Behind Turkey’s Roaring

By Marcus A. Templar

Turkey’s refusal to submit flight plans for its military airplanes is consistent with its doctrine of preemptive strike when the time is ripe. Turkey’s doctrine developed from the fact that not only it went unpunished for a number of rogue actions that it perpetrated against Greek interests especially after it joined NATO, but it was additionally rewarded for the same by consecutive Greek, Cypriot, also NATO governments.

The issue of Cyprus in the early 1950’s started as a matter between the UK and Greece. Turkey was nowhere to be seen. Somehow Greece accepted London’s pressure and Turkey was brought into the equation. For that Greek docile behavior the Hellenism of the island has suffered and keeps suffering. Turks still call the Greek Cypriots Rum instead of Greeks as if they were part of the Ottoman Rum Millet within the Turkish Empire.

The pogroms on September 1955 and 1964 not only went unanswered, but Greek governments are silent when Turkey encourages and implements further violations of the Treaty of Lausanne. In addition Turkey’s politicians demand reciprocity. Perhaps Greece should oblige them by deporting an equal percent of Muslims of Thrace and the Dodecanese.

The invasion of Turkey on Cyprus not only went unanswered, but it was additionally rewarded by the behavior of two Greek American public relations firms whose infighting produced the Turkey 10 vs. Greece 7 ratio in the mid 1970’s. Turkey was also rewarded for its rogue conduct by that mere fact that governments of Free Cyprus with the “assistance” of all Greek governments negotiated and negotiate the terms of Cyprus’ own occupation rendering the resolutions of the UNSC invalid. It is as if the government of General De Gaulle aiming at the legitimization of Hitler’s occupation of Vichy France, negotiated the terms of occupation that would determine the degree of a literal enslavement of the people of south France. I wonder if all those who negotiate the de facto occupation of Cyprus by Turkey are going to live under the same conditions that they try so hard to impose on others.

Turkey has been rewarded for its immorality by the EU, which has not only allowed the occupation of its own territory, but in addition it has accepted to negotiate Turkey’s candidacy. NATO has rewarded Turkey by accepting Turkey’s attack on an independent country under the rationale that the lives and welfare of its compatriots were in danger. At that time, although NATO was a strictly defensive organization, it accepted Turkey’s rationale of the “Peace” operation as a benevolent action.

Recently, NATO has rejected Russia’s identical rationale and hypocritically vies to punish Russia’s “illegal” annexation of Crimea, as if the northern part of Cyprus is not annexed hiding behind lexical semantics on what constitutes an annexed territory. Moreover, Turkey is in violation of the Geneva Convention IV, Article 49, sixth paragraph, which provides: “The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies”, and yet as far as NATO is concerned, all is well!

One more point one must consider is the difference on the casualty lists of Russia’s annexation of Crimea and the Turkish invasion of Cyprus. During the Turkish invasion, but also later, besides the results of the conflict (killed in action, missing in action, wounded, and prisoners of war), the human rights of a good number of unfortunate Greek Cypriots were violated by being subjected to torture, extra-judicial killings, illegal arrests and detentions, arbitrary taxations, property crimes, forced labor, trafficking, forced displacement and rape. The forced labor of civilians and POWs alike along with human trafficking took place on Turkish soil after the captured individuals were transported to the mainland.

To those who conveniently suggest that “we are all brothers” or we should forgive and forget, they had better visit their nearest Holocaust Museum or the 9/11 Memorial in New York City.