By Christos Panayiotides, Cyprus Mail

THE triggering event for writing this article was the criticism levied by some Turkish Cypriots.  They highlighted the fact that my articles almost exclusively focus on Greek Cypriots to the exclusion of Turkish Cypriots.

  This observation contains an element of truth. It stems from my belief that I have the right to judge and criticise those I have elected with my vote.  I consider it more appropriate for the Turkish Cypriot leaders to be judged and criticised for their mistakes and their omissions by the Turkish Cypriots.

At the age of 72, I am old enough to have participated, and I have participated along with many of my schoolmates, in the 1955-59 liberation struggle against the British.  As a person who has directly experienced these events, I can assure my Turkish Cypriot compatriots that that struggle was nothing more than a romantic attempt to achieve the political emancipation of Cypriots.

The effort failed because it was badly planned by amateur politicians.  One of the fundamental mistakes committed by the then leaders of the Greek Cypriots was that they ignored the identical needs and aspirations for political emancipation on the part of the Turkish Cypriots.  This gave the opportunity to the British to turn the one community against the other.

For the Greek Cypriots, the target of “enosis” (union with Greece) did not reflect a desire to render Cyprus a district of Greece.  Far from it.  In fact, most Greek Cypriots were fully aware of the political and economic problems that were confronting Greece at the time and which Cyprus would have inevitably inherited by such a union.

However, this was viewed as the price of “freedom” and “dignity”.  The status of “a subject” of a colony, the servitude, which that status entailed, and the resulting feeling of being a second-class citizen violently clashed with the desire of the Cypriots to be citizens of the world.  Exactly the same romantic idealism was prevailing amongst Turkish Cypriots, except that they had one extra concern: The frightening possibility of becoming subservient to the Greeks, instead of being subservient to the British.

The Zurich-London agreements, which led to the establishment of the Republic of Cyprus, generated a feeling of bitterness amongst Greek Cypriots because, instead of attaining the desired union with Greece, they ended up with a dysfunctional system, which – at least on the face of it – granted rights to Turkish Cypriots that were disproportional to their numbers.

Unfortunately, at this critical stage – as in the past – the Greek Cypriot leaders, instead of reassuring the Turkish Cypriots that their fears were not justified, they intensified these fears by unilaterally attempting to modify the Cyprus constitution and, in certain cases, by seeking to impose their choices by force.

This conflict was fuelled by extreme Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot elements and has gradually generated a climate of suspicion and fear between the two communities.  My impression is that the vast majority of the members of both communities are rational and peace-loving people, who choose to preoccupy their minds with their economic activities, thus leaving ample room for nationalistic elements, on both sides, to promote hatred.

In the last few years, I had the opportunity to meet Turkish Cypriots as well as immigrants from metropolitan Turkey, who belonged to this large silent majority.  What impressed me was the similarities in the behaviour of these people compared to Greek Cypriots.  Had they not had a different language and a different religion, I would have had difficulty to distinguish them.

I must admit that the number of Turkish Cypriots and Turkish settlers I have come across was insufficient to enable me to draw safe conclusions about the whole of the population.  Nevertheless, the genetic material appears to be common – a fact that reinforces the position that the animosity and fear that has prevailed since the establishment of the Republic of Cyprus is the result of specific actions taken by incompetent leaders and extremists on both sides, who do not have the slightest respect for the ideals of democracy and freedom that form the cornerstone of the Greek civilisation or the ideal of a tolerant and fair public administration that formed the cornerstone of the Turkish civilisation.

Regrettably, the leaders of both sides have proved unable to respond to the challenge they encountered.  Had they been able to marry these two civilisations, they would have created an “ideal state”.  Can the citizens of Cyprus take this matter in their hands? A difficult but not an unattainable target, which, however, would be impossible to attain while seating comfortably on the sofa of their living room.

Christos Panayiotides is a regular columnist for the Cyprus Mail and Alithia