Saturday, January 18, 2014

INTERVIEW WITH GNOMI NEWSPAPER

The T/C researcher-writer Dr. Ahmet Djavit An answers the questions of Gnomi newspaper on the Cyprus «problem»

«Only if we unite our forces, we can hope for a just and viable solution”

The T/C researcher- author Dr Ahmet Djavit, the man who dared sent the occupying forces to the European Court, an action that contributed to a domino of dramatic events, is not a man to hide behind words. An experienced scholar with deep understanding of the national question of Cyprus says the spade, a spade in the courageous and daring style that is part of his personality:

“The question is not which community will rule over the other,but which class forces will hold power in a future democratic, united and federal Cyprus.”

Dr Ahmet Djavit supports that the policies aiming at Enosis and Dihotomisis(partition) had always had the support of the NATO circles and the deep state through the underground organizations of TMT and EOKA. And he concludes:

“The left and the progressive forces in general have to find ways of eradicating the communal disagreements, ending the various manifestations of nationalism and separatism.”

***

- Could you outline the course of the national question in Cyprus in a brief way? - Which do you consider were the responsibilities of Makarios and Denktas in the shaping of the national question?

- There are historical and psychological reasons that in Cyprus two main distinct nationalities developed out of two religious groups, instead of one nation, although they shared a common history and some common cultural values since their co-existence starting from 1571. There used to be common and separate fields of cultural and communal structures even before the British colonial administration. The British colonialists put forward the differences, instead of similarities between the two communities, especially by importing the educational systems of Greece and Turkey respectively into Cyprus. By using the colonial divide and rule policy, they restructured the administrative system by helping the formation of nationalist groups, which they used in local politics. Instead of helping them to develop a common historical consciousness, the British remained silent so that Turkish and Greek nationalisms disseminated among the respective communities in Cyprus. The main political goal of the Greek Cypriots during the British colonial period was the union of the island with Greece, enosis, which excluded the Turkish Cypriots from a common struggle and forced them to seek shelter from the mainland Turkey. Again the British exploited these differing political aims and used the Turkish Cypriots against the anti-British rebellion of the Greek Cypriots. After the independence of the island in 1960, the two leaderships continued their so-called national aims, i.e. enosis and partition, which had both the support of the NATO deep state circles through the underground organisations, the TMT and the EOKA.

- To which degree did the involvement of Turkey and Greece affect the course of the Cyprus problem? - Which was the role of the British?

- In order to find a solution to the Cyprus problem, one should make distinction between the foreign interventions and the roots of the inter-ethnic conflict within the island. Both the imperialists and the local nationalists, be it Greek Cypriot nationalists or Turkish Cypriot separatists, depend themselves on the differences between the governing classes in both communities, by exploiting the old mistakes, which were the result of a wrong policy of nationalities. Turkey, Greece, Britain and the NATO as a whole are responsible for the non-solution of the Cyprus issue as an international problem.

- Do you believe that the period at which Talat and Christofias were the representatives of the two communities, was really a favourable “coincidence" for a solution?

- Since the ethnic-national composition of the Cypriot people is not homogeneous, the securing of the independence, territorial integrity and the sovereignty of the Republic of Cyprus is very much related with the solving of the question of nationalities internally. But it is necessary to underline the fact that the determining factor is not the ethnic-national differences between the two main communities of the island, but the class struggle within Cyprus and on the international level. Therefore the problem is not which community will be governing which one, but which class forces will have the power in the future democratic, united and federal Cyprus. The question of nationalities is a big complex of problems, which emerge during the struggle of the peoples for political, economic, ideological, legal and social liberation. The solution depends on the creation of appropriate conditions internally and externally. I believe that these conditions were not created internally during the negotiations between Talat and Christophias. As for external factors, I still believe that the NATO and the EU are not sincere in the re-unification of the island.

- Except of their impressiveness, what do you think was the practical result of the stunning mobilizations of the t/cs under the banner of the Platform This Country is Ours?

-The mobilizations just coincided with the court decision of my legal case against Turkey in the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg (Djavit An vs Turkey, Application No.20652/92). The decision came out on 20 February 2003 and the gates were opened just two months later on 23 April 2003. The judgement of the court was the last drop in the glass that forced the Turkish Cypriot leadership to lift the travel restrictions across the dividing line. This fact is stated in a book, written by the lawyer of the Turkish Cypriot leadership in the ECHR, Zaim M. Necatigil, The Cyprus Conflict and Turkey in the grip of ECHR: Cases brought against Turkey by the Greek Cypriot Administration and the Greek Cypriots before the European Commission of Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights (in Turkish). Ankara: Turhan Kitabevi, 2005, p. 190.

- Is there really a hope for a fair-viable solution to the Cyprus Problem? What do you think must be the role of the Left and the progressive forces in general within this setting?

- The Anglo-American imperialism had planned to realize the enosis or the taksim of the island years ago and they managed to exploit our internal conflict and finally to partition our island. There have been mistakes of both leaderships in this respect. The majority community had more responsibility in order to unite the whole population without any discrimination of ethnic origin, nationality, religion or language. The left and the progressive forces in general have to find ways of eradicating the communal disagreements, ending the various manifestations of nationalism and separatism, getting rid of developmental socio-economic differences, building a friendly mutual relationship based on real equal citizenship in a democratic federal state. Here lies the big responsibility of the AKEL, which is supposed to be the party of the working class of Cyprus. The AKEL has to revise its policy for the Turkish Cypriots by opening its Turkish Cypriot branch as soon as possible.

Yiorgos Sofokleous for Gnomi newspaper - Translation, Soteris Vlachos.
Published in “GNOMI” newspaper Friday, 10 January 2014


 

No comments:

Post a Comment