Cyprus-Forum.com

[DT.]

At any time since 1955 the chances are that Turkey would have invaded rather than allow Enosis. worst case scenario is that the whole of Cyprus would have fallen, along with loss of some Greek islands, with likely ethnic cleansing , possibly the more so if it happened in the 50's or early 60's. It was a risk in the run up to 1960, in 63 and 64', in 67, then happened in 74.

Not desirable, but possible. Too much pride at stake for Turkey where too many people would recall too clearly what happened only 35 to 40 years before. It was probably underestimation of Turkish reaction that resulted in the 1974 invasion.

In the 50's and 60's Turkey with its crackpot army couldn't have invaded Xilofagou let alone All of Cyprus and some Greek islands.

[GreekIslandGirl]

And are we all clued up as to who invited Turkey along????

I suspect they muscled in.

No they didn't. They were invited in by Britain as an ally against Greeks, to help them hang onto Cyprus. This collusion with Turkey by the British was in direct contravention of the Treaty of Lausanne (1923), article 16. The collusion was proposed in Februray 1955 by the British ambassador to Turkey and a meeting set up shortly after that.

This was before EOKA started its fight for freedom!

[supporttheunderdog]

Turkish expansionist plans regarding Cyprus were openly expressed long before 1955 Numerous statements by Turkish officials provide substantial evidence that Turkey considers Cyprus part of Turkish territory.

Kemal Ataturk regarded Cyprus as being particularly important for Turkey. Professor Dervis Manizade in an article in the Instanbul daily "Milliyet" (20.7.78) quoted Ataturk as saying, while addressing military commanders: "Pay attention to Cyprus, this island is important for us."

Ali Nesim reported in "Dogus" (20.9.84):
Ataturk, replying to a question on Cyprus after the annexation of Alexandretta said: "The turn of Cyprus has not yet come".

In 1954, before the meeting with the ambassador, shortly before the start of the EOKA campaign, and before the anti-Greek pogrom, the then Foreign Minister of Turkey F. Koprulu, declared that Cyprus is an "extension of continental Turkey" and that it should revert to Turkey "on the basis of geographical proximity".

[GreekIslandGirl]

Without doubt the Turks have lusted over Cyprus for years, but as DT. has pointed out they were incapable of putting this desire into practice - not only through their lack of ability but also because of the stipulations of the Treaty of Lausanne. So it's irrelevant what dreams they had, Britain invited them here in 1955!

So, stud, you have to accept that if it was not for the British, the Turks would not now, today, be in Cyprus and also slinging around some story they are "justified" in being here.

[supporttheunderdog]

Without doubt the Turks have lusted over Cyprus for years, but as DT. has pointed out they were incapable of putting this desire into practice - not only through their lack of ability but also because of the stipulations of the Treaty of Lausanne. So it's irrelevant what dreams they had, Britain invited them here in 1955!

So, stud, you have to accept that if it was not for the British, the Turks would not now, today, be in Cyprus and also slinging around some story they are "justified" in being here.

I accept nothing since as far as i can no reliable evidence has been produced and all we have is yourAssertion in support of your conspiracy theory which is derived from your own bigotry.

However when did treaty obligations bother Turkey. As it was in 1955 Britain was not wanting to give up Cyprus. Turkey however would not have taken on Britain in 1955 and with the then plans for internal rule, under offer since 1947, they would still have to go against Britain. What Turkey was capable of in 1955 was not therefore relevant.

However following the start of the Eoka campaign Britain began to rely more heavily on the TSC for policing, etc, and with the then targeting of TSC police by EOKA Turkey formed TMT for the alleged reason of protecting TSC but in reality to justify intervention and promote Takism and invited itself to the party. I have only seen your assertions it was at British request.

By 63 they were plainly willing to violate the earlier treaties of 1959 and were then threatening invasion. Whether they could pull it off is another matter but in any event the US stepped in and probably only they could influence Turkey.

Please however point me at credible evidence of what was discussed and not just crackpot theories.

[Mikiko]

Why to order from France ? Lagarde is French and together with Germans have shown how greedy and one sided bastards they are with lies and propaganda in their media until now !

[Oceanside50]

Why to order from France ? Lagarde is French and together with Germans have shown how greedy and one sided bastards they are with lies and propaganda in their media until now !

What's a Japanese person doing in Cyprus?

[Mikiko]

Why to order from France ? Lagarde is French and together with Germans have shown how greedy and one sided bastards they are with lies and propaganda in their media until now !

What's a Japanese person doing in Cyprus?

Konnichiwa ,

I am not Japanese . Only a friend of Japan.

[GreekIslandGirl]

Without doubt the Turks have lusted over Cyprus for years, but as DT. has pointed out they were incapable of putting this desire into practice - not only through their lack of ability but also because of the stipulations of the Treaty of Lausanne. So it's irrelevant what dreams they had, Britain invited them here in 1955!

So, stud, you have to accept that if it was not for the British, the Turks would not now, today, be in Cyprus and also slinging around some story they are "justified" in being here.

I accept nothing since as far as i can no reliable evidence has been produced and all we have is yourAssertion in support of your conspiracy theory which is derived from your own bigotry.

However when did treaty obligations bother Turkey. As it was in 1955 Britain was not wanting to give up Cyprus. Turkey however would not have taken on Britain in 1955 and with the then plans for internal rule, under offer since 1947, they would still have to go against Britain. What Turkey was capable of in 1955 was not therefore relevant.

However following the start of the Eoka campaign Britain began to rely more heavily on the TSC for policing, etc, and with the then targeting of TSC police by EOKA Turkey formed TMT for the alleged reason of protecting TSC but in reality to justify intervention and promote Takism and invited itself to the party. I have only seen your assertions it was at British request.

By 63 they were plainly willing to violate the earlier treaties of 1959 and were then threatening invasion. Whether they could pull it off is another matter but in any event the US stepped in and probably only they could influence Turkey.

Please however point me at credible evidence of what was discussed and not just crackpot theories.

No conspiracy theories I assure you. Pure evidence available from the newly released documents. They prove you don't know what you are talking about and are merely making stuff up based on reading Turkish/British propaganda.

Please see:

Britain and Cyprus: Key Themes and Documents Since World War II

By William Mallinson pub. I.B.Tauris: London, New York.

You can search CF for some other quotes from "Mallinson" which I have typed out.

[kimon07]

Without doubt the Turks have lusted over Cyprus for years, but as DT. has pointed out they were incapable of putting this desire into practice - not only through their lack of ability but also because of the stipulations of the Treaty of Lausanne. So it's irrelevant what dreams they had, Britain invited them here in 1955!

So, stud, you have to accept that if it was not for the British, the Turks would not now, today, be in Cyprus and also slinging around some story they are "justified" in being here.

I accept nothing since as far as i can no reliable evidence has been produced and all we have is yourAssertion in support of your conspiracy theory which is derived from your own bigotry..........

However following the start of the Eoka campaign Britain began to rely more heavily on the TSC for policing, etc, and with the then targeting of TSC police by EOKA Turkey formed TMT for the alleged reason of protecting TSC but in reality to justify intervention and promote Takism and invited itself to the party. I have only seen your assertions it was at British request.......

Please however point me at credible evidence of what was discussed and not just crackpot theories.

Some of us have a very short memory!

Opening the door for Turkey

Then [BT: Page 208], on June 8th 1949 came a note in the minority newspaper “Halkni Sesi”: It reported that the British Governor R. E. Turnbull requested the term “Muslims of Cyprus” to be replaced with the currently used “Turkish Cypriots”. This seemingly insignificant change of terms in time brought about a change in perception, that the Muslims in Cyprus were Turks, and thus that Turkish interference on the island represented a legitimate concern for Turkish citizens.
But that was hard work. As Turkish foreign minister Ali Kuprulu said in 1950:
“For Turkey, there does not exist any Cyprus issue”.
Only in 1954, when Archbishop Makarios with the aid of Greece got Cyprus on the agenda of the United Nations, did the British press and help Turkey sufficient that a Turkish demand to gain control of Cyprus could be raised at the United Nations. This is related in chilling detail on pages 208 through 213, and since the long-term consequences of these machinations are well known, it stands as a sinister example of how to cause severe long-term damage in international relations.
http://europenews.dk/en/node/42657
cyprus36890.html