5 ms·

There is a nuance between first and second operations in July and August. While occupation in second operation is pretty much an over reaction, first one was qu

There is a nuance between first and second operations in July and August. While occupation in second operation is pretty much an over reaction, first one was quite legal and necessary from the Turkish point of view. Greek state was in a turmoil and nationalists were trying to 'get the Cyprus back'. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_invasion_of_Cyprus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_invasion_of_Cyprus

Gatsky 8y ago
I see no nuance. Turkey used the situation to further their own agenda. They have stayed in Cyprus long after their presence could possibly be justified. Erdogan pulled the same trick to cement his authority with the recent 'coup' in Turkey.
- forvelin 8y ago
  IMHO it is just set of inept politicians not being able to negotiate properly for decades. Also they tried to unite the island but South rejected in a UN supported referandum. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cypriot_Annan_Plan_referendums,_2004 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cypriot_Annan_Plan_referendums... At this point, how can we negotiate with people who call Turkish people as cockroaches and so on, really. Now Turkey has upperhand of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Cyprus_Water_Supply_Project https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Cyprus_Water_Supply_P... for the negotiations, I hope they will use that and in next decades the island will unite.
mdekkers 8y ago
Sorry, none of them were legal. This was pure and simple the idea of the Turks being unhappy with Greek Cypriot rule. Source: lived in Cyprus for 5 years.
- forvelin 8y ago
  Wasn't there terror attacks against British and Turkish on the island -not only on Turkish people, Greeks felt like island 'rightfully belonged to them' -? Wasn't there attempts to unite island with Greece at times by the both Greek and Cypriot nationalists ? There was a guaranteering agreement precisely for this reason and Turkey used his rights. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London-Z%C3%BCrich_Agreements https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London-Z%C3%BCrich_Agreements

Gatsky 8y ago

I see no nuance. Turkey used the situation to further their own agenda. They have stayed in Cyprus long after their presence could possibly be justified. Erdogan pulled the same trick to cement his authority with the recent 'coup' in Turkey.

forvelin 8y ago
IMHO it is just set of inept politicians not being able to negotiate properly for decades. Also they tried to unite the island but South rejected in a UN supported referandum. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cypriot_Annan_Plan_referendums,_2004 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cypriot_Annan_Plan_referendums... At this point, how can we negotiate with people who call Turkish people as cockroaches and so on, really. Now Turkey has upperhand of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Cyprus_Water_Supply_Project https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Cyprus_Water_Supply_P... for the negotiations, I hope they will use that and in next decades the island will unite.

mdekkers 8y ago

Sorry, none of them were legal. This was pure and simple the idea of the Turks being unhappy with Greek Cypriot rule. Source: lived in Cyprus for 5 years.

forvelin 8y ago
Wasn't there terror attacks against British and Turkish on the island -not only on Turkish people, Greeks felt like island 'rightfully belonged to them' -? Wasn't there attempts to unite island with Greece at times by the both Greek and Cypriot nationalists ? There was a guaranteering agreement precisely for this reason and Turkey used his rights. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London-Z%C3%BCrich_Agreements https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London-Z%C3%BCrich_Agreements