RADEK SIKORSKI, the former deputy foreign minister of Poland and now head of the New Atlantic Initiative, recently pointed out to me that “there are no more contentious subjects in the world than the Middle East, Kashmir, Northern Ireland, and Cyprus.” Unfortunately, he told me too late.
When last I wrote about the Cyprus issue, I received much warmth and gratitude from the Greek Cypriot community and even a glowing letter from the president of AHEPA (American Hellenic Educational Progressive Association). It all made me feel like I was somehow furthering the cause of democracy in the world–that is, before the irate letters and e-mails from Turkish Cypriots and their sympathizers started pouring in.
Aside from the calls for me to stop writing and “be allowed only to clean the toilets,” many critics complained about the one-sidedness of the article. Why did I not meet with a Turkish Cypriot and get his perspective on the Cyprus question? So in the interest of fair-minded journalism–and a lunch at Levante, a Turkish-Mediterranean restaurant here in Washington–I decided to meet with Osman Ertug, representative of the “Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus” (recognized only by Turkey).
I was a bit nervous about meeting Ertug, even in a public place. (I had images of Michael Corleone meeting with the crooked cop and Sollozzo “the Turk,” who famously said, “Try the veal.”) But Osman Ertug was a genial-looking man in a natty blue suit, of slight stature, with a carefully trimmed, salt-and-pepper mustache. He seemed pleasantly surprised to see me too (and later confided that I look nothing like my caricature, which he described as that of an “angry Turk”).
Things began well, with my host gladly pouring olive oil on my plate so I could swab it with warm and fluffy “pide” bread (or “pita” in Greek) straight from a wood-burning oven. And as I took my first bite, he noted that Turkish Cypriots tend to dwell on the past while Greek Cypriots want to look to the future. “In order to look to the future,” he said, “we must look to the past. We must seek the truth–and the truth is on our side.” He derided the Greek Cypriots for having “selective amnesia” about history: “For them, history begins in 1974 and not in 1963 and ’64!”
Why are these years significant? In a letter he wrote me, Ertug cited “hundreds of Turkish Cypriots killed, wounded, or maimed as a result of the Greek Cypriot armed onslaught of 1963-64, which drove a quarter of the Turkish Cypriot population from their homes and properties in 103 villages across the island.” He added that all of the atrocities are backed by full documentation. (Greek Cypriots concede that terrible things did happen in the past–but claim they happened on both sides.) The year 1974 refers to the “intervention” of the Turkish army in northern Cyprus after an attempted military coup on the island against President Makarios. “Makarios and the military junta were actually both on the same side, you see. It is just that the military wanted ENOSIS (the union of Cyprus with Greece) to happen militarily, while Makarios wanted it politically–they thought he wasn’t acting fast enough and putting enough pressure on the Turkish Cypriots,” Ertug said.
To the Turks, the 1974 coup was the breaking point and the clearest sign that ENOSIS would take place by force. Of course the coup was unsuccessful and Makarios was reinstalled. But the Turkish army never left. It is the reason, says Ertug, why peace has existed on the island uninterrupted all this time. “It’s not because of the U.N. (peacekeepers), but because of the Turkish army.” I tell him that you don’t hear Greek Cypriots pushing for ENOSIS anymore and that they would never do anything undemocratic or unseemly to jeopardize their chances of reunification and, most of all, their entry into the European Union. “They have always wanted ENOSIS,” he insists. “They cannot disguise what is inside,” despite the friendly gestures.
Ertug is a smart guy. He is astute, quick-witted, and he drops historical references faster than Dominick Dunne drops names. Most of all, he doesn’t mince words. Regarding the 82,000 Greek Cypriots expelled from their homes in 1974, he says “they fled, just like Turkish Cypriots in the south fled to the north.” (The Greek Cypriots, naturally, disagree. They will also remind you that there are still more than a thousand Greek Cypriots missing as a result of the invasion.) I ask Ertug about Cyprus joining the European Union: “You mean ‘Southern’ Cyprus joining the European Union? Sure, it can happen.” He doesn’t seem bothered that no one except Turkey recognizes the north as sovereign: “So what? The United States was self-declared and only France at first recognized it. You mustn’t confuse an act of recognition with the legitimacy of a state, which requires three things: a territory, a people, and effective control of that territory. We are legitimate.”
Calling Cyprus’s accession to the EU “a train wreck,” Ertug says, “Europe must accept the consequences and the burden. And Turkey’s reaction to this will know no limits. Then it will be Europe’s problem too.” In other words, he doubts a solution to the Cyprus question will be resolved before the next round of accession. “The south has already acted unilaterally and if it does join, they can say goodbye to the north forever!”
Forever? None of this bodes well for the Greek Cypriots, who desire reunification through the establishment of a bi-zonal, bi-communal federal state. “A federal state is an idea first proposed by the Turkish Cypriots,” says Ertug. “But now it is too late for that. Two separate states exist. They better get used to it.”
I asked whether or not the stationing of 35,000 Turkish soldiers on the island was necessary–does he honestly think a massacre could take place? His response was, “Could you have imagined in this day and age that a massacre of hundreds of thousands of Bosnians could take place–right in front of U.N. peacekeepers? That millions would be killed in Rwanda in this day and age?”
By the time I finished my Adana kebab–skewered ground lamb on a pide with a side of rice and diced Bermuda onions–it was clear there was no space to find any common ground. Both sides do sincerely want a solution. The problem is, the Turkish solution, according to Ertug, is a divided island, while the Greek solution is reunification. Near the end of our lunch, I suggested that it’s not about being a part of either Greece or Turkey. Maybe–just maybe–the Greek Cypriots aren’t looking for the “triumph of Hellenism”–that all they want is a Cyprus for all Cypriots. He was not impressed.
And what of the Turkish Cypriots who no longer yearn to be a separate state but simply to be one with their Greek Cypriot brothers? “There are a few, but I don’t know anyone who feels that way,” Ertug says. As for the term “brother,” which the Greek Cypriots openly use when talking about the Turkish minority, Ertug agrees: “Yes, we are indeed brothers. But even brothers can be enemies.”
Did I mention that Turkish coffee is really, really strong?
Victorino Matus is an assistant managing editor at The Weekly Standard.
