NationMaster - Discussion - Cyprus Profile

Dilly Willy 20th February 2005	Turks are jerks. Greeks rule
efthokia lambri 2nd March 2005	Hi, I need to know what Cyprus defines as a crime.
Yahoo! 27th March 2005	Cyprus is an island country in the eastern Mediterranean Sea south of Turkey. Site of an ancient Neolithic culture, the island was settled by Phoenicians c. 800 B.C. and thereafter fell successively to the Assyrians, Egyptians, Persians, Macedonian Greeks, Egyptians again, and finally Romans (58 B.C.). The Byzantines controlled it from A.D. 395 until 1191, when it was captured by Richard I of England during the Third Crusade. Venice annexed it in 1489, Turkey conquered it in 1571, and Great Britain proclaimed its sovereignty in 1914. Cyprus became independent in 1960, but large-scale fighting between Greek and Turkish Cypriots led to the installment of a UN peacekeeping force in 1965. In 1974 Turkey invaded Cyprus and established a separate Turkish state in the northern part. Nicosia is the capital and the largest city. Population: 734,000.
John 30th March 2005	In response to Carmen: Latin is the native tongue of Latin Cypriots. Therefore, to call Latin a "dead language" is a misnomer.
Typsi 2nd April 2005	Jews of unmixed ancestry should move to Cyprus and blend in with the Maronites while maintaining their Jewish faith. I believe that Cyprus needs a Jewish population, they already have Christians and Muslims. Bringing together Jews and their language with the Maronites and their language would create a Judeo-Arabic all of its own. Which be a nice touch to both communities.
janissary 22nd June 2005	There is a big mistake in one of the commentaries.Turkey didn't invaded Northern Cyprus.We saved our people forum the Greek Cypriots' massacre.It is the true one.
aidan 14th August 2005	And what of the 1,800 Greek-Cypriots who were 'lost' after being captured during this 'non invasion', and the consistent refusal to hand over evidence to the UN war crimes investigation. In addition, what of the homes that were taken? What of compensation for those families who lost husbands and sons? Greek families had to flee and leave everything behind. Considering that the Turkish army did not have a presence in Cyprus before, they 'arrived' in large numbers and pushed across Cyprus and instead of pulling the Turkish Cypriots out and leaving, they remained and fortified positions. It's pretty strange to call that anything other then an invasion.
Paulynyc 29th September 2005	"Intervention"...31 years--that's got to be the longest "intervention" in the history of the world! I've also heard the invasion referred to by successive Turkish governments as a "peace operation." How tidy. Bombing and napalming unarmed civilians, raping women from 12 to 80, ethnically cleansing over 200 thousand people from their homes and pumping in tens of thousands of Anatolians to bolster their puppet state--are there even any real Turkish Cypriots left in the north, who were the original pretext for the "intervention?"--defiling and pillaging ancient Christian sanctuaries and cemeteries, selling stolen lands to wealthy northern Europeans with no conscience, trying so desperately to erase any trace of Hellenism in their 31-year occupation, creating a Turkish province for (admittedly) purely "strategic military purposes," and then using propaganda to twist the facts and propagandize their abomination as an "intervention"--it's sickening, and it's a pattern that has been repeated in Greco-Turkish history for centuries. An even more disturbing development is that for the last 31 years, Turkey has occupied one-third of the sovereign territory of the Republic of Cyprus, an EU-member country, with a force of 40 thousand troops and US-made weapons, while it strenuously pursues EU membership itself...
Neophytos 12th October 2005	MONITORS....Cyprus is not a Middle Eastern country. It is in the EUROPEAN UNION...I'd appreciate it if you would change the Nationmasters map to reflect this fact. Thanks.
Nick 19th October 2005	MONIOTRS RE:"The latest two-year round of UN-brokered direct talks - between the leaders of the Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot communities to reach an agreement to reunite the divided island - ended when the Greek Cypriots rejected the UN settlement plan in an April 2004 referendum." I have grown tired of seeing this everywhere. First and foremost, the Republic of Cyprus is a free republic in which a large number of peoples live side by side in the free areas of the island, PEACEFULLY and as full members of the democratic state. These include peoples of Hellenic, Venitian, Maronite, Persian, Arabic AND even Turkish background. All these peoples are considered equally Cypriot and a have the right to vote. This means that the 'no' majority in the 2004 referrendum was not simply a greek Cypriot decision, but rather a decision of the free Cypriot peoples. Further to this, the administration of the Turkish occupied north alongside Turkish Government has been opposing UN peace plans for over 30 years, and noone has ever paid the slightest bit of attention to this fact. However, when the Cypriot public refused the latest plan, they were met with threats of international retribution. The 2004 draft of the Annan Plan for Cyprus was not refused because it granted consessions to Turkish Cypriots, but rather because it granted too many concessions to Turkey and too few to the rest of the Cypriot public. Amongst the many inbalances in the "Annan Plan" the following were just too unfair to accept: - An agreement to the Annan Plan would have meant that the 18% Turkish Cypriot population would constitutionally control 50% of the parliamentary seats compared to the other 50% parliamentary seats shared between the remaining 82% of the Cypriot population. This is not a case of equal rights but rather minority rule. - The Islands' governement would have been a rotating seat government between the Turkish Cypriot community and the remaining Cypriot community, however the former would have the right to overturn any decisions made during the later's parliamentary rule (a priveledge not granted to the later). -It would mean a nullification of all rights regarding legal action against Turkey for reparations for crimes/damage that resulted from Turkeys' actions during the 1974 invasion. - It would have meant the denial of the right of tens of thousands of Cypriots to return to homes and property they were forced to flee from during the 1974 invasion. - The dispersal of the Cypriot national guard (Cyprus Army), but the continued presense of Turkish Sovereign troops on the island. - It would have also meant that Turkey would have a continued right to "military incursion" whenever it saw the need. Other proposals that were disliked included: - the replacement of the current flag of the Cypriot Republic with something that in my opinion highlights the division rather than moves to unite. The current flag may be view on the webpage above, and makes no referrence to Turkish, Hellenic, Maronite, etc communities but rather focusses on the island itself and the reath representing peace between all communities. The proposed flag is a copper coloured flag with two horizontal lines on it, one blue and one red, representing Hellenic and Turkish communities on the island. Firstly this is a blatent example of the kind of divisional tactics that have been persued for years by international politics, and secondly, if we are creating a flag that has a representation of the islands' communities, where are the lines for the other communities? Finally and again, what was wrong with the original plan in the first place. - It would have meant that the subject of the Islands' history would no longer be a permitted subject in state schools as it is seen as offensive to Turkish Cypriots from the occupied areas. I would like to point out that in the United States, the fact that the position of the southern states during the war of independence is still made crystal clear in history lessons, is not a sore point for people from the southern states. The Cypriot public are tired of being divided and sub-divided. We are a very small island state. However, due to our geographic position between three continents, we became easy an target for invading armies and people who sought a vantage point on the surrounding regions throughout history. I hope that I have highlighted some of the problems faced by Cyprus in this conflict and the reason that this version of the plan was refused. I also hope that the future will hold a solution that is just and fair for Cypriots of all ethnic backgrounds.
Hasan 20th October 2005	Turkey never invaded Cyprus since it was an intervention. Turkey saved the Turkish Cypriots from ethnic cleansing! If it was not for Turkey there would not be one Turkish Cypriot left in Cyprus and that is a fact. It doesn't take much research to find out what the Greek Cypriots were doing to the Turkish Cypriots pre 1974!!!!!!
tasawar 26th October 2005	what is the new rules for the illegal stay in cyprus.is there any new rules for the the illegal people to make them legal there.
Nicolas 31st October 2005	RE: If it was not for Turkey there would not be one Turkish Cypriot left in Cyprus and that is a fact There are still large communities of Turkish Cypriots that live quite safely and hapily without "ethnic cleansing" on the free side of Cyprus. Not to mention the thousands of Turkish Cypriots that commute across the green line everyday to work safely in free Cyprus. As for the "research" you speak of, just because a few opposition funded sites have posted half-truths about what was happening in the 1963-1974 period, doesn't make them research sources. The fact of the matter is that INTER-COMMUNAL fighting broke out in 1963. This means that BOTH communities had people causing trouble. Greek Cypriots were also murdered and subjected to terror tactics by Turkish Cypriot militia groups. Let us not forget that Ralph Denktash himself was imprisoned during his life by the British forces for instigating trouble. Further more, any incursion into another country's lands, unless performed under UN mandate, constitutes an INVASION. No matter how you try to paint it, Turkey's actions in 1974, which amongst other effects meant that the law on abortion in Cyprus had to change due to the number of girls and women that were raped by the invading soldiers, and their continued presence on the island of 40000 troops shows that Turkeys' move was one of political interest for the mainlands' asfety and not one of securing Turkish Cypriot safety.
Anton 31st October 2005	Hello all. Does anyone know how much money Greek Cypriot and Turkish cypriot administration has spent on Defense since 1974
Etzel 6th November 2005	Turkey's peace operation in 1974 ended 11 years of genocide against the Turkish Cypriots.The Turkish Cypriot Genocide started in 1963 when greek cypriots forcefully took over the control of the legislative,judiciary and executive organs of the island.According to the Cyprus Republic found in 1960 Turkish Cypriots had political equality.But with the start of the Turkish Cypriot genocide in 1963, the Turkish Cypriots were kicked out of the government and forced to live in enclaves.During the genocide thousands of turkish cypriots died or went missing, thousands were wounded and tens of thousands of Turkish Cypriots had to flee their ancestral land cyprus to save their lives.The genocide ended in 1974 with Turkey's peace operation to stop greece from annexing the island.Since 1963 the greek occupied republic of cyprus is recognised illegally as the Cyprus government though the Turkish Cypriots whose consent is a must for any action on cyprus will never approve this occupation.
Dinos 9th November 2005	Whether a country belongs to the Middle East depends on its geographical position, and not on its politics. Cyprus is definately a Middle Eastern country, even though politically it has little to nothing to do with the other countries in the Middle East. If Syria (or Israel, which has practically joined already...) were to join the EU would you stop calling it a Middle Eastern country? Same goes for Greece. Greece is, whether you like it or not, part of the Balkans. It being a member of the EU for over 20 years doesnt change that. Moreover, don't "we" (as Greeks) also refer to Turkey as Asia Minor? Then if you call Turkey Asia (which it is, apart from Western Constantinople), then you simply can't call Cyprus Europe..
Marcus Platrides 27th November 2005	It is doubtful if Turkey will have the ability let alone capacity to fulfill all the chapters. I believe Turkey has a very hard job to accomplish within the next 15 years. My guess is that they "if" they accepted in the union, this will be done in no more than 30 to 40 years.
Ashh_. 16th May 2006	Im doing a project on this country. its really interesting to learn about a country thats really small. Theres lots of information for a small country. Im really glad im doing this cool country.
Ashley 16th May 2006	Im doing a project on this country. its really interesting to learn about a country thats really small. Theres lots of information for a small country. Im really glad im doing this cool country.
Holden 9th May 2007	If Turkish Cypriots are unable to accept the 80+% majority Greek Cypriot dominance then the least they can do is have the common courtesy to leave and go to Turkey as they have caused enough problems on this island already.

Share your thoughts, questions and commentary here