WHEN MAKARIOS ALSO REALISED

On 29 July 1974, in the middle of the first Geneva conference, he met Kissinger and handed him a Memorandum with the main demand of a return to the Zurich agreements which he himself had undermined from the very first moment

Theoretically speaking, what kind of Cyprus would we want to live in? In such cases the first words that come to the mind of any reasonable person are peace, prosperity, happiness. There is no Cypriot who would choose for his country to turn into a vast military base, although unfortunately we were never given such a right to choose.

Cyprus is today and has always been a vast military base, a stable aircraft carrier in the Eastern Mediterranean, which at times has served, sometimes very much and sometimes less so, the geostrategic interests of great powers. Since ancient times, Cyprus, also because of its copper trade, has been the bone of contention between the Babylonians, Assyrians, Egyptians and Persians. Under Alexander the Great, it was a strategic centre for the conquest of Tyre and, in general, for the control of the Syro-Palestinian coast. In periods of powerful empires such as the Roman, Byzantine, at least in its early period, and Ottoman, Cyprus lost its importance. It was just another island in the Mediterranean which under the Ottoman Empire was almost left to its fate. Cyprus did and still does gain importance in times of geopolitical volatility. It was of great value as a Byzantine rampart during the period of Arab invasions, it acquired enormous commercial importance as the West’s only window to the East during the Frankish and Venetian periods. After 1870, due to the Second Industrial Revolution, its geopolitical value emerged again. The importance of oil led the British and the French back to the region to control the deposits and especially the transport routes, which can be seen in a series of agreements, treaties and actions, such as the lease of Cyprus in 1878, the Sykes-Picot Agreement in 1916, the Treaty of Lausanne in 1923 and later the intervention in Suez in 1956. A battle for control of Cyprus was also fought during the Cold War, with the Soviets attempting to neutralise it and, more importantly, to turn it into a tool for splitting the south-eastern wing of NATO. On the occasion of the Turkish invasion they succeeded in 1974, after Greece withdrew from the military arm of NATO. In contrast, after the invasion of Ukraine, Turkey’s pro-Russian stance upgraded Greek-Cypriot relations with the West and NATO, which we saw working in practice during the ongoing war in Gaza.

In 1960

From Independence to the present day, the issue of Cyprus’ membership in NATO has come and gone. In Zurich, Karamanlis and Turkish Prime Minister Menderes signed a gentleman’s agreement in Zurich for the accession of Cyprus to the North Atlantic Alliance. This was not achieved, although in fact since 1960 NATO has always been here in a tragic way. The Cypriots received all the negative appendants, while Greece, Turkey and Britain took on a role they never fulfilled. The Zurich-London agreements provided for the signing of a treaty of guarantee, under which the three NATO members took over the security of the new state. In fact, each in its own way undermined it: Britain in a divide-and-rule role to stay in the game, Greece in a motherland role of the G/C majority who had to take everything, and Turkey as the country pulling the strings with the pro-partition T/C nationalists. Cyprus was de facto operating as a NATO country through the guarantors of its independence and not as an independent country.

The devaluation of NATO

Based on the above, the 1974 Turkish invasion of Cyprus was explained through a relatively easy narrative, without self-criticism and taking of responsibility, which is attractive and easy to digest even nowadays. After 1974 at home an olive branch was given to the leaders of the coup, while in Greece the 7-year period of dictatorship was completely forgotten, which fell because of the Polytechnic uprising! Most of the blame was rightly placed on Turkey and a huge suspicion was then raised, first of NATO and then of the European Union. The amazing propaganda of both the KKE [Communist Party of Greece] and AKEL and shortly afterwards PASOK [Panhellenic Socialist Movement] contributed to this, with the slogan “EEC and NATO, the same union” echoing in every square in Athens after the post-war period. The first two parties in particular managed to demonise the West by presenting the Soviet Union as a sort of motherland of the underprivileged and oppressed of the whole world. They managed to portray Stalin, who had very few differences with Hitler, as more or less the father of the poor and weak, regardless of the fact that during the Second World War he slaughtered 20,000 Polish people in Katyn, managed to devour Eastern Europe by sowing red dictatorships everywhere, but also by exiling millions of Russians to Siberia.

All the world’s ills were the fault of Capitalism, which was certainly to blame for a great deal. Certainly not for the purchase of the Russian SAM missiles which Makarios wanted to bring to Cyprus in the presence of 3 NATO guarantor powers! Nor because the President believed that he could maintain the independence of Cyprus through the Non-Aligned who were the Trojan Horse of the Soviets led by Cuba.

In 1974 Makarios realised what game everyone was playing, but it was probably too late. On 29 July 1974, in the middle of the first Geneva Conference, he met with Kissinger and handed him a Memorandum with the main demands of ending the Turkish invasion and returning to the Zurich agreements which he himself had undermined from the very first moment. Based on what was said at the meeting, everyone can understand that President Makarios understood what we all know today about the game the Soviet Union played in Cyprus.

According to the official minutes kept by the State Department and published in Politis on August 8, 2009 by Makarios Drousiotis, the following discussion took place:

Makarios: I was telling Mr. Kissinger that the Soviets are trying to take advantage of the situation and that their interest in the Cyprus problem is not genuine. Yesterday, they called a meeting of the Security Council and we were very disappointed when it turned out to be a waste of time. But, as I said, to some extent the United States is giving way to the Soviets.

Kissinger: We have to pay attention to three parties (Cyprus, Greece, Turkey) and, therefore, our policy is more complex than for someone who supports only one of the parties.

With this statement Kissinger cynically states the obvious. That the USA had a dispute to resolve within the Western Alliance and needed to keep balances, unlike the Soviets who simply wanted to dismantle the south-eastern wing of NATO to have easy access to the warm waters of the Eastern Mediterranean. Through Turkey’s invasion, which they never condemned, Greece left NATO and Cyprus was partitioned, leading 150,000 Greek Cypriots into refugeehood.

In Moscow

How was the Cyprus problem to be solved afterwards? Most certainly huge compromises had to be made, with the Americans showing no inclination to completely reverse the situation, as Makarios had requested. The only one who understood the complexity of the problem, showing himself ready to shoulder the responsibilities of the G/C side was Glafcos Clerides. He was “eaten alive” by populists such as Spyros Kyprianou and Tassos Papadopoulos, while AKEL consistently shouted “Makarios in Moscow” out of touch with reality.

Unfortunately for our country, AKEL remains consistently out of touch even today.

Why not?

Cyprus has had NATO troops consistently on its territory since 1960, but could not, as a country, play a role within NATO. What could that role have been? It could have been similar to the small role we have today in the EU. In any case, it is rather certain that we would not have reached the disaster of 1974 so easily, since there would de facto have been no need for guarantor powers. Some people today with nihilistic tendencies ask what Greece gained from joining NATO. Perhaps half of the Aegean Sea, which Turkey claims?

This is the basic argument, under different circumstances of course, of those who today want a solution to the Cyprus problem by Cyprus joining NATO. The solution to the Cyprus problem will come within the EU, so it will operate in full compliance with the acquis communautaire. NATO membership will free us from the obsolete guarantees of 1960 with whatever unilateral rights the guarantor powers claim. In such a case Cyprus would become a normal country, just as Turkey would become a normal country if it became a member of the EU, with many possibilities to get rid of the last remnant of colonialism which is the British Bases.

The Akrotiri Base could be an ideal NATO base, so that hundreds of millions would not be needed to upgrade the air base in Paphos. A NATO base would save us from dozens of other bases and camps that the Turks have in northern Cyprus, it would save us from dozens of National Guard, Greek, British and American installations in southern Cyprus. Today Cyprus, to recall the lyrics of Alkaios, is a vast camp, an endless “cheap firing range, where also foreign soldiers are practising cursing natives” [Editor’s note: reference to a song by Alkis Alkaios, titled ‘Erotiko (Me mia piroga)’, in Greek: Ερωτικό (με μια πιρόγα)].

A necessary evil

A few years ago, French President Emmanuel Macron, expressing the difference of opinion between Europeanists and Atlanticists, called NATO a brain-dead organisation. Putin’s invasion of Ukraine brought back the fear of the Soviets in the former eastern countries of the Warsaw Pact and upgraded NATO’s role even at the expense of the European Union. The volatility in the Middle East also reinforced the importance of NATO as a force for deterrence and stability.

NATO, with the EU lacking its own security pillar, is in short a necessity for Cyprus as well, since in the short and medium term it could free us from current asymmetric threats in the region, but above all from guarantors of another obsolete era. A security necessity for our country or even a necessary evil, if some friends of the Left prefer to call it that.

This article was originally published on 1.12.24.

Source: WHEN MAKARIOS ALSO REALISED