The recent article published by Greek City Times on May 21, 2024, titled “Concerns Raised Over Visit of Turkish Cypriot Leader to Victoria,” has stirred emotions among Greek and Turkish Cypriot Australians, particularly those who recall the painful history of the Cyprus conflict. However, this one-sided story requires a balanced response, highlighting the complexities of the situation to emphasise the legitimate perspectives of Turkish Cypriots.

Historical Context and Misconceptions

The article by Greek City Times, citing an email from Pavlos Andronikos, President of SEKA Victoria, presents a one-sided view of the Cyprus conflict, focusing on the 1974 events and subsequent Turkish presence in Northern Cyprus. It is crucial to recognize that the Cyprus issue is not simply a consequence of what the Greeks term a 'Turkish invasion.' Instead, it is the result of a legal Turkish intervention in response to a Greek-led coup and a series of events driven by the Greek aspiration for Enosis that have destabilized the island for decades.

Before 1974, Cyprus, Turkish Cypriots experienced severe violence from Greek Cypriots in their quest for Enosis and an attempt to remove British rule of Cyprus. The 1963-64 period, known as "Bloody Christmas," saw brutal attacks on Turkish Cypriots, leading to significant loss of life and displacement. This period of violence and the subsequent creation of enclaves laid the groundwork for the legal Turkish military intervention, which, given the 1960 treaty of Guarantee, Türkiye rightly argues was a peace operation aimed at protecting Turkish Cypriots from further ethnic cleansing.

The Legitimacy of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC)

The Greek City Times article labels the TRNC as illegitimate, recognized only by Türkiye. While it is true that international recognition of the TRNC is limited, this does not invalidate the governance structures established by the Turkish Cypriot community. The TRNC was proclaimed in 1983 after nearly a decade of failed negotiations and increasing marginalization of Turkish Cypriots.

The TRNC operates as an independent state with its own democratic institutions, economy, and legal system. The lack of international recognition is primarily a political issue, influenced by geopolitical alliances and the Greek Cypriot stance. However, it is crucial to recognize the right of Turkish Cypriots to self-determination and governance, principles enshrined in international law.

The Role of International Actors and Ongoing Negotiations

The article's portrayal of the international community's stance on the Cyprus issue omits significant details about ongoing negotiations and the role of international actors in seeking a solution. Over the years, numerous rounds of UN-led peace talks have taken place, with varying degrees of progress. The Annan Plan of 2004, which proposed a comprehensive solution, was accepted by a majority of Turkish Cypriots but rejected by Greek Cypriots in a referendum, highlighting the rejection of the Greeks for any UN solutions, as well as the complexities and divergent perspectives on the island.

It is also worth noting that the presence of Turkish troops in Northern Cyprus have not only maintained peace since 1974 but are also very much welcomed and viewed as a stabilizing factor for many Turkish Cypriots, who fear a return to the pre-1974 conditions of violence and discrimination. Any comprehensive solution to the Cyprus issue must address this reality, and the legitimate security concerns of Turkish Cypriots while ensuring the rights and safety of both communities.

Condemning the Greek Narrative and Political Agenda

The Greek City Times article underscores a narrative that paints Turkish Cypriots and their legitimate political aspirations in a negative light. This narrative mirrors the historical enosis movement of the 1950s, which sought to annex Cyprus to Greece and led to significant intercommunal strife. The persistence of this narrative today serves to further political agendas rather than promote peace and reconciliation.

It is crucial to condemn the actions of the small faction of Greek Australians who propagate this false narrative and hinder efforts toward a peaceful resolution. By continuing to paint Turkish Cypriots as aggressors, they perpetuate a cycle of mistrust and hostility. Instead, the focus should be on constructive dialogue and mutual recognition of rights and a focus on the reality on the ground in Cyprus.

The Call for Non-Engagement

The call by Pavlos Andronikos for the Victorian government to disengage with Ersin Tatar reflects a continuation of policies aimed at isolating Turkish Cypriots rather than fostering dialogue and understanding. Such an approach is counterproductive and undermines efforts toward reconciliation and a peaceful resolution of the Cyprus issue.

Engagement with leaders from both sides of the conflict is crucial for building trust and finding common ground. Ersin Tatar's visit to Victoria should be viewed as an opportunity to hear the perspectives of Turkish Cypriots, understand their aspirations, and explore avenues for dialogue. The Australian government’s stance of non-recognition of the TRNC does not preclude interactions that can contribute to peace and mutual understanding.

Embracing Dialogue and Reconciliation

To truly address the Cyprus conflict, it is imperative to move beyond historical grievances and engage in constructive dialogue. Both Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots have suffered and continue to bear the scars of conflict initiated by EOKA paramilitaries with aspirations for Enosis. A solution requires empathy, mutual recognition, and a willingness to acknowledge the history of events in Cyprus prior to the 1974 Turkish peace operation.

The international community, including countries like Australia, can play a vital role in facilitating dialogue and supporting confidence-building measures. Encouraging interactions between Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots, rather than isolating one side, is key to fostering a culture of peace and reconciliation.

The Case for a Two-State Solution

One of the fundamental aspirations of the Turkish Cypriot community is the establishment of a two-state solution, a stance strongly advocated by President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan at the UN level. This approach recognizes the realities on the ground and the distinct identities, governance structures, and historical narratives of the two communities on the island.

A two-state solution is not about division but about coexistence. It acknowledges the right of both Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots to self-govern and live in peace without fear of violence or marginalization. This solution aims to create a framework where both states can cooperate on issues of mutual interest while preserving their sovereignty and cultural identities.

The Greek City Times article underscores the deep-seated emotions and historical grievances of one-sided Greek political narrative surrounding the Cyprus conflict. However, it is essential to approach this issue with a balanced perspective that acknowledges the legitimate rights and concerns of Turkish Cypriots. Ersin Tatar's visit to Victoria should be seen as a step towards inclusive dialogue and a testament to the need for continued efforts towards a peaceful resolution. By embracing engagement and understanding, we can work towards a future where both Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots can coexist peacefully on the island, they both call home.

For further reading and a complete understanding of the Greek City Times article, click here to visit.