[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 14]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 20332-20333]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




               STOP THE BLAME GAME WITH REGARD TO CYPRUS

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. DAN BURTON

                               of indiana

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, July 24, 2007

  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Madam Speaker, over the last week or so I have 
listened to a number of my colleagues come to the floor of this Chamber 
to lament the 1974 ``invasion'' of Cyprus. For many years the United 
States, the European Union and other members of the international 
community have worked together for a just and lasting solution to the 
vexing problem of Cyprus. That is why I am deeply concerned when I hear 
some of my colleagues throwing barbs at the Turkish Cypriots and Turkey 
in an attempt to lay all the blame for this complicated issue at their 
doorstep. Because by distorting the facts, we are potentially 
undermining our good-faith, efforts to see this conflict resolved and 
to see peace and prosperity come to all the people of Cyprus.
  The fact is that when the Island of Cyprus gained its independence 
from Great Britain in 1960, the Republic's constitution specifically 
defined a power-sharing arrangement which required a Greek Cypriot 
president and a Turkish Cypriot vice-president, each elected by their 
constituency.
  The fact is that in 1963 Greek Cypriot President Makarios proposed 
sweeping constitutional modifications which heavily favored the Greek 
Cypriot community. The changes removed most of the checks and balances 
which had been built into the constitution to ensure the safety and 
equal status of the Turkish Cypriots. The inevitable result was a 
serious deterioration of relations between the two parties, which came 
to a head in December 1963, when armed Greek Cypriots attacked and 
killed many Turkish Cypriots who were unable to escape. The armed 
conflict spread quickly, with the Turkish Cypriots eventually being 
forced to withdraw into enclaves to defend themselves.
  For the next 10 years, the campaign of the Greek Cypriots cost the 
Turkish Cypriots many lives and untold suffering, as well as their 
equal partnership status in the Cyprus government.
  Former United States Undersecretary of State, George Ball, who, among 
others, was actively dealing with the crisis at the time, remarked in 
his memoirs entitled The Past Has Another Pattern, that Makarios has 
turned ``this beautiful little island into his private abattoir'' (p. 
341). Ball went on to say that ``Makarios' central interest was to 
block off Turkish intervention so that he and his Greek Cypriots could 
go on happily massacring the Turkish Cypriots'' (p. 345).
  The fact is that during the presidential elections of 1974, 
Archbishop of Cyprus Makarios--the Greek Cypriot leader at the time--
escalated the crisis by embracing Enosis, or Union with Greece, as his 
election platform. Although Makarios won reelection he

[[Page 20333]]

also created a power struggle between the military junta in control of 
mainland Greece and himself for the control over the Island. That power 
struggle culminated in a coup which forced Makarios to flee Cyprus and 
renewed ethnic cleansing of Turkish Cypriots.
  In his address to the UN Security Council on July 19, 1974, Makarios 
himself described the coup as ``a clear attack from the outside and a 
flagrant violation of the independence and sovereignty of the Republic 
of Cyprus''.
  The fact is that in the face of a bloody coup that not only 
threatened the independence of Cyprus but also resulted in renewed 
massacres of Turkish Cypriots, Turkey, which was treaty-bound to act as 
a Guarantor State, was compelled to undertake action on July 20, 1974. 
And the fact is that as a result of this legitimate and timely action, 
Turkish Cypriots were saved from imminent destruction, bloodshed among 
the Greek Cypriots was ended and the independence of Cyprus was 
protected.
  The fact is that the Turkish intervention was legitimate and was 
internationally confirmed by, among others, the Consultative Assembly 
of the Council of Europe (CACE). CACE resolution 573, dated July 29, 
1974, clearly states, ``Turkey exercised its right of intervention in 
accordance with Article IV of the Guarantee Treaty of 1960.''
  Unfortunately, since 1974, and in defiance of the rule of law and the 
established principle that federations can only be built on a 
foundation of equal partnership, the Greek Cypriot side continues to 
claim exclusive sovereignty over the entire Island. In 1983, this 
prompted the Turkish Cypriot side to assert its rights by proclaiming 
the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC).
  After many unsuccessful attempts at reconciliation, U.N.-led direct 
talks between the two sides began in early 2002. The talks sketched out 
a settlement--the Annan Plan--which was voted on in simultaneous 
referenda held on each side on April 24, 2004.
  The fact is that Turkish Cypriots approved the Annan Plan by a clear 
and overwhelming majority of 65 percent but Greek Cypriots--under heavy 
pressure from the Greek Cypriot government--rejected it by an even 
larger majority of 76 percent. The Turkish Cypriots were 
internationally and rightly praised for their ``courageous vote in 
favor of the proposals''.
  The Greek Cypriot side has since been trying to justify its rejection 
by claiming, among other things, that the plan ``did not meet the 
interests of the country'' and that ``it did not provide for guarantees 
to ensure the complete implementation of commitments under the plan''. 
However, impartial European Union diplomats, closely associated with 
the reconciliation effort, have gone so far as to say very 
undiplomatically, that the Greek Cypriot people had been ``lied to'' by 
the Greek Cypriot government as to the details of the Annan plan.
  As public servants I think the members of this House understand that 
no compromise worth its salt ever fully meets all of the demands of 
either side, nor could it do so or it wouldn't be much of a compromise. 
The fact is that the Annan Plan was a carefully balanced compromise 
that certainly from the Turkish Cypriot perspective represented immense 
sacrifices on the part of the Turkish Cypriots, on such key issues as 
land, resettlement, property and security.
  The Greek government and several former Greek government leaders 
fully supported the plan and the Turkish government was also pivotal in 
encouraging the Turkish Cypriots to approve the plan. In the end, the 
only people who were not willing to make the sacrifices necessary to 
bring peace to this troubled island where the Greek Cypriots--yet they 
were inexplicably rewarded membership to the EU; although some EU 
leaders have subsequently stated that doing so was a mistake.
  The fact is that despite the Greek Cypriots' failure to embrace peace 
and the international community's failure to end the economic isolation 
of the Turkish Cypriots; Turkish Cypriots continue to seek a just and 
peaceful settlement to this crisis.
  Most recently, Turkey and Turkish Cypriots have supported 
implementation of the July 8, 2006, United Nations-brokered agreement 
between Greek Cypriot leader Tassos Papadopoulos and Turkish Cypriot 
leader Mehmet Ali Talat relating to the reunification of Cyprus through 
a process of bi-communal discussions.
  Some of my colleagues, particularly those who support House 
Resolution 405 (H. Res. 405), would have this House believe that 
Turkish Cypriots are unwilling to proceed with the July 8 agreement. 
But I would ask my colleagues this simple question; when offered the 
chance to vote for peace which side rejected peace, Turkish or Greek? 
The answer is Greek.
  Under the circumstances it should make one wonder if Greek Cypriots, 
having already forestalled UN efforts to resolve the Cyprus issue--and 
been rewarded for it through EU membership--whether they truly feel 
under pressure to seek a just solution. The fact is that the status quo 
benefits Greek Cypriots significantly more than Turkish Cypriots and it 
seems to me that if either side has an incentive to delay 
implementation of the July 8 agreement; it would be the Greek Cypriots.
  Madam Speaker, facts are stubborn things; and as the facts in this 
case clearly show, the crisis on Cyprus is significantly more complex 
than the ``blame Turkey'' special interest groups would like people to 
believe. It's time for these groups and their friends in Congress to 
end the ``blame game'' and get down to the real work of reshaping 
Cyprus into a Cyprus that respects human rights and the fundamental 
freedoms for all Cypriots.

                          ____________________