Cyprus-Forum.com

[Agios Amvrosios]

"In the summer of 1983 a Turkish embassy spokesman in Washington told the Washington Post that Turkey supported the Indonesian position on East Timor at the United Nations because it saw a 'parallel' with the Turkish case in Cyprus. The spokesman was being a little ungenerous to his own government. All verifiable and independent reports show the government of Indonesia to have been guilty of near-genocide in East Timor, using the weapon of starvation, and indulging in the indiscriminate slaughter of civilians. One wonders at any government which would voluntarily associate itself with such an atrocity."
Christopher Hitchens, 'Cyprus: Hostage to History'

[erolz]

Christopher Hitchens, 'Cyprus: Hostage to History'

It's probably worth mentioning that Christopher Hitchens (first) wife and his 2 children by his first wife were GC (1/2 GC for the kids).

Mr Hitchens often protrays himself as an 'expert' on Cyprus but rarely mentions his personal connection to the GC side and point of view.

[Othellos]

Christopher Hitchens, 'Cyprus: Hostage to History'

It's probably worth mentioning that Christopher Hitchens (first) wife and his 2 children by his first wife were GC (1/2 GC for the kids).

Mr Hitchens often protrays himself as an 'expert' on Cyprus but rarely mentions his personal connection to the GC side and point of view.

Hmm....if his first wife's GC background played an important (positive) part in the shaping of Mr. Hitchens' views, then shouldn't his divorce from her also play a similar (but negative this time) part

O.

[erolz]

Christopher Hitchens, 'Cyprus: Hostage to History'

Hmm....if his first wife's GC background played an important (positive) part in the shaping of Mr. Hitchens' views, then shouldn't his divorce from her also play a similar (but negative this time) part

O.

I just think that Mr Hitchens should be more honest about his connection to the GC side rather than present an image of 'independance'.

Being married to a GC and having GC children and GC relatives inevitably means that he has been exposed directly and personaly to the GC point of view. I am not saying this means he must be biased but to neglet to mention this connection is to me less than totally honest.

[cannedmoose]

I just think that Mr Hitchens should be more honest about his connection to the GC side rather than present an image of 'independance'.

Being married to a GC and having GC children and GC relatives inevitably means that he has been exposed directly and personaly to the GC point of view. I am not saying this means he must be biased but to neglet to mention this connection is to me less than totally honest.

I agree with you Erolz. Having read Hostage to History, it comes up with some valid points but is certainly not a book that I could regard as objective. Also, I find Hitchens a bit of a 'conspiracy theorist', quick to jump upon a rumour and accept it as fact, although that may just be a personal opinion.

A far better account from him was in the form of the 'Frontiers' documentary that he presented on the BBC in the late 1980s. Someone on this forum kindly provided this in the form of vidcaps a few months ago, whoever it was, thank you as it's a really interesting piece of work. In that he is slightly more objective, discussing the issue with people from both sides and pointing out how from an outsiders perspective the divide is a total anomoly.

Personally, I'm in a similar position to Mr. Hitchens. I'm doing my research for my thesis and attempting to be as objective as possible (thankfully only one of my chapters deals with the Cyprus Problem itself), but when you are exposed to the GC view the majority of the time, it is very easy to buy into it. Thankfully I have some good TC and Turkish friends also, so I can bounce ideas off them. Nonetheless, in the frontispiece to my work, I will mention my connection with Greek Cyprus, I think it's only fair to those who read it and to myself.

Finally, Hitchens' comment on Indonesia is an interesting one. Given that many of the world's arms exporters (prominently the US, UK, France, Germany, Japan, Russia) provided the weapons that Indonesia used to suppress the East Timorese (see link below), a large number of governments can be said to have voluntarily associated themselves with the atrocities there, not Turkey alone.

http://www.caat.org.uk/information/publ ... 099.php#38

[Othellos]

I just think that Mr Hitchens should be more honest about his connection to the GC side rather than present an image of 'independance'.

Being married to a GC and having GC children and GC relatives inevitably means that he has been exposed directly and personaly to the GC point of view. I am not saying this means he must be biased but to neglet to mention this connection is to me less than totally honest.

Has Hitchens ever tried to "hide" the fact that he was married to a GC? If not (and to the best of my knowledge he didn't) then I fail to see what your point is. Starting every book or speech of his with an introduction about his ex GC wife for the sake of being "totally honest" may not be the most pleasant thing for him (especially if he ended up divorcing her).

While I can see what you are trying to suggest about "Hitchens being exposed only to the GC version of the events" (he claims otherwise btw), I still think that bringing up his personal life details, is a very weak approach.

Just my 2c.

O.

[erolz]

Has Hitchens ever tried to "hide" the fact that he was married to a GC? If not (and to the best of my knowledge he didn't) then I fail to see what your point is. Starting every book or speech of his with an introduction about his ex GC wife for the sake of being "totally honest" may not be the most pleasant thing for him (especially if he ended up divorcing her).

If you search on the net for Christopher Hitchens you can find many profiles and many articles he has written about Cyprus. If you specificaly try and find 'proof' that he was married to a GC then you will find, as I did, that it is no easy task. Whilst 'hiding' this fact may be a 'strong' term he does not mention it (to my knowledge) in either his book or in the TV programme (frontiers) or in ANY of the various articles he has written about Cyprus. My personal view is that he should be more up front about this connection.

While I can see what you are trying to suggest about "Hitchens being exposed only to the GC version of the events" (he claims otherwise btw), I still think that bringing up his personal life details, is a very weak approach.

Just my 2c.

I am not saying that nothing he says about Cyprus has any value or that his views are to be 'rubbished'. What I am saying is that I personaly feel that the close personal connection he has to the GC side is a valid piece of 'context' that should be born in mind when reading his views on Cyprus. Hence my mentioning this fact in relation to this thread.

Just my pennys worth.

[Othellos]

If you search on the net for Christopher Hitchens you can find many profiles and many articles he has written about Cyprus. If you specificaly try and find 'proof' that he was married to a GC then you will find, as I did, that it is no easy task.

I tried it and it took me about 3 minutes to come accross this article by Cristopher Hitchens:

http://www.forward.com/issues/2001/01.01.26/arts1.html

Quoting from the first paragraph of the above article:
"...I'm fairly globalized: My father was Anglo-Celtic; my first wife is Greek; my second wife's family came from Odessa or thereabouts, and I have a godchild in Zimbabwe. "

From the above it is obvious that Hitchens has no problem telling others that once upon a time he was married to a Greek (Cypriot). I also came accross some other articles about him where his ex-wife's GC background was mentioned....perhaps I was luckier in my search than what you were.

Some may still think that Hitchens would be more "honest" if every time he wrote about Cyprus he also included a short note saying: "Some years back I used to be married to a GC etc". In my opinion this would be a ridiculous thing to do and this is probably the reason why he never did that. I still think that if one wants to challenge Hitchens' work then he / she can try doing it directly with arguments and not through "gossip" about his personal life.

O.

[erolz]

I tried it and it took me about 3 minutes to come accross this article by Cristopher Hitchens:

http://www.forward.com/issues/2001/01.01.26/arts1.html

Quoting from the first paragraph of the above article:
"...I'm fairly globalized: My father was Anglo-Celtic; my first wife is Greek; my second wife's family came from Odessa or thereabouts, and I have a godchild in Zimbabwe. "

From the above it is obvious that Hitchens has no problem telling others that once upon a time he was married to a Greek (Cypriot). I also came accross some other articles about him where his ex-wife's GC background was mentioned....perhaps I was luckier in my search than what you were.

Yep you sure were luckier than me. I spent maybe 1 to two hours trying to confirm what was gossip to me as fact. Just the way it goes sometimes.

Some may still think that Hitchens would be more "honest" if every time he wrote about Cyprus he also included a short note saying: "Some years back I used to be married to a GC etc". In my opinion this would be a ridiculous thing to do and this is probably the reason why he never did that. I still think that if one wants to challenge Hitchens' work then he / she can try doing it directly with arguments and not through "gossip" about his personal life.

O.

As I have tried to make clear, for me it is a matter of 'context'. Mr Hitchens personal connections to Greek Cyprus is not 'gossip' - it is a fact. I heard it orginally as 'gossip' and then wanted to establish if this 'hersay' was in fact fact. Like I say it took me a considerable (in net erms) amount of time to do this. I may just be bad at it I guess.

If you would like to start a thread about the content of Hitchens writings on Cyprus I am more than happy to comment on where I think he is right and where I think he is wrong and where I think he is wrong because of a bias in his outlook. That however was not what this thread was about or what my comment was about in realtion to him. My personal view is that knowing his personal connection to Greek Cyprus is a vaild piece of 'context' with which to judge his work and writings. Not knowing it has to be worse than knowing it surely? Thus I mentioned it in case there were those who did not have this 'context'. Once knowing it you can decide if you think it has any relevance to his views or not. Not knowing it provides no such opportuinty.