handed over to its real owner, the Turkish Cypriot community, but the Lausanne Agreement had already abolished the Cyprus Convention, which provided for the British Administration to appoint one of the Evkaf delegates.[19]

            In 1928, the Evkaf Department was established by a decree issued by the colonial government, which gave special privileges to the director of the department. After the Lausanne Agreement, the Evkaf properties in the Balkan countries and Palestine were to be administered by a commission and this was not done in Cyprus and therefore there was no say anymore on the administration of the Evkaf properties by the Turkish Cypriot community. On the other hand, the Greek Orthodox Church continued to administer the Church properties in Cyprus.

Starting from 1923, when the Republic of Turkey was declared, there was no Califdom and no Minister for Religious Affairs anymore in modern Turkey. The British Colonial Government abolished the post of Müftü, starting from 19 November 1928, and this was an important event, since the Moslem population had this institution since 1571. Instead of Müftü, the post of Fetva Emini was created under the Evkaf Department and Hürremzade Hakkı Efendi was appointed there. He was supporting the Kemalists and also made a meeting together with the teacher for replacing the Arabic alphabet with the Latin at the schools. Now the authority of the Evkaf director was reinforced and Münir Bey was regarded as the leader of the Turkish Cypriot community and was invited as such to the Royal Garden party in London in 1928.

The Sheri Courts were in a deplorable state, functioning in Cyprus as if the island was still in Ottoman 19th Century. In 1927, the Cyprus Courts of Justice Order-in-Council limited the jurisdiction of the Sheri Courts to strictly Moslem religious matters and provided for appeals from them to the Supreme Court. This was done in conformity with the view of a report prepared by three leading Turkish Cypriots, Münir Bey, M. Raif and M. Shevket. Cingizzade Mehmet Rifat wrote a series of open letters to the British Governor of Cyprus, between 10 December 1932 and 11 March 1933, in his newspaper Masum Millet for the modernization of the Sheri Courts, and the Inheritance Law, similar to the reforms made in Turkey since 1926, as well as the matters of Müftü and Evkaf. 

            In 1930, Münir Bey lost his seat at the Legislative Council to the Kemalist leader Necati Bey, who voted later in April 1931 against the Customs Tax Law together with the Greek Cypriot members. In May 1931, Necati Bey convened a National Congress, where a new Müftü was elected for the Turkish Cypriots, but this was not recognized officially by the colonial government. When the British appointed in 1951 Yakup Celal Menzilcioğlu, aged 72, as temporary Müftü from Turkey, his preaching was strongly criticized by the Kemalists of the Turkish Cypriot community; uncoincidentally, after six months the anti-Kemalist Menzilcioglu resigned and left Cyprus. Necati Özkan supported again another candidate from Turkey, Mahmut Kamil Toker, for the post of Müftü against the candidate of the National Party of Dr.Küçük, Dana Efendi. But Toker was forced to withdraw his candidacy before coming to the island and the only candidate from Paphos, Dana Efendi was elected on 30 December 1953 as the new Müftü of Cypriot Muslims.    


Religious Education

Eleven “Sibyan” schools were opened between 1571 and 1600 for the elementary education. In 1632 “Büyük Medrese” and in 1640 “Küçük Medrese” were founded for the young people, who wanted to acquire religious and legal knowledge. These schools were started by rich philanthropic Turkish Cypriots, who made vakıf for the financing of these institutions, therefore the schools were under the administration of the Evkaf. From the Vakf Registers, we can see that some of these philanthropics belong to religious orders that they appointed their own care-takers for these vakıf properties for financing their activities.[20]

The first modern secondary school (Rüştiye) was opened in 1862 and in 1897 the first modern gymnasium (İdadi) followed. In 1922, it was called “Sultani”, but after the foundation of Turkey, the name was changed into “Cyprus Turkish Lycee”. The British colonial government appointed in 1937 an English headmaster to the Lycee, Mr. Wood, who changed the name all of a sudden into “Cyprus Islam Lycee”. The Turkish Cypriot community could use the original name only in 1950, when a Turkish Cypriot Headmaster was appointed to the Lycee. In 1932 a Moslem Theological School was established by Münir Bey in order to replace the Büyük Medrese, which was demolished. Advocate Mehmet Rifat (Con Rifat), who was one of the supporters of the Kemalist populist movement, criticized in his newspaper Masum Millet [Innocent Nation] the establishment of a Theological School in Cyprus.

In the first year, there were only two students and three teachers. From 1932 until 1949, in 16 years, only 8 imams graduated from this school. To be exact, in addition, two persons, one coming from Solia and the other from Tilliria also took a short course. If we bear in mind that there were about 300 mosques over the island, the qualified imams were not over two dozens. Many mosques were without imams and prayers were officiated there only at great intervals, twice a year by qualified persons. This Moslem Theological School in Nicosia was closed in 1949.[21]

            The Interim Report on Turkish Cypriot Affairs was prepared in 1949 by exclusively Turkish Cypriot members, who collected data on all relevant subjects (Evkaf, Müftü, Family Laws, Sherie Couts, Schools) from official and non-official quarters, and five public meetings were held in all towns of the island other than Kyrenia. The Turkish Cypriot press gave also considerable prominence to its deliberations. Therefore, these recommendations had gained general approval and represented a fair reflection of the desires and opinions of the Turkish Cypriot community. Thus the Turkish Family Courts Law and Marriage and Divorce Law came into force in 1951 and later amended in 1954.[22] There were reactions by Şeyh Nazım Hoca, who published a leaflet “Family Law is contrary to the Sheria”, but he was attacked by Dr. Küçük in Halkın Sesi, on 25 May 1950. Another political opponent of Dr.Küçük, Necati Özkan, wrote a series of articles in his own newspaper İstiklal (28 May-11 June 1950). The Turkish Religious Head (Müftü) Law was enacted in 1953. It provided an indirect election, that the Turkish Cypriot community elected in 1954 Dana Efendi as the Müftü for the first time after 27 years. The transfer of the Management of Evkaf properties was made officially on 14 April 1956. The administration of the Turkish Cypriot schools was handed over to the Turkish Cypriot community on 9 June 1959. 


The traditional Turkish Cypriot mosques

After the conquest of the island in 1571, the Ottomans were impressed with the Latin cathedrals in Nicosia and Famagusta and they converted them into mosques by adding minarets and other Islamic elements. Besides these and other conversions, mosques were built by the Turks in various periods in Ottoman style. Those of architectural interest are Arabahmet, Sarayönü and Turunçlu in Nicosia, Seyit Mehmet Ağa and Hala Sultan in Larnaca, Haydar Paşazade Mehmet Bey in Lapithos, Cafer Paşa in Kyrenia and Camii Cedid in Limassol. The mosques in the villages have tiled roofs, carried by one or two rows of high arches, giving the interior a spacious atmosphere.[23] Most of the mosques in rural areas did not have minaret, because they were modest buildings for the villagers built by Evkaf. Some writers insist that they represent the Alevite sect in Cyprus; but they have nothing to do with the “Cemevi”, where the Alevites perform their rituals.


The Islamization of the northern part of the island

There has been a religious movement among the Turkish Cypriot community, which was mainly represented by Şeyh Nazım Hoca, a Turkish Cypriot follower of the Nakshibendi order, which was active especially between the years 1945 and 1949 and later in 1954. Those activities were well documented by one of his followers, Hüseyin Mehmet Ateşin, in his book Dr. Fazıl Küçük and Şeyh Nazım Kıbrısi, (İstanbul, 1997). The book reflected the ideological struggle between Dr. Fazıl Küçük, (who was supporting Kemalism and modern Turkey in Cyprus in his activities for winning the leadership of his community) and Nazım Hoca, (who was an anti-Kemalist.) The same writer wrote also the history of the Islamic Movement among the Turkish Cypriots in Kıbrıs’ta İslami Kimlik Davası [The case of Islamic Identity in Cyprus] (İstanbul 1996).[24]

Islamization activities of the occupied parts of the island started right after the invasion and the occupation in 1974. Churches were transformed into mosques in the main towns and villages. Religious propaganda went parallel with the increasing activities of the religious parties in Turkey. When Müftü Dana Efendi retired on 1 September 1971, his deputy, Dr. Rifat Mustafa was appointed as Müftü. The Turkish Cypriot Islam Association was founded already in 1971 with a publication of a fortnightly newspaper Her şeyde ve her yerde milli ve dini NİZAM [National and religious ORDER in everything and at everywhere], on 5 February 1971, which ceased its publication with issue 38 on 19 July 1974. Right wing and religiously oriented columnists from Tercüman newspaper, Ahmet Kabaklı and Ergun Göze, were invited to Cyprus in February 1974; it was a kind of revival of the Şeyh Nazım movement.

A second religious association “Cyprus Turkish Islam Cultural Association” was re-activated after 1974. One of its activities was a conference organized in Kyrenia in June 1977. The chairman of the Association accused the Turkish Cypriots as being “Gavur” (infidel to Islam): “Unless Islam disseminates now or in the future in Cyprus, they shall stay as Gavur as they are today”.[25] The insult provoked Dr. Fazıl Küçük to reply in a series of articles in his daily Halkın Sesi for five days, under the title “Tongues with spikes”. On 12 July 1977 he wrote:


They have given permission to those members from the Koran courses that are spreading across the island and they are practicing as imams and preachers. The administration should be more sensitive in their duties. […] We are embarrassed from the words of those, who came from mountain or forest villages. They don’t know how to walk properly on the street, with their wide trousers. They are chewing the sentence ‘You are bastards of the British, gavurs, without any religion’ and they passed the limits of tolerance. We don’t know what will happen and what will be the result, when there will be no tolerance for these curses. […] Our arms are open for the Ataturkist imams and preachers and we can share our bread with them. These associations have become hearths of disaster. These Islam associations should be closed without any further delay. Although everyone is free to open an association according to the constitution, but the government has the right to close them, when they engage in dangerous activities. […] There is no authority today, who will force them to withdraw their long tongues back into their mouth, who says ‘We shall make you, the gavur Turks, Moslem’.[26]


He further wrote that he had received a letter about the activities of Süleymanist missioners, who were employed by the Müftü Mustafa Rifat that they were teaching Arabic to the youth in Famagusta and giving conferences without getting permission in the villages, where they accused the Turkish Cypriots of not being religious enough. Halkın Sesi reported one year later, on 11 August 1978, that Koran courses were organized in a mosque in Famagusta and the children were told not to watch TV, because it was a sin; small boys were not allowed to wear short trousers and they could not learn by heart to sing the prayers properly at the minarets.


The growth of mosques and Islam in occupied Cyprus

There were approximately 300 mosques in Cyprus before 1974. Many of them in the rural areas did not have minarets and between 1968 and 1974 minarets were built to some mosques like the ones at Krini, Fota and Agridi. At the end of 1991, there were 141 mosques in the occupied areas, but 58 of them did not have imams for performing the religious prayers. Βy 1999 the Department for Religious Affairs – with a personnel of 13 – employed 135 imams in all the mosques (only 5 of them were graduates of a Theological Faculty), plus 56 imams were appointed from Turkey. According to the official numbers, there were 199 mosques in the ‘TRNC’ at the end of 2012, excluding those in construction; in these mosques, 255 imam and muezzin were employed. Furthermore, there were another 103 imams, who were paid by the Turkish Embassy in Nicosia. Thus the total number of imams – including the three imams working in the southern part of the island – is 361 of whom only ten are are permanently employed while the rest are on a contact basis.[27] In 2014, there were 260 imams, who were paid from the budget of the Prime Ministry of the TRNC, but only 13 of them were on permanent staff- list. Another 120 imams received their salaries from the Turkish Embassy in Nicosia.[28]

Nine mosques were built between 1974 and 2002 in various towns and villages in the occupied areas with the finances of the Turkish Embassy in Nicosia. One of them is the big mosque, built in Anatolian style in Kyrenia in 1999 and it was named after Nurettin Ersin Pasha, the Turkish commander of the 1974 invasion forces. It was followed, in 2003, by another big mosque that was built in Famagusta and was named after Fazıl Polat Pasha, the Turkish commander who occupied Famagusta in 1974. In the summer of 2005, there were a total of 173 mosques and a budget of 3.5 million TL was allocated in order to build 12 new mosques. During the AKP government, starting with the year 2002, out of 39 newly built mosques, 37 were in occupied Greek Cypriot villages; they were all reduced-size copies of the big mosque built in Kyrenia, either with one or two minarets.[29]

The Turkish Cypriots perceive these Islamization activities with concern. For example the Trade Union of Turkish Cypriot Teachers (KTÖS) issued a statement and criticized the ongoing Koran courses and new schools for religious education:


There are 192 mosques in the TRNC, whereas there are 160 schools, 21 health centres and 17 hospitals. Each university wants to build a mosque and these plans increased the controversies. […] They say that they got permission from the Ministry of Education, but there are Koran courses ongoing in the mosques, without permission and controls. If the government does not have the power to control these places, they should resign.[30]


The Trade Union of the Turkish Cypriots Secondary School Teachers (KTOEÖS) protested for a teacher that was appointed from Turkey, at the Polatpaşa Lycee, because the pupils did not like the way he was teaching the lesson of “Religious Culture and Ethics”.[31] The parents’ association of the same school made a demonstration and criticized the Ministry of Education that there was no inspection how the teachers for religion perform their duties.[32] The chairman of KTOS, Semen Saygun, remarked that there were 2,000 pupils, who were participating at the Koran courses during summer season in 2012 while in 2015 the number increased to 5,000. She said that it was not pedagogically appropriate for the immature children to have these courses instead of playing games, resting or spending time with their own families.[33]


Turkish Cypriot reaction

The majority of the Turkish Cypriots does not like that that religious belief is mixed with politics in a show off and are against using religion for political purposes.  Therefore they do not approve mass propaganda for Islam, done by the various religious associations, mainly set up by Anatolian settlers and students. There have always been religious people among the Turkish Cypriot community, but they were in minority and not so fanatic. Some religious Turkish Cypriots formed in cooperation with Turkish settlers some political parties, which were based on religious programs, but they did not have any success: “Reform and Welfare Party” (1979), “Our party” (1998). When the followers of Şeyh Nazım convened on 22 December 1996 in Nicosia at a meeting under the name “Great Islam Congress”, Şeyh Nazım defined the Turkish Cypriot as “a different kind of human, who is clever and has many demonic ideas. There is a need to have someone, who can imprison the demon in a bottle. Those imams, who are sent from Turkey, do not know the Turkish Cypriots. I can convince millions, but in the last 60 years, I got tired of trying to convince this millet (of Turkish Cypriots)!”[34]

            Since the population of the Anatolian settlers is more than the local Turkish Cypriots in the occupied areas at the moment, religious events and activities are organized mainly for them by various associations and organizations that are financed by the Turkish Embassy in Nicosia or some reactionary Arabic countries, and enjoy the support of the ‘TRNC’ government. Last year the Evkaf distributed 5,000 packages of food, sent by the General Directorate of the Vakıfs in Turkey. During the Ramadan month, when the Moslems do not eat or drink anything during the daytime, 100,000 persons had the chance to have dinner on 14 meeting-points in various towns and villages, under the organization of the “Red Crescent Association of Northern Cyprus” with the support of the Turkish Embassy Aid Department in Nicosia. Since 2005, it has been a traditional event. Similar dinners were given also by the Evkaf Department, the Turkish Cypriot Islam Association and Universal Love and Brotherhood Association (ESKAD).[35]

            At the moment there are 600 students at the two theological faculties, one at the Near East University (YDU) and the other one at the University of Social Sciences [Sosyal Bilimler Üniversitesi], while another 800 pupils attend the Theological Colleges. Almost all of the students and teenage pupils are from Turkey who came to the occupied areas with scholarships while a small number are the children of the Anatolian settlers; the teachers are all coming from Turkey. The newly established Hala Sultan Theological College is part of the big complex with a boarding house, a large mosque, conference rooms and shops that will cost 80 million dollars. The Hala Sultan Mosque with its four tall minarets – a small replica of the Selimiye Mosque in Edirne – will be ready by 2017 at a total cost of 30 million dollars. Another large mosque with six minarets is being constructed at the Near East University and is expected to be completed by 2017.

            It is interesting to note that an Anatolian settler, professor Talip Atalay – also an unsuccessful AKP candidate at the 2015 general elections – who settled with his family in occupied Famagusta in 1975, when he was 7 years old, was appointed by Ankara, in 2010, as the Muftü of Cyprus. His employment as the Director of the Religious Affairs, was accompanied by the purchase of two Mercedes and three BMW cars for his Department, which caused criticism by the Trade Union “Hizmet-Sen” in the Turkish Cypriot press.[36] Talip Atalay, a professor of theology, represents the Turkish Cypriot community in its relations with the Cyprus Greek Orthodox Church and he is welcomed by the authorities of the Republic of Cyprus, although he is not a local Turkish Cypriot. The Anatolian settlers can visit now the Hala Sultan Tekke during Moslem Holidays. Since 2014, four such visits were organized with the participation of more than one thousand visitors in each time, comprising mainly of the Turkish citizens![37]


(Published in “EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN POLICY NOTE • No. 8 • 10 July 2016, Cyprus Center for European and International Affairs, University of Nicosia)







Dr Ahmet Djavit An, MD, is a historical researcher, activist and author of 24 books about the Turkish Cypriot political, religious, communal and social affairs. Among his books about the history of the Turkish Cypriots and the Cyprus Problem are: Kıbrıs’ta Fırtınalı Yıllar (1942-1962) [The stormy years in Cyprus (1942-1962)], (Nicosia: Galeri Kultur, 1996); Kıbrıs Türk Liderliğinin Oluşması: Dinsel Toplumdan Ulusal Topluma Geçiş Süreci (1900-1942) [The formation of the Turkish Cypriot leadership: the process of making a national community out of a religious community (1900-1942)], (Nicosia: Galeri Kultur, 1997); Kıbrıslılık Bilincinin Geliştirilmesi [Notes on the development of Cypriot awareness], (Nicosia: Galeri Kultur, 1998); Kıbrıs Nereye Gidiyor? [Quo Vadis Cyprus], (Istanbul: Everest, 2002); Küçük Adada Büyük Oyunlar: Kıbrıs’ta Ayrılıkçılık, Federal Çözüm ve AB Üyeliği [Big games on a small island: separatism, federal solution and EU membership of Cyprus], (Istanbul: NK Publishing, 2004); Kıbrıs Türk Toplumunun Geri Kalmışlığı (1896-1962) [The under-development of the Turkish Cypriot community (1892-1962)], (Nicosia: Shadi Publishing, 2006)


[1] Cengiz Orhonlu, The Ottoman Turks Settle in Cyprus (1570-1580), in Milletlerarası Birinci Kıbrıs Tetkikleri Kongresi (14-19 Nisan 1969) Türk Heyeti Tebliğleri, Ankara 1971, p.100

[2] Ibid, p.97

[3] According to the 1572 census 76 villages in the Mesaoria and Mazotos regions were empty: Cengiz Orhonlu, Milletlerarası Birinci Kıbrıs Tetkikleri Kongresi Türk Heyeti Tebliğleri, p.93. Quoting B. Sagredo in des Mas Latrie, Histoire De L’Ile de Chypre, III, Paris 1855, p. 542, Halil İnalcık wrote that “in 1562 there were 246 villages belonging to the State and were described as ‘Real’ while those belonging to the mobility and the Church numbered 567”: Halil İnalcık, Milletlerarası Birinci Kıbrıs Tetkikleri Kongresi Türk Heyeti Tebliğleri, p. 64.

[4] Cengiz Orhonlu, ibid, p.94

[5] Ibid, p.100

[6] Ahmet Djavit An, “Origins of Turkish Cypriots”, Cyprus Today, Vol. XLVI, No. 2, April-June 2008, pp.13-21.

[7] Letter of Mehmet Ziyai Efendi to Sublime Porte (“Bab-ı Ali” in İstanbul) dated 22 February 1910, quoted by Mustafa Haşim Altan, Kıbrıs’ta Rumlaştırma Hareketleri [Movements for Greek convertions in Cyprus), 2nd edn (Kyrenia: Milli Arşiv, 2000), pp. 9-10; also M. Nabi, “Nüfus Sayımı-2”, Hürsöz newspaper, 15 June 1947.

[8] Author’s emphasis; Ronald C. Jennings, Christians and Muslims in Ottoman Cyprus and the Mediterranean World, 1571-1640, New York University Studies in Near Eastern Civilization XVIII (New York: New York University Press, 1992), p. 137.

[9] Alkan Chaglar, Toplum Postası newspaper, London, 5 August 1981.

[10] Cyprus Today, July-December 1967 and January-March 1968.

[11] Paschalis M. Kitromilides, “From coexistence to confrontation: the dynamics of ethnic conflict in Cyprus”, in Cyprus Reviewed, ed. by Michalis Attalides (Nicosia: New Cyprus Association, 1977), pp 35-70 (37).

[12] Ibid.

[13] Ahmet An, ‘Changes in the ethnic and cultural structure of Cyprus after 1571’, in Kıbrıs Türk Kültürü Üzerine Yazılar [Articles on the Turkish Cypriot Culture]; (Nicosia: Ateş Matbaacılık, 1999), p.15.

[14] [“Rum” is related to Eastern Roman Empire and all the Greek speaking Orthodox Christians, who were living in Anatolia, were called as “Rum” in Turkish language. The Greek Cypriots used to be citizens of the Eastern Roman Empire, therefore they were called also as “Rum”, i.e. “Kıbrıslı Rumlar” (Rums of Cyprus).  For example, those Rums, who were living in the Black Sea region, were called as “Trabzonlu Rumlar” (“Rums of Trebizun”= Pontians). On the other hand, “Yunan” means (Ionian in Arabic) and it is used for a citizen of the state of “Yunanistan” (Land of Ionians= Greece) after 1829. Therefore the Greeks, living outside the boundaries of Greece, are called “Rum” as the ex-citizens of Eastern Roman Empire, not being the citizens of Greece.  Could you please explain in this footnote why the Christians in Cyprus were called Rum and not Υunan]

[15] Evkaf is a religious institution in Islam. The legal definition of Vakf (Evkaf is the plural of Vakf) is the tying up of the property for the sake of God and to earn the Divine Mercy, with ultimate imposition of interdiction on its transfer to persons contrary to the conditions of dedication. The term is equivalent of “dedication”.

[16] A Tekke (convent) is a place where Dervishes belonging to a cult used to stay and carry out their prayers and religious ceremonies. 

[17]  C. F. Beckingham, “Islam in Cyprus”, The Islamic Quarterly, vol. II, no. 2, July 1955, p. 140.

[18] M. Kemal Dizdar, “Cyprus Evkaf”, in Milletlerarası Birinci Kıbrıs Tetkikleri Kongresi, 14-19 Nisan 1969 Türk Heyeti Tebliğleri (Papers of the Turkish delegation to the First International Congress of Cypriot Studies) Ankara: 1971, p. 211.  


[19] Advocate Fadıl N. Korkut, 31 Mart 1947 tarihinde Kıbrısta Mevcut Türk Kurumları Namına Ekselâns Valiye Takdim Edilen Arizada Hükûmetten Talep Edilen Haklarımızdan 2ncisi EVKAF, Hür Söz Basımevi, (Lefkoşa), (Evkaf, The second of our rights, being demanded from the government in an application given to his Excellency the Governor in the name of the existing Turkish institutions in Cyprus on 31 March 1947, Hür Söz Printing House (Nicosia).


[20] Ali Süha, ‘Turkish Education in Cyprus’, in Papers of the Turkish delegation to the First International Congress of Cypriot Studies (Ankara: 1971), pp. 235-237.

[21] 1949 Interim Report of the Committee on Turkish Affairs [in Turkish], Nicosia 1950, p.70.

[22] Ahmet An, A Short Overview on the Past of the Turkish Law Institutions in Cyprus, Articles on Turkish Cypriot Culture, Nicosia, 1999, p.89.

[23] Hakkı M. Atun, “The Influence of Ottoman Architecture in Cyprus”, in Papers of the Turkish Delegation to the First International Congress of Cypriot Studies (Ankara: 1971), pp. 262-263.

[24] Ahmet An, “The role of religion in Turkish Cypriot community” (in Turkish), Kıbrıslı Turkun Sesi dergisi, 27 September 1996, http://can-kibrisim.blogspot.com.cy/2014/01/kibris-turk-toplumunda-dinin-yeri.html; Ahmet An, “Religion and society in the 2000’s” (in Turkish), Kıbrıslı Turkun Sesi dergisi, December 1997, http://can-kibrisim.blogspot.com.cy/2014 /01/2000li-yillarda-din-ve-toplum.html.

[25] Halkın Sesi, 11 June 1977.

[26] Dr Fazil Küçük, “Dikenli diller” [Tongues with spikes], Halkın Sesi, 12 July 1977, p. 1

[27] Havadis, 6 December 2012.

[28] Afrika, 18 August 2014.

[29] Mete Hatay, “‘Direniş’ Minarelerinden ‘Vesayet’ Minarelerine”, Afrika, 17 October 2014, p. 19.

[30] KTÖS Press release, Kıbrıslı, 5 August 2012.

[31] Yenidüzen, 29 December 2015.

[32] Kıbrıs, 16 February 2016.

[33] Kıbrıs, 11 July 2015. 

[34] Quoted by Ahmet An, Kıbrıs Türk Toplumunda Dinin Yeri [Place of Religion in Turkish Cypriot Society] Kıbrıslı magazine, 27 September 1996, no.14.

[35]  Kıbrıs, 18 June 2015.

[36] Afrika, 5 March 2014, p. 3.

[37] Kıbrıs, 11 December 2015.


  • July 23rd 2016 at 23:53

THE CURRENT POLITICAL CRISIS IN TURKEY

By myislandcyprus.blogspot.com

The Justice and Development Party (Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi=AKP) has been in power in Turkey in the last 14 years and it has already made big steps forwards in order to legitimize the establishment of an Islamic State in Turkey. The Republic of Turkey was founded in 1924 by Kemal Ataturk and until 1990’s, Kemalism has been the state ideology of modern Turkey.  


The AKP originated from the religious movement, started by the National Order Party (MNP) of Necmettin Erbakan, who broke apart from the traditional right wing Justice Party (AP) in 1970 and started a separate political party in order to represent independently the political Islamism in Turkey. Erbakan’s political movement continued under various parties, which succeeded each other after the proscription of the previous one: National Order Party (1970-1981), National Salvation Party (1983-1998), Welfare Party (1983-1998), Virtue Party (1997-2001), Prosperity Party (2001-today). Those, who did not want to join the Prosperity Party, established the AKP on 14 August 2001 and Recep Tayyip Erdoğan was the chairperson between 2003 and 2014.  The AKP won 34.28% of the votes in the general elections in 2002, 46.58% in 2007 and 49.83% in 2011. In June 2015, the AKP won 40.89% of the votes under its new chairperson Ahmet Davutoğlu, who could increase the percentage in November 2015 up to 49.50%. Davutoğlu was previously the Foreign Minister in Erdoğan’s cabinet and he initiated the so-called “Zero-problem with the neighbours” policy, which proved later to be an enemy maker policy for Turkey.    


The Islamic religious communities have been very active since 1973 in Turkey and the most influential one of them was Fethullah Gülen’s movement. Gülen supported Erdoğan’s AKP, starting from the general elections of 1994 until 2009. During the power of the AKP, the state apparatus was not anymore supporting the Kemalist principles of the founder of the Republic of Turkey. It was already under the influence of a Turkish-Islam synthesis, which could be defined as a kind of fascism with Turkish flavour. It is not only anti-communist and anti-democratic, but also anti-humanist and anti-enlightenment. The ideology of the AKP is oppressive and against the classic liberalism in the sense of political rights and freedoms.


After the military regime of 1980, the Turkish state establishment did not disturb the so-called “moderate” religious movement of Gülen, organized as companies, associations and foundations. The security bureaucracy of the Turkish State, like the Ministry of National Education and the Directorate of Religious Affairs were already indocrinated with the Turkish-Islam synthesis, as well as the Intelligence Services (MIT), the police and the army. It is not possible to find Kemalist persons anymore, working in the Ministries of National Education or Internal Affairs or among the Security Bureaucracy.  


Starting with the military ultimatum on 28 February 1997, the political Islam in Turkey took a neo-liberal course, which brought Turkey to participate in the Great Near East Project of the USA, to start relations with the EU, to implement the programme of the IMF and to privatize the big state enterprizes. The big monopolies of Turkey have accumulated a lot of capital during the power of the AKP and they bought almost all of the state properties and benefited from extraordinary subsidies.


According to a survey, done by the Ministry of Family and Social Policies, published at the beginning of 2013, Turkey is one of the countries at the top of the list with inequal division of national income. The division of national income is unjust and inequal. 95% of the households live below the poverty line (3.200 TL) and 60% live below the limit of hunger (1.200-1.000 TL). Out of 19.7 million families, the richest 100 were getting 30% of the national income with their wealth of 216 billion dollars. The income of the richest 10% of the population in Turkey is 12.6 times more than the 10% of the poorest population. According to the numbers from 2015, Turkey is the fifth OECD country after Mexico, Chile, USA and Israel and the first in Europe.


According to the study of Research Institute on Turkey, which was based on the Global Wealth Report of the Credit Suisse, the richest 1% of the population in Turkey, used to get 39.4% in 2002, but they got 54.3% in 2014. The remaining 99% got in 2002 60.6% of the total wealth, reduced to 45.7% in 2014.  Erdoğan’s family, alone, has accumulated in the last 10 year a wealth of 128 billion dollars, which makes 16% of the national income.


The Gülen Movement had 88 foundations, 20 associations, 128 private schools, 218 companies and approximately 500 boarding houses in Turkey. It was also well organized in the mass media with 17 newspapers and magazines, several TV and radio stations. The Gülen imperium, which is supposed to have the support of the CIA, has in 92 countries, approximately 500 elementary and secondary schools and 6 universities, plus many education and language centres. The movement educate more than 100.000 persons worldwide. The schools, which operate in the foreign countries, are all private and enroll the children of the middle and the upper classes.


In November 2013, Erdoğan decided to break his cooperation with the Gülen Movement and and get the whole power in his own hand in Turkey. Therefore he started by preparing a bill for the closure of the preparatory classes for the universities. This was a big challenge for his long-time collaborator, the Gülen Movement, which was recruiting young members to the movement through these preparatory classes for the universities. The “Zaman” daily newspaper of the Gülen Movement reacted strongly against this decision of the AKP government by saying that this was not done even during the Kemalist military regimes in Turkey. This was a big economic and political blow to the Gülen community, because 60% of all the preparatory classes (4.000 of them registered, 2.000 - 5.000 unregistered) belonged to Gülen Movement and 80% of the publishing materials for the preparatory classes.   


Gülen Movement reacted on 17 December 2013 by making some operations, where 80 persons were detained and  among them was an Iranian businessman, Rıza Sarraf, who sold the Iranian petrol during the years of embargo and gave the money back to his partner in Iran in gold.  The mass media was given some recorded telephone conversations about the corruption of four cabinet ministers, who were bribed by Sarraf. This ended up with their resignation on 24 December, because the sons of  Zafer Çağlayan, Muammer Güler, Erdoğan Bayraktar were involved. During the police operations, 4.5 million dollars were found, hidden in shoe-boxes in the house of the director of Halk Bank and a money-counting machine was found at the bedroom of Minister Güler’s son! Erdoğan Bayraktar told to the press that what he had done was according to the orders of Premier Minister Erdoğan! But he negated this statement later.  On 25 December 2013, a second operation for the arrest of 30 suspected persons for money laundering could not be realized, because the security forces did not implement the order of the state attorney. From that day on, the AKP started to restructure the legal system in Turkey with its own supporters. 


Later, the events on 17 and 25 December 2013 were seen as a civil coup d’Etat of Erdoğan, whereas the accused ministers should have been before court, in order to have a clarification, if they did something against the law or not, but the AKP stopped the legal procedure!


In January 2014, the MIT officers did not allow the state attorney to search lorries carrying guns and ammunition for the ISIL. The Minister for Internal Affairs stated on a TV programme that during 35 days, after the incident on 17 December, 5,000 policemen and many state attorneys were appointed to other posts. On 25 February 2014, another voice-recording was popular on the social media and Youtube which was recorded on 17 December 2013. The PM Erdoğan was informing his son, Bilal, about the police operation at the homes of the sons of some ministers and he told his son to get rid of the money, hidden at their own home. Bilal Erdoğan has been accused of involvement in illegal oil smuggling in Syria  and Iraq.


After the corruption scandals were made public, Erdoğan decided to abolish the court decisions on Ergenekon case and the similar ones, which made a big blow on the strength and authority of the Turkish Army. Now the Army was a reliable partner of Erdoğan, who wanted to avoid his cornered position.


The AKP was able to collect 44% of the votes in the local elections on 30 March 2014 and Erdoğan declared war on the Gülen Movement, which he defined as a “parallel state within the Turkish state.” On 12 June 2015, 37 judges and attorneys were expelled from their professions.  


Erdoğan started also a revenge attack on the Kurdish cities and people in South-Eastern provinces, where his party could not win, but the Democratic Party of the Peoples (HDP) was very successful. Erdoğan broke the alliance with the Kurdish movement, which costed 40.000 lives in 35 years and 6.000 people were killed only in 8 months time!


According to a report, prepared by the TU for Education Labourers (Eğitim-Sen), when the AKP came to power in 2002, the number of students attending 450  Imam Hatip schools were 71,100.  In the school year 2014-2015, the number of the Imam Hatip Schools was 1,017 with an increase of  90% to almost 750,000 children, aged between 10 and 18, or 9% of all students. (Hürriyet, 13 June 2015) Government officials, many of them former Imam Hatip pupils themselves, have since argued that the schools’ revival responds to demand by Muslim families, who felt discriminated against after 1997.


The Turkish Directorate for Religious Affairs, which employs 120.000 personnel, in a total of 84,684 mosques (emlakwebtv.com, 18 June 2015), had a budget of  more than 3 billion Euros (6.5 billion TL) for 2016 and the whole amount, spent on religious activities between 2006 and 2015 makes a total of approx. 12 billion Euros. (haber.sol.org.tr, 27 January 2016) In the summer of 2015, more than 3 million children (4-6 year-olds included) went to Koran courses, organized in 60.000 mosques. More than 1 million visited other places than mosques for Koran education. 929 persons and many other associations and foundations organized 16.958 Koran courses in 2013-14. (Birgün newspaper, 31 March 2016)


In Turkey, there are 107,000 doctors and 1,250 hospitals, whereas there are 122,000 imams and almost 85,000 mosques. Every year only 9,000 doctors graduate, whereas there is a need of 105,000 doctors more. On the other hand, there are 122,000 imams and every year 60,000 imams graduate and they are in surplus. (Yılmaz Özdil, Sözcü newspaper, 8 January 2015)


The AKP is very happy with the majority of the media, including some 32 newspapers and 22 television channels, using them in order  to dominate the news coverage and attack on opposition parties. 


Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu was forced to announce on 5 May 2016 that he was resigning as head of the ruling AKP and giving up the premiership. President Erdogan continued to concentrate the whole power of the state in his own hands and obedience to him within the AKP was openly praised as a virtue and required as a duty.


On the other hand, the country faced now serious challenges on the security and economic fronts. Turkey failed to protect the city of Kilis on the border with Syria, where ISIS attacks with missiles that took lives of 21 people, including eight Syrian refugees, and wounded scores of others. Many buildings have been devastated. One columnist wrote that Kilis is a clear testimony to Turkey’s powerlessness in its ambition to be recognized as a regional power.


Erdogan and his party AKP are among the major actors in the ordeal that Syria has been going through since 2011, alongside with Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Erdoğan strives to assume the leadership of the Sunni masses of the Middle East and return to Turkey the glory of its Ottoman past. This is one of the reasons why the AKP government supported ISIL until very recently and continue to support other Islamist groups fighting against the Assad regime in Syria, where he flamed the hatred of war between the Sunni and the Alevi. The Alevites are a minority denomination in Islam and they are closer to the Shia than the Sunni. The AKP does not have good relationship with the Alevites in Turkey. Another problem for the AKP government is the formation of the Kurdish cantons on the Syrian border. The USA asked Turkey to cleanse the line Cerablus-Azez from the ISIL, but Erdoğan does not want that the Syrian Kurds would put these areas under their control. Russia and Syria prefer the Kurdish authority rather than the ISIL.


The relationship between Turkey and Russia have deteriorated significantly since 24 November 2015, when a Turkish fighter jet shot down a Russian warplane in Syria. Russia declared economic sanctions against Turkey and the trade between the two countries contracted 25% in 2015. Since the beginning of 2016, Russia has put restrictions on the supplies of vegetables, fruits and other goods from Turkey and these restrictions included also a ban on hiring of Turkish citizens. It is estimated that the embargo could cost the Turkish economy more than 3 billion dollars.         


Erdoğan does not act as an independent President, but continue to govern the AKP as its leader, getting involved in goverment affairs and breaching the Constitution, which is punishable with life-long imprisonment. He should have cut his relationship with his AKP on the day he was elected as President. On the contrary, he succeeded the resignation of the Premier Minister, who won the elections with 23 million votes. Erdogan intervened also the internal party affairs of the oppositional National Movement Party (MHP) in order to secure the continuation of the party’s support for his power. 


The new chairperson of the AKP, Binali Yıldırım, who would be the Prime Minister of Turkey, is a well-known close friend of Erdoğan and one of the founders of the AKP in 2001. He was appointed to the Ministry of Transport in 2002 and served the longest term in the history of Turkey at that post. During his term of office, a lot of corruption allegations were published in the media and many state enterprizes were sold cheaply under the guise of privatization. Yıldırım’s family owns 17 companies, 28 cargo-ships and 2 super-yachts, but others allege that the real number of ships are higher than this. Now that Erdoğan has a puppet Prime Minister, he would try to get rid of the MP’s of the Democratic Party of the Peoples (HDP) in the Turkish Grand National Assembly by removing their immunity, nut not those from his own party, AKP. The Republican People’s Party (CHP) has lost its Kemalist ideology on one hand and takes a nationalist position in the Kurdish question like the MHP. Erdoğan is now a monarch!  

 

(Published in IN DEPTH bimonthly electronic newsletter • Volume 13 Issue 3 • June 2016
© 2016 Cyprus Center for European and International Affairs • University of Nicosia)





  • July 17th 2016 at 22:02

COEXISTENCE IN THE DISAPPEARED MIXED NEIGHBOURHOODS OF NICOSIA

By myislandcyprus.blogspot.com

During the mediaeval period, the Pedios river used to run in the middle of Nicosia. When the Venetians decided to build the walls surrounding the town in 1567, the river’s bed was diverted for strategic reasons outside the walls, following its present course through the Greater Nicosia. The old river-bed within the present city walls from Paphos Gate to Famagusta Gate was covered in 1882 by the British in order to serve as the city’s principal drainage system. This line follows today’s Paphos Street and the Ermu Street, which were both lively centres for trade. There were four bridges on this river-bed: First one was near the Paphos Gate, the second was at the place, where we call now Lokmadji Gate, the third was at the junction, where the Goldsmithstreet near the Municipality Bazaar crosses the Tricoupis Street and this was called Köprübaşı (Head of the Gate) and the fourth one was at Tahtagala Neighbourhood.   



At the time of the Ottoman conquest of Nicosia in 1570, the town was originally divided into 12 neighbourhoods and the 12 generals in command of the divisions of the Ottoman Army, which conquered the island, were posted to these neighbourhoods, so that the names were said to be derived from these 12 generals, like Arab Ahmet Paşa, İbrahim Paşa and Mahmut Paşa.



Later the old city Nicosia was divided into 24 neighbourhoods. Each neighbourhood was organized around a mosque or a church, where mainly the respective Moslem and Christian communities lived. It was natural to have a church near a mosque or mesdjit and the hodja’s call for the prayers could get mixed with the sound of the church bells. For example behind the Dükkanlarönü Djami on the Paphos Street, there were the Armenian and the Catholic Churches or the Ayios Loucas Church was near the Akkavuk Mesdjit. Near the Phaneromeni Church was the Araplar Mosque, which was used until 1951.  



In some neighbourhoods, the majority population were Turkish Cypriots and in the others the Greek Cypriots. In the Arab Ahmet and Karamanzade neighbourhoods, the Armenian Cypriots were the majority. Almost all of the Nicosians were living mixed, in other words the Mohammedans or the Turkish Cypriots and the Christians or the Greek Cypriots and the other ethnicities used to live as neighbours side by side.



In the census of 1946, the population of Nicosia was 34,485 and in this census report, the distribution of the population was given for the first time not as “Moslems” and “non-Moslems”, but according to their ethnic origins, such as Turks, Greeks, Armenians, Maronites etc.



In 1946, there were 10,330 Turkish Cypriots, 20,768 Greek Cypriots and 3,387 persons of ethnic origin living in Nicosia.



Population in Nicosia in 1946


Neighbourhood                      Christian         Moslem           Others            Total


1. Abdi Çavuş                         74                    799                  29                    902


2. Akkavuk                             107                  1094                1                      1202


3. Arab Ahmet                       576                  846                  1195                2617


4. Aya Sofya                          632                  1239                65                    1936


5. Ayii Omoloyitadhes           1678                9                      123                  1810


6. Ayios Andreas


    (Tophane)                           2224                152                  636                  3012


7. Ay.Antonios                        2045                   7                    38                    2090


8. Ay.Ioannis                          1375                  57                    4                      1436


9. Ay.Kassianos


      (Kafesli)                            1061                115                  1                      1177


10. Ay.Loucas                         263                  536                  7                      806


11. Ay.Savas                          1211                39                    16                    1266


12. Haydar Paşa                     45                    334                  6                      385


13. İbrahim Paşa                    650                  1539                145                  2334


14. Karamanzade                   124                  61                    412                  597


15. Chrysaliniotissa                865                  29                    7                      901


16. Korkut Efendi &


      İplik Pazarı                       116                  232                  208                  556


17. Mahmut Paşa                    61                    713                  101                  875


18. Nöbethane                        438                  19                    63                    520


19. Ömerge                             917                  249                  27                    1193


20. Phaneromeni                    1065                10                    13                    1088


21. Tahtakale                          902                  518                  13                    1433


22. Tabakhane                         701                  20                    36                    757


23. Tripiotis                            2982                27                    238                  3247


24. Yeni Cami                          656                  1686                3                      2345

Total:                                      20,768             10,330             3,387               34,485



Within the walls:                    24,967


Outside the walls:                    9,518 in quarters like Köşklüçiftlik (part of Arab Ahmet Neighb.), Yeni Kapı (New Gate-part of Yeni Djami N.) and Yeni Şehir (Neapolis-part of Ibrahim Pasha N.).


In the outskirts of  the old city Nicosia, there were 9 villages, where a total of 18,839 persons were living. These villages were Ayios Dhometios (Incirli), Eylenje, Hamit Mandraları, Büyük Kaymaklı, Küçük Kaymaklı (Omorphita), Ortaköy, Pallouriotissa, Strovolos and Trakhonas (Kızılbaş).


(Source: Report by D.A.Percival, Cyprus: Census of Population and Agriculture, 1946, Report and Tables, London 1949)


ARAP AHMET NEIGHBOURHOOD



Arab Ahmet neighbourhood was the most prestigious residential area of Nicosia, where the Turkish high-ranking officials and the Kadis and the Pashas had their homes. First of all it was near the old Ottoman Saray (previously Lusignan palace) and easy for the high-ranking officials to go to their work on foot. Secondly it was the coolest place in the evening during the summer. Because it could get the best of the evening breeze, coming from the west, from the direction of the Morphou Bay into the Mesoira plane.


When the Turks arrived, they confiscated the houses, the churches and the other properties of the Latins and settled mainly in the towns and in the empty Latin villages. The Greek Cypriots, the Armenians and the Maronites continued their living in their traditional quarters of the towns and the villages.



The Armenian Cypriots did not like the Latins and it was recorded that they opened the Paphos Gate and helped the Ottoman soldiers to enter into Nicosia during the siege of the town on 9th September 1570. Later the control of the Paphos Gate was given to the Armenians as a gift, together with the Benedictine Monastry, which was used by the Latins. With a special firman of the Ottoman Sultan, the Armenians could use for their religious services both the Monastry and the Church near the Paphos Gate.



Many other Armenians, who escaped from the massacre in Anatolia, settled in the Arab Ahmet neighbourhood and lived there until the inter-communal troubles of 1963, when they were forced by the TMT, the Turkish Cypriot fascist organization, to leave to the south of the Green Line.



Since most of the Armenians, who came from Anatolia could speak the Turkish language, they preferred to live side by side with the Turkish Cypriots, using the same language. The Armenians were known as tradesmen and they were famous especially in the fields of jewelry, tailory, photography and carpet-selling.



During the Ottoman period, the Lusignan Palace in Sarayonu Square was taken over by the Turkish governor of the island and until the British demolished it in 1905, one could see its last remains. The British built there in 1901 the present Law Courts. The only remains of this Lusignan Palace is a unique carved window in Gothic style, common to cathedrals in the 15th century, which is kept now in the Lapidary Museum near Ayia Sophia Mosque.



Until the inter-communal troubles started in 1956, there were a lot of law offices around the Nicosia Sarayonu Law Courts, belonging to the famous Greek Cypriot lawyers like John Clerides, the father of Glafkos Clerides. The Nicosia main police station was also near Sarayonu Square during the British rule.



TOPHANE NEIGHBOURHOOD



Tophane was another prestigious neighbourhood, where Turkish, Greek and Armenian Cypriots used to coexist together with the Latins. Tophane means literally in Turkish the cannon’s house or the store for artillery ammunition. The mediaeval building near the Paphos Gate, Casteliotissa, was originally a part of the second Royal Palace of the Lusignans and it was used as a munitions-store by the Ottomans. Tophane gave the name of the nearby neighbourhood.



The Turkish Cypriot writer Hizber Hikmetagalar describes in his book “Heighbourhoods and Memories from old Nicosia” some Turkish and Armenian families from the Tophane neighbourhood, where Turkish Cypriots, Greek Cypriots, Armenians and Latins were living side by side until 1950’s.



In September 1945, the Ottoman name of the Tophane neighbourhood was changed into Ayios Andreas. The nearby small neighbourhoods of Tabakhane and Nöbethane were abolished and attached to the Ayios Andreas neighbourhood, which after this had two muhtars, a Turkish Cypriot and a Greek Cypriot.


The Turkish Cypriot daily newspaper Yankı wrote that a new church was to be built further to that neighbourhood near the Pedios river and Ayios Andreas would be the name of this church. Yankı was complaining on 17 September 1945 that there were Turkish Cypriot villages in Paphos district with the names of the Christian saints, like Ayios Nicholas, Ayios Yannis and that these names were never tried to be changed by the Turkish Cypriots. The daily Halkın Sesi reported on 16 October 1945 that all the three Turkish Cypriot members of the Nicosia Municipality Council gave a protest letter about this alteration to the Nicosia Commissioner on 15 October 1945, to be handed over to the British Governor.



The columnist Yavuz wrote in Halkın Sesi on 19 Ekim 1945 that the name of the Alemdar (Bairaktar) Street, used for 370 years, had been changed previously into Tricoupis Street. Hasan Fahri Uzman wrote on the same issue in Yankı newspaper on 29 October 1945 that the name of a historical Turkish neighbourhood was changed with the stroke of a pencil and that the British still use the Tophane as a store for armaments, which gave the name to the neighbourhood.



Ouzunian was the only Armenian street name in the Tophane neighbourhood. When Dikran Ouzunian bought the garden of a Turkish Cypriot, named Hadji Sofu, he parcelled the garden. The new street passing through the plot was given after his name. Nearby was the Tophane Mesdjidi.



No Turkish Cypriot was living in this neighbourhood after 1960 and the last Turkish name of the Tophane Mesdjidi Street, which was mainly resided by the Turkish Cypriots, was changed into Granikou Street after 1963.



Nöbethane was the headquarters of the Ottoman soldiers, patrolling the town. Until he died in 1956, Hodja Salih Efendi used to open the Nöbethane Mesdjit at the corner of the Pygmalion (previously Çizmeci) Street and the Paleon Patron Germanou (previously Usta Kadi) Streets. Artemis Street was previously called Nöbethane Street. Several shops were built in the garden of the mesdjit, hiding the main building behind them.



Tabakhane (the tannery) Mesdjit was on the Pericleus Street (previously Kalkancı Street), where Musa Nami Efendi used to live. He was a Turkish Cypriot village judge and one of the founders of the Nicosia Turkish Bank. His son Şevket Nami was also a village judge, later a tradesman on the Ledra Street as the general distributor of many trademarks for Cyprus like Quink, Parker, His Master’s Voice, Singer and Hilmann. Musa Efendi’s other son, Reşit Nomer was a judge in Istanbul. His daughter Nezire Hanım lived in their family house in the Pericleous Street until she died in 1960, as the last Turkish Cypriot, living in this neighbourhood.



Famous Turkish Cypriot tanners, who used to work at the tannery and live nearby within the walled city at the Tabakhane Neighbourhood, were Hallumazade Tabak Hacı Salih Ağa, Tabak Hacı Mehmet Bektaş Efendi, Debbağ Fellah Efendi, Tabak Emin Efendi (Grandfather of Kemal Rustem) and Tabak Mulla İsmail Ağa. Pharmacist Hasan Hilmi Bey, who was the father of Mrs. Şefika Durduran, used to live in the Megalu Aleksandru (Ahmet Efendi) Street. Old police chief Ali Raci Bey had to move to Izzet Efendi Street near Ayia Sophia, because his children were being harassed by the Greek Cypriot boys. He was the next door to Prof. Dervish Manizade’s home, whose family were living also in the same Vasilis Vulgaroktonou (Behçet Efendi) Street.



The famous bar of Antonaki was also on this street, serving all the ethnic communities of Nicosia like the other well-known bar, which belonged to the Armenian Cypriot Gamavor.



MUNICIPAL OR PUBLIC GARDEN (MİLLET BAHÇASI)


Tannery was a traditional Turkish artisanship and the working place was just outside the Paphos Gate. After the British took over the administration of the island in 1878, they decided in 1890’s to move the tannery away from the town, to Köşklüçiftlik (old name was Tabana=Tabakhane), near the Pedios river. Later, when Koskluciftlik was populated with Turkish and Armenian houses, starting from 1930 onwards, the tannery was moved to another place near Piroyi village in 1953.



The site of the original tannery near Paphos Gate, which was Evkaf property, was turned into a public garden by the Nicosia Municipality, according to a proposal of the then British Delegate of Evkaf. Later this garden became the most popular and respected place for strolling Nicosians. When the Nicosia General Hospital was built in 1925 on a nearby plot, the importance of the Public Garden grew. There was a wooden pergola in the middle of the garden. Every Sunday the police band would give an open air concert under this pergola and the people used to go and listen to them as a weekend entertainment.



According to an article published in Hürsöz of 19 July 1953 under the title “Ahirevan Dede?”, the  grave of the master of the old tanners was kept in the Public Gardens until the beginning of the 1950’s. This grave, which was supposed to belong to a certain “Vah Veli” (like the Grandfather Ahirevan-Shieh of the Tannery Guild), used to be visited by the newcomers to the profession as a respect. The Hürsöz writer was complaining that some Greek Cypriots hanged a picture there and started to call this grave as “Ayios Dimitrios”. He called the Evkaf Administration to take action against the decision of the Municipality Council, headed by the Greek Cypriot nationalist Dr. Dervis that changed the name.



TAHTAKALE



Tahtakale is the neighbourhood, near the Famagusta Gate. The Ottomans named it as “Taht-el-kale”, meaning the lower part of the fortress, i.e. Famagusta Gate. But the word was corrupted as “Tahtakale or Tahtagala”, meaning wooden fortress. The street going from the gate to the west was called Çarşı (Market) Street, now the Ammohosto Street.



Tahtakale was one of the biggest mixed neighbourhoods of Nicosia with a population of 518 Turkish Cypriots and 902 Greek Cypriots. Now the only sign of this coexistence is the Tahtakale Mosque and the Koran School, which were built in 1826 by the Ottoman Governor Es-Seyyid Mehmet Ağa, at the same place of the old mosque. There were also a small graveyard and a koran school for the minors, which had its first teacher appointed in 1594. The Evkaf Administration built shops on the site of the graveyard in the 1950’s. In 1881, there was a fountain near the mosque, which Salvatore draw a picture of it, but it did not survive today. The original minaret was cracked in 1936 and it was rebuilt in 1948.


Hasan Karabardak Ağa was one of the most popular personalities of Tahtagala neighbourhood, where several Turkish Cypriot butchers and cattle-dealers used to live. Karabardak was one of the rich Turkish Cypriots, who were imprisoned during the First World War in the Kyrenia Castle, because they were accused of helping the Germans.



The imam of the Tahtagala Mosque was Ratip Efendi until 1935. He was the father of Ahmet Ziyaeddin Bey, the owner of first Turkish Cypriot macaroni factory. The signboard-maker Cahit Usta was the son of Ahmet Efendi, the muezzin of the Tahtagala Mosque. In front of the mosque was a Greek Cypriot businessman, making gyps-powder out of the baked gyps masses. Behind his shop was the mosaic factory of Pittarilli, that had its entrance from the Ermu Street. The first Turkish Cypriot cheese producers, Ahmet and Hüseyin Efendi brothers, were also among the well-known inhabitants, that had later their workshop in Kaimakli.



The Turkish Cypriots living in the Tahtagala neighbourhood were forced to leave their home twice, in 1958 and in 1963. That is why the younger generations do not remember Tahtagala as a Turkish Cypriot settlement.



OMERIYE


In the southern part of Nicosia and again near the Archbishopric there is another neighbourhood, called Omeriye with a population of 249 Turkish Cypriots and 917 Greek Cypriots in 1946. The Omeriye Mosque was the second biggest Christian place of worship after Ayia Sophia Cathedral in Nicosia, which was turned into a mosque by the Ottomans after the conquest of Nicosia. It was believed that Chalif Omer prayed in the sofa of this Chapel of St.Marie des Augustin. After the conquest, Lala Mustafa Pasha turned it into a mosque.



The last muhtari and muezzin of Omeriye Mosque was Ahmet Seyfi Efendi, who was addicted to snuffing. His daughter, Peyker Hanım was killed by the EOKA fighters, who asked from her a glass of water and as she went to bring it, she was shot from behind.  



The Omeriye Mosque, which has two balconies like the one in Peristerona, is used today by Moslems other than the Turkish Cypriots and the Turkish Bath Omeriye is renovated and is used as a tourist attraction that won a Europa Nostra Prize. The street near the hamam was called Soutsos Street,which was out of bounds as there were borthels, where Turkish Cypriot and Greek Cypriot women were serving the men from both communities. Karannaki was famous helping the youngsters with his syringe after their visits to the borthels. 



Among the Turkish Cypriot big landowners in this neighbourhood, we can name Galip Bey, the shopkeeper; Ata Dayanç, the manifacturer; Ali Riza Efendi, the tradesman; Osman Mısırlızade and others.



WOMEN’S BAZAAR (KADINLAR PAZARI, YENEKOPAZARO)


The Women’s Bazaar was on the east side of the Makri Dromo (Uzun Yol) which is called today Ledra Street and it used to convene on every Friday. It was established in 1850 by the Ottoman governor of Cyprus, Mehmet Ali Pasha, whose aim was to promote the trade within the island. He also established the weekly “Animal Bazaar” outside the Kyrenia Gate. It was originally convened every September for fifteen days and the villagers from far villages used to bring their animals to be sold there. There were also people coming from the neighbouring countries to buy animals and to shop in the Women’s Bazaar. (Ses, 26 February 1937, No.:82)



According to Kevork K.Keshishian, the courtyard of the extensive square block of shops and offices within Ledra, Liperti, Phaneromeni and Nicocles Streets, which belonged to the Phaneromeni Church, was used as Women’s Market. This area was known as the Garden of Orta Odası with a Persian well in the middle (alakadi in Greek and dolap kuyusu in Turkish). The owner lived in Istanbul and in 1893 the Phaneromeni Church Committee bought the place for 1100 Ottoman pounds through the intermediary of Michali Papadopoulos of Istanbul.



AYIOS LOUCAS NEIGHBOURHOOD



Many Greek Cypriots used to live in this neighbourhood around the Ayios Loucas Church in the northern part of Nicosia until the first inter-communal clashes in Nicosia in 1956. Ayios Loucas Church was dedicated to St.Luke and was built in 1758 in dressed limestone during the Ottoman period.



18th October was the day of festivities in the name of  Ayios Loucas, which was the most famous fair (panayiri) within the walls of Nicosia. A four-day- and- four- night-fair was organised annually in honour of Ayios Loucas, during which local products and seasonal fresh fruits and dried fruits, almonds and walnuts were sold, together with delicious shamishi and lokmades. The sweets, called pastellis, were brought in wooden boxes from Kazafani and the sudjuko, paluze and koefteri from the villages of Paphos.



However, by 1956, when the EOKA and later the TMT intensified their terror activities, the Greek Cypriot inhabitants of the Ayios Loucas neighbourhood were forced to leave their homes and also the church was evacuated. The Ayios Loucas Church remained in ruins until it was restored in 1986 and it was allocated to the Turkish Cypriot Folklore Association (HASDER).  



PARTITION POLICY DIVIDED NICOSIA FIRST IN 1956


After the attack of the EOKA on the Turkish Cypriot villagers in Vasilia and the killing of a Turkish Cypriot policeman, who was chasing two EOKA fighters, the inter-communal violence intensified. On 27th April 1956, the Turkish Cypriot newspaper Halkın Sesi wrote in its main title the following:


“Curfew was declared and applied in Nicosia yesterday afternoon from 5 o’clock until 4 o’clock this morning... During the 11 hours of curfew, the town was divided into North and South Nicosia, like East and West Berlin. The street from Paphos Gate until the Famagusta Gate remained closed at all.”


Halkın Sesi wrote in its edition on 28th April 1956:


“The Greek Cypriots, who had their homes, offices or shops in the Turkish neighbourhoods, have started to look for places in the Greek Cypriot neighbourhoods, so that they could abandon their previous dwellings.”


Bozkurt daily newspaper wrote on 3rd June 1957 about the first step of the partition policy of the Turkish Cypriot leadership: “Yesterday, after a meeting of the Cyprus is Turkish Party, the Turkish Cypriot councillors in the Municipalities of Nicosia and other districts gave up their resignations all together.” 


Bozkurt reported on 24th June 1958 that Dr.Tahsin S.Gözmen was named by the T/C leadership as the Turkish Cypriot mayor of the Turkish Cypriot Municipality of Nicosia. The others were named later.


Then came the TMT provocations, when the Turkish Information Centre of the Turkish Consulate in Nicosia was bombed by the TMT on 7th June 1958, after which the Greek Cypriot properties and houses were attacked and put on fire in the mixed neighbourhoods by the Turkish Cypriot terrorists. This was followed on 12th June by the Gönyeli provocation of the British police, where 8 Greek Cypriots were killed.


In June 1958, 600 Greek Cypriot families were forced to leave their traditional neighbourhoods, where they used to live side by side with the Turkish Cypriots. The grocery shops of the Greek Cypriots in the municipality market near the Ayia Sophia Mosque were looted by the Turkish Cypriot terrorists and on 26th June 1958 the municipal market was left to the Turkish Cypriot sector of the divided municipality by the British colonial government.  



The partition line of Nicosia, drawn two years ago in 1956, was running through the Paphos, Ermu and Famagusta Streets and the same line was used in summer 1958 in order to divide the Turkish Cypriot and the Greek Cypriot sector of  Nicosia with the barbed wires, which left the people from either community to the mercy of the other. This so-called Mason-Dixon line was used originally in 1767, because of the border disagreement between the States of Maryland and Pennsylvania in the USA.



It was the same line used again as the basis for the Green-line drawn by a green pencil in December 1963 during the inter-communal clashes. As you know the line dividing Nicosia, which was about 4 miles long (6.4 km) was extended through the whole island along the 180 km. in the summer of 1974, completing the imperialist partition plan of the Anglo-Americans.    



Resources:



1. An, Ahmet, The Values Cyprus Cultivated, Volume: 1 (1782-1899), Ankara 2002 (Turkish)


2. An, Ahmet, The Political History of the Turkish Cypriots (1930-1960): The Forgotten Political


    History of the Turkish Cypriots and the Struggles for the Leadership in the Mirror of the Press,


    Nicosia 2006 (Turkish)


3. Gürkan, Haşmet M., Nicosia of Yesterday and Today, Nicosia 1989 (Turkish)


4. Hikmetağalar, Hizber, Eski Lefkoşa’da Semtler ve Anılar, İstanbul 1996 (Turkish)


5. Keshishian, Kevork K., Nicosia, Capital of Cyprus, Then and Now, Nicosia 1978


6. Kyrris, Costas P., Peaceful Co-existence in Cyprus under British Rule (1878-1959) and


    after Independence: An Outline, Nicosia 1977


      

(This paper was read at the conference, “Nicosia: The Last Divided Capital in Europe”, organized by the London Metropolitan University on 20th June 2011)



  • April 29th 2016 at 08:38

THE HISTORY OF PARTITION OF CYPRUS AND HOW TO AVOID IT THROUGH FEDERALIZATION?

By myislandcyprus.blogspot.com

Nowadays almost half of the world’s population lives in the countries, where the constitution and the structure of the state are federal. If we put aside the socialist federalism, implemented in the former socialist countries (e.g. the USSR, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia), the bourgeois federalism is being implemented today in 28 developed and developing countries.

Especially after the Second World War, the former colonialist countries like Great Britain and France practised a new policy of federalism. In this new period of the capitalist general crisis, this federalization of the colonies was realized by bringing federative elements into the constitution of those countries and by making detailed legal arrangements. Through this, the possibility of influencing the character, the structure and the form of the new states, which were about to become independent soon, emerged as an element of the new colonialism. The aim of this new strategy of the imperialist powers was to keep the old colonial territories under their sphere of influence as long as it was possible and to protect their economic and strategic interests under the specific conditions of each region.[1]

  As it will be remembered, this policy was tried to be practised under “self-government” in Cyprus in 1948, but it was not successful, because of the ambition of the Greek Cypriots for enosis[2]. It was in the same year, when the radio monitoring facilities of the British and the Americans were transported from the Middle East to Cyprus[3] and the Great Britain spent 50 million pound sterling for the construction of the two military bases at Dhekelia and Akrotiri villages in Cyprus.

 There are enough archieval material in Claude Nicolet’s book “United States Policy Towards Cyprus, 1954-1974” about the strategic interests of the USA and Great Britain on the island of Cyprus[4]. Both countries have used the policy of “divide and rule” in the past and today. The British are still willing to keep their “sovereign base areas” on Cyprus[5] and the Americans are still willing to keep under security their communication facilities on the island, which they have been using since 1949.[6]

  Prof. Nihat Erim, who was teaching Inter-state Law and Constitutional Law in the University of Ankara, was asked in 1956 by Turkish Prime Minister Adnan Menderes to prepare a report on the Cyprus issue and to help the government in shaping the Turkish policy on Cyprus. Erim was also informed by Menderes that a retired American general, who was a friend of President Eisenhower, was sent to Ankara and he suggested partition, which was accepted as positive.[7]

  Prof. Erim’s first report to the Turkish government had the date of 24 November 1956 and he underlined: “The optimum form of solution is partition of the island of Cyprus. The idea of partition was discussed between the governments of Turkey, Greece, England and America in some secret, official or semi-official negotiations… In view of the probability of the acceptance of the partition proposal, authorized experts should determine as of today how Cyprus would be partitioned, so that it would serve the benefit of the Turkish population in the island and also to the military and economical aspect.” [8]

   We already know that there was an American expert on geography, Dr. Alexander Melamid of the New York University, who was sent to Cyprus after the USA warned England that the threat of communism was increasing in Cyprus. Dr. Melamid made a field research on the island and published his findings in the “Geographical Review” journal in July 1956 under the title “Geographical Distribution of the Communities in Cyprus”[9] The same expert published another article in March 1960 under the title “Partitioned Cyprus: A class study in applied political geography”, proposing two lines for the division of the island, the first one dividing the island as northern and southern parts and the other as eastern and western parts.[10]

  In June 1956, the US President Eisenhower asked his Foreign Minister Dulles during a meeting if it is possible to put an end to the conflict by partitioning the island, shifting the Turkish Cypriots to the northern part?[11] When the US President met British Prime Minister Macmillan in March 1957 in Bermuda island, he told him during the four-day meeting: “The military bases are enough for us. They can divide the rest among themselves.”[12]

The architect of the Turkish policy on Cyprus, Prof.Nihat Erim, suggested in a speech in Ankara on 14 January 1958 that a Turkish state with a population of 120 thousand could be established in Cyprus.  On the other hand, the Turkish Cypriots started to attack the British for the first time on 27/28 January 1958 in order to force the implementation of the partition plan. The common demonstrations of the Greek and Turkish Cypriots on 1 May 1958 against partition and the terror events were followed by a series of murder and intimidation attacks on the progressive Turkish Cypriot workers.[13] In summer 1958, the TMT staged many provocations in order to show that the Turkish Cypriot community should be regarded as one of the main players in the Cyprus problem.

  Nicolet writes: “Zorlu had told Dulles in Washington that the Turkish idea of partition did not necessarily need to include a geographical division of the island. It may be enough, the Foreign Minister had said, “that the two communities ... be given the idea that neither was being governed by the other.” This concept sounded surprisingly compatible with the status of independence of the island.”[14] Thus the Republic of Cyprus, which declared its independence in 1960, was the result of a diplomacy, which was driven “towards some form of partition of Cyprus, if not geographically, then at least in terms of administration.”[15]

According to an evaluation by Prof.Stanley Alexander de Smith, the most complicated and detailed constitution of the world after the constitution of Kenya was prepared in Cyprus. As the rights of the communities were to be controlled through guarantees and limitations and to be balanced, constitutionalism was parallel with communal egoism.[16] Through long and complicated precautions, it was planned to avoid the misuse of the rights by the both sides, but an influential organization of a state was not realized.

           

THE CONFLICT IN 1963 AND THE TURKISH THESIS

When Makarios declared his 13 points of amendments to the Constitution on 6 December 1963, they were immediately rejected by Turkey, since the amendments would give some minority rights to the Turkish Cypriot community.

On 21 December 1963, intercommunal clashes started and the underground organizations, which had their connections with the foreign powers, became influential again in both communities. The Greek Cypriot leadership was aiming the union of the island with Greece and the Turkish Cypriot leadership was planning to create the conditions for the partition of the island. Now Cyprus problem was once again on the international arena.

From Nicolet’s book we read that in a working paper, prepared by Donald A. Wehmeyer, a US legal adviser, on 11 December 1963 that a Treaty of Joint Sovereignty between Greece and Turkey was proposed. Wehmeyer added to his memorandum “Outline of Possible Cyprus Settlement” an important ingredient for a solution, which would be more attractive to Turkey: Cyprus should be divided into provinces. Certain provinces would be administered mainly by Turkish Cypriots and this would create an illusion of partition or federation.[17]

Salahi R.Sonyel writes that the British government hit upon an interesting solution, which was the reconstruction of Cyprus as a federal solution: “Thus on 3 January (1964), Sir Francis Vallat asked H.G.Darwin, a constitutional expert, to produce a paper examining the possibility of dividing Cyprus into a Turkish and a Greek area, which might be formed into a federal state. Even if such a plan was feasible a number of problems were foreseen in its application. Darwin composed a memorandum, in which he suggested a federation of two states, one predominantly of Greek, and the other of Turkish populations. He also suggested an exchange of population in order to realise the Turkish state. The capital of the Turkish state would be Kyrenia.”[18]  

In Summer 1964, Makarios rejected the Acheson Plan, which was discussed in Geneva and which envisaged the union of Cyprus with Greece on the condition that a military base would be given to Turkey in Karpas peninsula. President Makarios was re-elected in 1968 with his new policy of “feasible solution”, instead of enosis.

We read again from Nicolet’s book: “Acheson was fully indulging himself in studying the different proposals that had emerged in Washington throughout spring of 1964. In Brands’ words, “he was ready to devise a plan that would eliminate the Cyprus problem by eliminating Cyprus.” A suggestion he was particularly intrigued with was Don Wehmeyer’s scheme of 24 April, providing enosis with an illusion of partition or federation to the Turks by the establishment of certain provinces to be administered by Turkish Cypriot eparchs, as he cabled to Ball on 8 July.[19] And this was finally realized with a so-called “controlled intervention”[20] in summer 1974, which was decided by the Deputy Foreign Minister of Greece, Christos Ksantopoulos-Palamas and the Turkish Foreign Minister, Osman Olcay. The two ministers met on 3-4 June 1971 during the NATO ministerial meeting in Lisbon and discussed how to get rid of Makarios and put an end to the independence of the Republic of Cyprus by partitioning the island through  “double enosis”.

   

IMPERIALIST CONSPIRACY IN 1974

A de facto situation was created by an aborted coup d’Etat against President Makarios, organized by the fascist Greek junta and its military forces in Cyprus on 15 July 1974. This created an opportunity for Turkey to intervene five days later to the internal affairs of Cyprus. Turkey occupied the 37% of the northern part of the island and on 16 August 1974, on the 16th anniversary of the foundation of the Republic of Cyprus, the island’s territory was partitioned into two regions, one in the North for the Turkish Cypriots and the other in the South for the Greek Cypriots. With the transfer of population across the partition line, a bi-regional ethnically cleansed geographical division was attained de facto. It remained to form a de jure central government for the “federation”, which was the aim of the Turkish government since 1964. 

In a declassified Secret Memorandum sent from Helmut Sonnenfeld, Counselor of the US State Department to Secretary Henry Kissinger on 14 August 1974, the order was this: “...assuming the Turks quickly take Famagusta, privately assure Turks, we will get them a solution involving one third of the island, within some kind of federal arrangement.”[21]

After two further days of fighting, the Turkish military occupied the approximately 37 per cent of Cyprus that it still holds today, according to a plan that had existed since at least 1964, possibly even since the 1950’s.” [22]

Five rounds of intercommunal talks took place in Vienna from 1975 to 1976 and a summit meeting between G/C Leader Makarios and T/C leader Rauf Denktash declared in 1977 their agreement on four guidelines for a solution of the constitutional problem on a bi-communal federal basis. The intercommunal talks continued also after the unilateral declaration of independence in 1983 under the name “Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus”, which was recognized only by Turkey.


THE WAY TO UNITY IN CYPRUS PASSES FROM REAL FEDERALISM

Some circles seem to accept a federal Cyprus state, which will have a central government with weak authority, when they speak of re-unification of the two separate regions created de facto after 1974. But the official Turkish perception of a federation has the same meaning of a confederation, which envisages the partition of the island. One has to bear in mind here what the former Prime Minister of Turkey, İsmet İnönü spoke about the Turkish policy on Cyprus in the Turkish Grand National Assembly on 8 September 1964.

He underlined: “In order to be within the legal framework, we started to discuss instead of saying officially partition, we say a form of “federation”![23]

This official form of federation is synonymous with confederation, which envisages the partition of the island. Therefore, this statement is very important for the understanding of today’s Turkish policy on Cyprus.

Under the circumstances existing today on our island, the only way out is to transform the existing unitary or functional federal state into a bi-communal, bi-zonal federal state in order to gain the reunification of the state and the island of Cyprus. Therefore the following prerequisites are valid for a federal government, which the British Constitutional expert Sir Kenneth Wheare writes in his book “Federal Government”.[24]   

I quote from Ramesh Dutta Dikshit’s book “The political geography of federalism-An inquiry into its origins and stability” (New York 1975), where he refers to Wheare and writes that Wheare has tried to isolate various factors for union and separation, which appear to him as necessary factors in the origins of federalism. He enumerates the following half-dozen factors, all of which operated in the U.S., Switzerland, Canada and Australia, to produce a desire for union among the communities concerned[25]. Those factors are the following: [26]

1. Need for common defense: Is there a need for common defense for the Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots, who have lived over 400 years side by side on this island? Of course there is such a need against imperialism and its aggressive organization NATO, which wishes the partition of the island and to stop the struggle of the people of the island for social liberation. It is imperative for the leaderships of both communities to follow a policy of peaceful coexistence consistently and to put Cyprus out of the sphere of influence of NATO.

2. Desire to be independent of some foreign power and a realization that only through union independence be achieved: From the point of view of the progressive and democratic forces, which have understood that the way to the complete independence of Cyprus is through unity, the demand for being independent from the imperialism and its military bases as well as from the “motherlands” are valid as ever.

3. Expectations of economic advantages from union: Expectations of economic advantages from union are very wide especially among the Turkish Cypriot working masses.

4. Some political association of the units involved prior to their federal union: From the point of view of certain political parties with class approach, there is an association of political aims of the Turkish Cypriots and the Greek Cypriots before the federal union. This association of political aim will be crystalized better in a democratic system.

5. Geographical neighbourhood: Geographical neighbourhood is the most appropriate in Cyprus, where the small island is divided into two.

6. Similarity of political institution. Although there is a similarity of the political institutions on both sides, there is a difference in the level of maturity of the democratic life. But this can be developed with mutual solidarity and especially with the elimination of the anti-democratic elements, without any outside interference. Moreover, there will be common political organizations based on class approach rather than on ethnic-national origin.

It will be noted that Wheare excludes from this list of prerequisites for union, factors such as community of language, of “race”, of religion or of nationality.

To these six prerequisites Wheare adds one more: “Leadership or statesmanship at the right time” which is the most wanted patriotic merit that we need nowadays from all the political leaders in Cyprus.

Another point of view, which should not be overlooked is that the solution of the problem in the concrete conditions of Cyprus depends on one hand on the elimination of the influences of imperialism and neo-colonialism and the military bases and on the other hand to decide how to solve the internal question of nationalities, which I see as the main issue. But the determining factor is not the difference between the two communities. On the contrary, it has to be stressed that the class struggle in the whole country and in the international arena will be decisive.[27]

It seems that the following fear of the imperialists is still valid, first mentioned in the 1989 International Yearbook of Communist Affairs: “If the north and the south of Cyprus will be united in a future “Federal Cyprus”, the electoral power of the Greek and Turkish communists can win the majority of the votes in any Presidential elections of such an unusual government.[28] But here the crucial problem is not, as the bourgeois circles suggest, “which community will govern the other one”, but “which class will have the power in his hand on the whole of the island.” This is my evaluation.


(This paper was read at the two-day Conference entitled “The Cyprus Problem, its Resolution and the Broader Implications” organized by The Center for European and International Affairs” at the University of Nicosia, on 11 and 12 March 2016.)



[1] W.G.Grafski-B.A.Straschun, Federalism in the developing countries of Asia and Africa, Moscow, 1968, quoted in Ertan Yüksel, Federal Solution in Cyprus, Ortam newspaper, Nicosia, 22-23-24 January 1985

[2] Greek word for union of Cyprus with Greece

[3] New York Times, 17 May 1949

[4] Claude Nicolet, Removing the Greek-Turkish Bone of Contention, Mannheim und Möhnesee 2001. For a review of the book, see Ahmet An, The origins of Cyprus Conflict in the light of the American Documents, Yeni Çağ newspaper, Nicosia, Three articles on 21 and 28 March 2003 and 4 April 2003.

[5] Nicolet, ibid, p.87

[6] Nicolet, ibid, p.141

[7] Nihat Erim, Cyprus  as I know and I have seen, Ankara 1975, p.18

[8]Erim,  ibid, p.22 and 24

[9] Vol.46, No.3, New York 1956, s.355-374

[10] Vol.59, March 1960, Chicago, s.118-123

[11] Nicolet, ibid, p.92

[12] ibid, p.101

[13] Ahmet An, The victims of the TMT, Nicosia 2008, pp.25-39

[14] ibid, p.133

[15] ibid, p.133

[16] Prof. S. A. de Smith, The Common­wealth and its Constitutions, London 1964, p.285

[17] Nicolet, ibid, p.226 and 229

[18] Cyprus, The Destruction of a Republic and its Aftermath, British Document 1960-1974, Extended second edition, Ankara 2003, pp.78-78

[19] Nicolet, ibid, p.257

[20] Nicolet, ibid, p.213

[21] Cyprus Weekly, 10 August 2007

[22] Nicolet, ibid, p.452

[23] Dışişleri Belleteni, October 1964, Number:2, p.63

[24] Sir Kenneth Wheare, Federal Government, London 1953

[25] ibid, p.37

[26] ibid, pp.220-222

[27] See also Ertan Yüksel, The way to unity in Cyprus passes not from a confederal, but from federal state, Ortam newspaper, 20-21 December 1984

[28]  p.530, see also Ahmet An, How the USA look at the Turkish Cypriot Left? Socialist Observation, Nicosia, October 1993, No.5



  • March 13th 2016 at 11:38
❌