|
20 March 2003
TURKEY’S EXISTENCE IN CYPRUS IS
BASED ON INTERNATIONAL LAW
Turkey’s military existence in Cyprus is based on international
law.
Therefore, the reasons which made Turkey intervene in Cyprus in 1974
have to be thoroughly analysed with respect to international law. In order
to fully comprehend this fact, it is necessary to briefly recall the
chronology of incidents up to Turkey’s Peace Operation.
The Cyprus Republic which was co-founded by the Turkish Cypriots and
the Greek Cypriots based on their political equality collapsed in 1963 as a
result of the armed attacks by the Greek Cypriots and the forceful expulsion
of the Turkish Cypriots from the State machinery. The brutal attacks and the
embargoes imposed on the Turkish Cypriot people increasingly continued
between the years 1963-1974 with the common desire of the Greek-Greek
Cypriot duo of uniting the island with Greece, in other words for attaining
‘ENOSIS’. The Turkish Cypriots were squeezed into 3% cantonal areas of
the territorial land of Cyprus and had to fight against all kinds of inhuman
treatment and embargoes. The clash between the wish for “immediate
ENOSIS” by the Junta Regime in Athens and the wish of Makarios for
attaining “ENOSIS gradually” ended up with the coup d’etat on 15 July
1974 by the Junta in Athens together with the EOKA-B (Greek Cypriot
terrorist organisation) in Cyprus. Due to her responsibilities owed to the
Turkish Cypriot compatriots who were starving under the severe ethnic
cleansing campaign imposed on them, Turkey used her inherent right to
intervene as a Guarantor power in order to restore peace and order in the
island through finalising the clashes, blood-shed and the agony experienced
for eleven years.
Turkey intervened through the rights vested to her by the Treaty of
Guarantee which was initialled in London in 1959 and became internationally
binding with the proclamation of the Cyprus Republic in 1960.
Article 2 of the Treaty of Guarantee which made Turkey, Greece and
Great Britain, the Guarantor Powers is as follows:
“Greece,
the United Kingdom and Turkey, taking note of the undertakings by the
Republic of Cyprus embodied in Article I, recognise and guaranty the
independence, territorial integrity and security of the Republic of Cyprus,
and also the provisions of the basic articles of its Constitution.”
Thus, with the above article the countries which were granted as
Guarantor powers of Cyprus were vested the right with Article 4 of the
Treaty of Guarantee to intervene jointly or unilaterally in case of
instability. Article 4 (last paragraph) is as follows:
“...
In so far as common or concrete action may prove impossible, each of the
three guaranteeing powers reserves the right to take action with the sole
aim of re-establishing the state of affairs established by the present
Treaty”.
Turkey observed the adverse development of incidents between
1963-1974 with patience however, the coup d’etat carried out by the Junta
Regime in Greece together with their Greek Cypriot colleagues with the aim
of achieving ENOSIS was the last step to exceed patience and trigger
Turkey’s intervention. Turkey requested to take joint action with Great
Britain however, Great Britain preferred to stay indifferent to the matter.
Turkey, finally used its rights vested to her by international agreements
and intervened to save the lives of the Turkish Cypriot people, to end the
brutal attacks against them and to prevent the annexation of the island with
Greece. As a result of Turkey’s Peace Operation on 20 July 1974, peace and
stability was brought to the island.
International institutions on several occasions have confirmed the
legality of the Peace Operation. The United Nations, passed many resolutions
with respect to the Peace Operation however, never uttered it as an
“invasion”. The Council of Europe passed a resolution nine days after
the intervention, on 29 July 1974 reiterating that Turkey had to intervene
in accordance with the 1960 Treaty of Guarantee, and condemned the coup
undertaken by the Junta. Paragraph 3 of the Resolution 573 of the Council of
Europe dated 29 July 1974 is as follows:
“Regretting the failure of the attempt to reach a
diplomatic settlement which led the Turkish Government to exercise its right
of intervention in accordance with Article 4 of the Guarantee Treaty of
1960;”
The Greek High Court of Appeal took a similar decision on 21 March,
1979 (No. 2658/79) which stipulated that,
“The
Turkish intervention in Cyprus is legal, the real responsibilities
are the Greek Officers”.
Currently, some EU representatives, with the aggravation arising out
of the failure to accede and have authority throughout the island are
overlooking the realities behind Turkey’s rightful and legal intervention
and, therefore creating a platform where the principle of supremacy of law
and respect thereto is contested.
Many legal and constitutional experts verify the realities in Cyprus.
The internationally well known Legal Expert, who is also an Instructor in
the London University Prof. Maurice H. Mendelson Q.C., in his documented
legal opinion entitled “Cyprus Entry Into The European Union Would be
Illegal” dated 12 September 2001, pointed out that the application for
full membership by the Greek Cypriot administration is illegal. Prof.
Mendelson, also clarified that the 1960 Treaty of Guarantee is valid,
eliminating the allegations that Turkey’s intervention in Cyprus is
an“invasion”.
Prof. Mendelson, noted in his legal opinion that unless one of the
parties signatory to an agreement, submit a written official notice, the
validity of that agreement can not be questioned also adding that, the Greek
Cypriot administration which, from time to time, criticizes the Treaty of
Guarantee, has never undertaken any kind of legal action or has never
commenced any official procedure for its elimination. Prof. Maurice
Mendelson, whilst evaluating the validity of the Treaty of Guarantee, stated
that, during the “Cyprus vs. Turkey” case in the European Human Rights
Commission in 1975, the Greek Cypriot administration expressed that they
recognise the validity of the Treaty. Mendelson continued his examples with
the declaration of the Turkish Cypriot Assembly during the establishment of
the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) on 15 November, 1983, which
stated that “the TRNC will be adhered to the 1960 Foundation Agreement and
the Treaties of Guarantee and Alliance.”
In paragraphs 87-88 of his legal opinion Prof. Mendelson considered
the stances by the Guarantor Powers as follows:
Paragraph 87:
“In
any event, the three Guarantor States themselves do not appear to regard the
London Agreements as invalid. Turkey certainly does not, and indeed relied
on the Treaty of Guarantee to justify its 1974 intervention. So far as
Greece is concerned, although it maintains that the Constitution became
unworkable, it has not, I am advised and so far as I know, taken the
position that London Agreements
are invalid or not otherwise in force.
Paragraph 88:
“The
United Kingdom apparently does not question the validity of the treaties
either... In 1987 Baroness Young, Minister of State at the Foreign and
Commonwealth Office, confirmed to the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House
of Commons that ‘We believe that the 1960 Treaty of Guarantee still
applies in which we are guarantor and continue to play that role...’ Prof.
Mendelson underlined the fact that, with respect to these treaties Great
Britain is holding the British Sovereign Base Areas in Cyprus. Prof. Mendelson also gave examples from the UN Security
Council Resolutions on Cyprus which based its arguments on the 1960 London
Agreements.”
It is noteworthy to state that a treaty becomes invalid only in case,
the parties of that international agreement decide co-jointly for the
termination of that treaty or a new treaty is signed to replace the former.
Therefore, the Treaty of Guarantee is still valid as are the rest of the
other international agreements which established the 1960 Republic.
Recent developments once again made the validity of the Treaties on
Cyprus unquestionable. The Treaty of Guarantee appeared in the Cyprus Plan
prepared by the UN Secretary General Kofi Annan in 2002, which had foreseen
to create a new partnership. The Plan envisaged the continuance of the
Treaty of Guarantee however, with some modifications which seek to dilute
Turkey’s rights as a Guarantor Power (Annan Plan Article 1(3) The New State of Affairs). Today, the Greek Cypriot administration has formerly
stated imputations regarding the Treaty, declared that it is “opening the
Greek Cypriot air space and airports for military use against Iraq by Great
Britain with respect to the 1959-60 Treaty of Guarantee and Alliance”.
In the light of the above facts, the adverse attitude by the European
Union against Turkey and the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus is unjust
and fundamentally inaccurate since the Treaties are valid and supported by
international conformation.
Prepared by Fatma
Demirel
|
Articles and Comments 