These two lovley people were the real Cypriots who gave their lives for their people. May they rest in peace, for those who wanted them dead as well as those who killed them, may they burn in hell.
The four TMT men who were involved, had an accident not to far from the location in early 70s, when a JCB went to help pull them out of their vehicle, it slipped and crashed them to death. A fifth deaf and dumb person in the vehicle came out unscratched.
Long live all Cypriots.
Dervish Ali Kavazoglu and Costas Mishaulis
April 11, 2011 by Fred
Perhaps on this occasion I could post here a translation I made from Turkish into English of a 1964 article by Derviş A. Kavazoğlu that I first posted on another site a few years ago. The article was published in the Bulgarian Communist Party’s Turkish-language newspaper “Yeni Işık” on 20 October 1964 and I found it in Ahmet An’s book “TMT’NİN KURBANLARI” (TMT’S VICTIMS). I am just the translator, so please do not attack me if you disagree with his ideas. I am just happy to post this in memory of the anniversary of his demise.
Incidentally, the poster you have displayed above is hanging from many pillars beside the streets of the Limassol suburbs of Nesa Geitonia and Agios Athanasios today.
The translation of the article, entitled “STOP, MR JOURNALIST”, follows:
——————————————————————-
What a gem of truth was spoken about us by the Bulgarian Turk, 67-year-old grandfather Kadir Hüseyin.
From what I have heard, a group of five journalists from Turkey recently came to Bulgaria.
One particular gentleman from among this group of journalists apparently collared the 67-year-old Bulgarian Turkish grandfather Kadir Hüseyin and would not be satisfied until he had imposed his views on the old man:
– “Don’t you know, dad,” said the journalist, “The Greek Cypriot gavurs are slaughtering our Turkish brothers in Cyprus for no reason.” Grandfather Kadir Hüseyin had clearly seen and heard plenty of things like this in his 67 years and was ready with the reply:
-“For heaven’s sake, my good Sir, somebody must be putting them up to it [herhalde onları kestirenler var]”. The journalist, not expecting such a reply, lost his temper and reprimanded him with the words:
-“You seem to have lost your Turkishness, old man.”
Hold on, journalist, don’t be in such a hurry. Grandfather Kadir Hüseyin has not lost his Turkishness, or anything like that, he just has no time for charlatanism and demagogy. According to you, the grandfather’s entire fault is that he is this way inclined.
Anyhow, leave Bulgarian grandfather Kadir be and come and talk to me, a Turkish Cypriot; listen to me Mr journalist. Bulgarian Turks, lend an ear, too. Grandfather Kadir, you lend an ear as well.
Let me start by saying that thirty thousand of the nearly one hundred and ten thousand Turkish Cypriots have been driven into a life devoid of civilisation and humanity, living in cinemas and like nomads in tents on the open plain, away from hearth and home, far from the soil which they had tended with the sweat of their own brow and yearning for the places where they were born and grew up! But why?
For ten months the vast majority of the Turkish Cypriot community has been condemned to a life of unemployment, hunger, absence of medicine and wretchedness! But why?
According to Rauf Denktash’s group, having taken charge of the Turkish Cypriot community by coercion, armed force and fascist methods and with the support of the imperialists and, at the time, of the reactionaries grouped around Menderes, the blame for the Turkish Cypriot community’s current woes lies with them, fairly and squarely with the Greek Cypriots. However, I will attempt to demonstrate with evidence that this claim is nothing more than baseless demagogy and that the blame and guilt for the Turkish Cypriot’s current woeful situation rests in the final analysis with the imperialists and the fascist Denktash group that is their tool.
I shall examine Emin Dirvana’s article as the first piece of evidence. Emin Dirvana, who was appointed as ambassador to Cyprus by the National Unity Committee government which took charge in Turkey following the 27 May action and who gained the love and respect of the Turkish Cypriot community – with the exception of Denktash’s fascist group – during the two years in which he served as ambassador, wrote the following in a long article which was published in the Milliyet newspaper in may 1964:
“…For the time in which I was in Cyprus in the capacity of ambassador not a single Turkish Cypriot’s home was destroyed and burnt. Not a single Turk was shot at by Greek Cypriots; nobody at all rejected Turkish rights in Cyprus…”
Mr Emin Dirvana, having stated these facts, wrote the following, exposing the true face of Rauf Denktash, the head of the fascist group:
“Denktash needs to comprehend the responsibility that he has, as head of the Turkish Cypriot Community Assembly, to the Turkish Cypriots and to the Turkish government.” “I attempted in vain for months to caution Denktash to concentrate his efforts on matters concerning the Turkish community’s development. But Denktash preferred to quarrel with the Greek Cypriots, on several occasions without cause, over and above considering the Turkish community’s development.”
Did you hear, Mr journalist, who was the cause of quarrels and fights between the Greeks and Turks? Or, in your estimation, has Mr Emin Dirvana also lost his Turkishness? No, mate. I don’t think you’d go that far!
Now, let’s move on and hear from Denktash himself who was responsible for driving 30 thousand Turkish Cypriots from their homes and turning them into nomads. Denktash said precisely the following in an interview broadcast on the evening of 22 March 1964 on a programme entitled “Window on the World”:
“We wish to establish a federal administration in Cyprus. In order to achieve this, it is necessary to move a portion of the Turks from one place to another place and to concentrate our people in certain parts of the island.”
Are you listening Mr journalist? You who are determined to set out on a mission to stir up the Bulgarian Turks with the demagogy that “The Greek Cypriot gavurs are slaughtering our Turkish brothers in Cyprus for no reason.” Denktash in that interview himself admits that 30 thousand Turks were made homeless, not to escape slaughter at the hands of Greek Cypriots, but were forcibly uprooted from their homes by himself and like-minded people.
Denktash and those who think like him have lied to the Turkish Cypriots in order to satisfy their own racist political ambitions and to benefit their masters, the imperialists, and have uprooted 30 thousand of our brothers from their homes and villages by exploiting the Turkish Cypriot peoples’ decent national sentiments with demagogy about “mass murder” and driven the Turkish Cypriot community into its present woeful state!
Denktash and those who think like him have deceived a section of our population with talk of a “national struggle” and whipped them up into a frenzy; they have caused the deaths of hundreds of Turks and as many Greeks and caused them to kill one another.
A brief examination of the history of Cyprus over the past ten years easily reveals that the thing that Denktash calls the “national struggle” amounts to nothing more than serving the British and American imperialists.
Here I will try to give a few examples from this history.
The year was 1954. In the British parliament Mr Henry Hopkinson states that “The status quo on Cyprus will never change”, i.e. British imperialism will never grant Cyprus freedom and independence. Britain in the same year argued at a General Council meeting of the United Nations organisation that “the Cyprus problem is a domestic affair.”
In the same year, the “thesis” with the name “the Turkish thesis” that was defended by the imprudent Turkish leaders in Cyprus and the Menderes administration was absolutely identical to the British thesis. Such that at the General Council meeting of the United Nations a representative of the Democratic Party government defended, in common with the British representative, the thesis that “the Cyprus problem is Great Britain’s domestic affair, thus the United Nations has no right to interfere in member state’s domestic affairs.”
The year was 1955. September. Britain changes its policy and at the Tripartite London Conference offers Cyprus limited home rule. Turkey’s Foreign Minister, Fatin Rüştü Zorlu, who was participating at the same conference and at the time was representing the Deocratic Party government, announces that the limited home rule offered by Britian was accepted by the Turks and in passing mentions “equal representational rights”.
The year was 1956. December. The Greek Cypriot community having rejected the British offer of limited home rule, the British imperialists this time propose the Radcliffe constitution. On 20 December 1956 the Turkish prime-minister at the time Adnan Menderes announces that “the Radcliffe constitution is a reasonable basis for discussion.” The imprudent Turkish leaders in Cyprus also state that they accept the Radcliffe constitution. However, as is known, the Radcliffe constitution is not based on the “equal representational rights” to which Zorlu had referred in 1955. Thus, the so-called “Turkish thesis” kept step with British policy in line with the wishes of the imperialists.
Subsequently, the Greek Cypriot community having rejected the Radcliffe constitution that did not grant Cyprus full independence, the notion of “partitioning Cyprus” began to be floated around in the British parliament, purely with the aim of instilling fear and serving their own imperialist interests.
The Menderes administration and those who had been imposed by force on the Turkish Cypriot community as leaders accept the notion of “partitioning Cyprus” first floated by Britain, which wished to retain Cyprus as a springboard, a warship and an aircraft carrier so that it may protect its own imperialist interests in the Middle East, continue to steal petrol in this area and stifle the Arab people’s wars of national liberation, for these very purposes and present this divisive policy of the British imperialists as “Turkish policy”.
Henceforth, the Turkish Cypriot and Turkish people are whipped up with slogans of “partition or death” and the conditions are created for the first intercommunal conflict in Cyprus.
Subsequently the British imperialists come up with a new imperialistic plan for Cyprus named the “Macmillan Plan”. The same people who had sent the Turkish Cypriot community to its death with the slogan “partition or death” now immediately consented to the Macmillan Plan. However, this plan was not based on “Partition” or anything like it.
When the Greek Cypriot community also fail to accept this invention of imperialism known as the “Macmillan Plan”, the so-called Turkish Cypriot leaders and Menderes administrators fall in behind the British in the quest for other imperialist inventions and the Zurich-London agreements appear on the scene.
The Zurich and London agreements, which served no other purpose than to drive a wedge and sow the seeds of enmity between the Greek and Turkish communities that had lived in a spirit of peace and mutual assistance in Cyprus for over four hundred years, whip up nationalist hysteria and create separatism were imposed on both communities and these agreements were not submitted to a referendum.
From three years of experience it became abundantly clear that these agreements along with the constitution and state based on these agreements were incapable of working normally.
Consequently, President Makarios proposed that the constitution be amended in order that the state may function normally and submitted a 13-point draft for discussion. This 13-point draft did not essentially infringe on the Turkish Cypriot community’s genuine and democratic rights. However, neither the so-called Turkish leaders in Cyprus or Turkey showed any inclination to discuss the draft. As a result of this the political atmosphere in Cyprus became electrified. Imperialism managed to exploit this electric atmosphere and on 23 December 1963 by means of its agents conflict began.
The conflict which has continued until today has claimed the lives of hundreds of Turkish and Greek Cypriots, destroyed families and turned women into widows and innocent children into orphans. For the sake of the interests of imperialism and its organs, Turkish Cypriots as a whole have been taken to the brink of disaster.
Had the parties sat down at a round table to negotiate the 13-point draft which President Makarios had submitted to make the constitution workable, the current disaster would not have hit the people of Cyprus and in particular the Turkish Cypriots.
How painful and instructive it is that those who refused to negotiate Makarios’ 13-point draft are now flirting with the 5-point Acheson plan of imperialist making whose first article begins with “Enosis”. They flirt in this manner because the Acheson Plan gives the Americans, British and Turkey, i.e. NATO, the right to establish a military base on Cyprus. We will not be in the least bit surprised if the Acheson Plan, whose first article begins with “Enosis”, i.e. the joining of Cyprus with Greece, will be presented to us – a phony moon and star having been placed on it – as a “Turkish thesis” or “Turkish plan”, just like we have seen above with the other imperialist plans, since it contains NATO bases.
“Mr journalist” who collared the 67-year-old Bulgarian grandfather Kadir, saying, “The Greek Cypriot gavurs are slaughtering our Turkish brothers in Cyprus for no reason,” are you unaware of all of these facts? Do you not see that Turkey is on course to become friendless like Franco’s Spain for acting as a lackey to imperialism in the Cyprus question? Have you never, as a journalist, compared Turkey at the time of Ataturk and Turkey’s current international situation? Have you never examined the way that Turkey, which under the leadership of Ataturk opened the banners of national salvation against imperialism for the first time in the Middle East, opposes peoples who are conducting wars of national liberation and the baleful consequences of this?
Mr journalist, if you really love your country and people, leave the Bulgarian Turkish grandfather alone and join the fight of Turkish patriots, progressives and true supporters of Ataturk who are struggling that Turkey may once more take its honourable place on the anti-imperialist front and to open the way to a happy future for the Turkish people. This is the only way you will serve the interests of the Turkish people and the Turkish Cypriots, in whom you purport to show so much interest.
I have not read all of it, but that vision of the refugees arriving in Lurucina will live with me for the rest of my life. The fear they had in their faces and the hopelessness that followed.
I will read all of it later. Thanks for this tim.
A good book on Dervis Ali Kavazoglu was written by his close friend Christos Vanezos. I seem to remember that Vanezos was trying to get it published in Turkish too.
I have to take up one small matter with this article, although I do agree with most of what is said. The role of EOKA is totally ignored. The Greek Cypriots pretend it did not exist, and yet in 1964, four men were picked up by police outside Piroi and the bones of these victims turned up in a well in Paphos. Packard himsellf testifed to a child being shot through the head with a dum dum bullet and an old man being riddled with bullets from Aysozomeno. EOKA had an equal role to push TCs into enclaves and keep them there. That was my experience in Lurucina. That was also the experience of all the refugees that moved into Lurucina from the surrounding villages. Even after 67 when there was relative calm these people did not have the confidence to go back to their homes and land. TMT had nothing to do with them not returning not after 67, that was their choice and fear was the main cause. My father has land in Potamya which he eventually started using again but only between 1970 and 74, and only from long distance. He never stayed there once.
Mikis, is this book available in english?
I have spoken to a great many Turkish Cypriots, and have yet to hear from anybody who moved into the enclaves during the 1963-1964 conflict that they did so under duress from the TMT. I thus tend to concur. Of course, Kavazoğlu had to toe the party line in writing this article.
No I am confused. I always thought that Akel was anti-Eoka as well as anti TMT. Certainly Eoka was anti-Akel. I have heard enough eoka men who said they hated akel as much as the Turks.
Of course a huge gulf separated AKEL from the nationalist right, and still does, but AKEL arguably made mistakes on the national question in the past. The following article by
Niyazi Kızılyürek, whose English translation is at:
http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:RAsFRsGVLcsJ:www.observercyprus.com/observer/NewsDetails.aspx%3Fid%3D2771+akel+policy+enosis&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk
touches on this point, and the way that Kavazoğlu found himself walking a tightrope to stay faithful in public to the party’s policy.
Dervis Ali Kavazoglu, AKEL and Enosis
18.04.2008
Niyazi Kizilyurek
The life of a Turkish Cypriot Communist
A book entitled ‘Dervis Ali Kavazoglu: the Road to Nicosia – Larnaca 11 April 1965’ written by a former member of AKEL Central Committee, Christakis Vanezos, has recently been published. On April 11, Demetris Christofias made a speech at a ceremony organised to commemorate the lives of Dervis Ali Kovazoglu and Kostas Misaulis, in which he delivered messages of friendship to Turkish Cypriots.
Vanezos’ book is an autobiography delivering some interesting events in Kavazoglu’s life from the writer’s perspective as he is the only person who is able write such a memoir in that style as he was Kavazoglu’s roommate and shared the last years of his life. Dervis Ali Kavazoglu was a union-based leftist intellectual who believed that Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots should be able to live in peace next to each other. As in the case of the first generation of Turkish Cypriot leftists he believed in unity and not in division and defended the brotherhood and the unity of the Turkish and Greek Cypriot working class.
Kavazoglu accepted Marxist ideology and became a communist. He made internationalism both his motto and the basis of his teaching that he followed, keeping his distance from nationalism and chauvinism as he influenced his friends for his cause. As a result of assaults on the Turkish Cypriots PEO union member workers, on May 1, 1958, he lost some of his close friends though some surviving friends moved to London. He refused to go abroad and moved to the Greek Cypriot side where he lived for the rest of his short life. While working as a union member at the PEO Dervis Ali Kavazoglu became a member of the AKEL Central Committee; probably the first and probably the last Turkish Cypriot to hold such a position in the highly influential AKEL party.
Republic of Cyprus and Kavazoglu
Following the establishment of the Republic of Cyprus in 1960 Kavazoglu grasped the idea of independence totally and wrote under a nick-name in ‘Cumhuriyet Newspaper’. He was in close cooperation with the paper’s barristers, Ayhan Hikmet and Muzaffer Gurkan, who were trying to give life to the Republic. Their assassinations in 1962 caused him great sorrow and Vanezos has related the devastation felt by Kavazoglu in the book. The sorrow was not just because of the loss of two friends. Following the death of his two comrades Kavazoglu found the need for a deeper solidarity and had to find other ways of fighting the cause. May be the ‘Luricina connection’, which lead to his own assassination, was a relationship formed as a result of the lack of organisation following the assassination of his barristers.
Kavazoglu-Luricina connection
Christakis Vanezos writes about a journey he made with Kavazoglu during January or February in 1965 when they left Nicosia and travelled towards Larnaca making a stop on the road soon after they passed Piroyi village where they than got in contact on the roadside with two Turkish villagers from Luricina (Akincilar) village. They wanted Kavazoglu’s help with some car registration. One is immediately struck with the idea as to whether a member of the AKEL Central Committee, whose life is under threat, would risk his life to help two Turkish Cypriots that are asking a favour for ‘car registration’. It would not be a wild guess to say that Kavazoglu’s thought was: “If you do not deal with the small problems of the people you cannot get them to support your cause.”
The day of April 11
Dervis Ali Kavazoglu had made a joyous start to the day of April 11. He shared a house with two families, the Conis family had left the house early in the morning and the Vanezos family was about to leave the house to visit relatives. Information, which is now available, states that Kavazoglu was to go to Larnaca with Kosatas Misaolis as they had already planned. It is not quite possible to know anything about the ‘Luricana connection’ with the current information. However, it can be guessed that he apparently wanted to find a solution to a Teacher Problem and planned to use his ‘Luricina connection’. Apparently the people he was in contact with promised to help him with the problem. On April 11, 1965, when he went to meet the two Luricina villagers on the road from Nicosia to Larnaca he thought he would return with a teacher. Instead he was the victim of an assassination at the meeting point.
AKEL’s Enosis Policy and the Kavazoglu Tragedy
Although Dervis Ali Kavazoglu fought with all his might for ‘the cause’ despite difficulties, he was deeply sorry for the events that took place in 1964. The reason was not just the bloodshed between the two communities but also that AKEL, the party that he was a proud member of, had decided to return to their Enosis policy, which drove him to take a stand of political solidarity. AKEL had indeed returned to their Enosis policy in 1964, leaving their 1960 “completion of Independence” policy. Kavazoglu had objected to division all his life and he even put his life at stake in order to defend his cause. Now, especially after the establishment of the independent Republic of Cyprus, it was unacceptable to him that the Party had once again gone back to Enosis. His disappointment is obvious in the lines written by Vanezos. In a speech about the fighting in Erenkoy/Mansura made by Hambis Michaelides, a member of the Central Committee, he said “The blood of the Greek Cypriots and their Greek brethren got mixed up in Mansura,” which caused Kavazoglu deep sorrow. When talking about this incident with Vanezos, Kavazoglu, with his head between his hands, could not help but ask: “Then why am I fighting this war?”
He held the leaders of the two communities responsible for the events of 1963-64 and he knew very well that it was difficult to live in peace on an island where blood had been shed. He also knew well that the Enosis policy of the Greek Cypriot Leadership was nothing more than supporting the idea of division. His expectations from AKEL were deep regarding this very issue. Tell the Greek Cypriot community the truth and drive them away from the Enosis policy! Otherwise he felt that the future of the Republic of Cyprus would be very dark.
Unfortunately AKEL’s attitude did not meet Kavazoglu’s expectations as the Party insisted on its own self-determination/Enosis decision and whilst doing so left Dervis Ali in a difficult situation. What Kavazoglu said to Vanezos makes clear the tragic situation that he had been dragged into: “Vanezos, I will carry on with this fight as I have been doing so up until this moment. (…) However AKEL’s Enosis policy is not helping me the least bit and puts me in a difficult situation. (…) How can I help build a Turkish-Greek Cypriot friendship as a member of AKEL? What can I say to the Turkish Cypriots that have cooperated with me about the AKEL Enosis policy, what will I say?” These lines clearly explain the tragic situation that Kavazoglu found himself trapped in.
AKEL Enosis self-criticism
Kavazoglu’s predictions were verified by political events in the days to follow when his party AKEL finally had to accept his prophecy regarding the issue, but, unfortunately their ‘apology’ came 25 years too late. AKEL made an announcement of self-criticism on January 27, 1990 – exactly 25 years after the Kavazoglu assassination – when it admitted that pursuing their Enosis policy during the years 1964-1967 was a “mistake”.
So, you see AKEL officially accepted Dervis Ali Kavazoglu’s words said in the beginning of the 60s twenty-five years later in 1990.
The two Lurucadis that met him, were not just any two Lurucadis, they were actualy known left wingers to Kavazoglu, which is why he trusted them. He wasn’t to know that they had joined the TMT and were perfect for setting up a trap for him.
According to information in Ahmet An’s book, quoted above, these two left wingers were caught disseminating left-wing leaflets in opposition to TMT/Denktash policy, and were offered a deal in which they would be spared execution for ‘treason’ if they cooperated in setting a trap for Kavazoğlu.
I am not so sure how true that is. Lurucina was a very tight community and murdering somebody there on political grounds would have been very difficult. Clan members would wreak havoc on TMT.
It is also known that another left winger was threatened with the same and despite the fact that he ignored them completely was not harmed in any way. The difference between those two left wingers and the third was that the third was a farmer and was independent economically where as the other two, one was a civil servant and the other earned a living depending on others which could have been influenced by TMT. My own view is that they did it because they had no other choice economically.
There was a situation after major from Turkey came in and was planning to kill one person followed by pretending to “revenge kill” a few more anti TMT men but the villagers got together and had him removed from his post. Despite the protestation of TMT. Lurucina was no easy cake for TMT. They were mainly protectors and that’s how they remained.
Accoring to An’s book, and of course I am only quoting second-hand for the sake of argument, these two left wingers did a deal in which they were spared execution then resettled in the UK with enough money to set up their own small businesses there. An’s source is the testimony of Numan Ali Levent, at the time the headmaster of the secondary school in Lurucina/Louroudjina. I accept that you were there at the time and I wasn’t.
I think that is a smoke screen. The people I am aware who did the deed, remained in Cyprus for a very long time. I think one has moved to US eventually but the other is still there. The problem is proof. There is no real proof, we can only speculate. Without prof or admission it will not stand in court. But in any case it should be Denktash who should be in the dock as he gave the order.
I may have got it wrong. That it was not the two left wingers that killed him, they were merely there for the trap, but I have a feeling it was them two. They had to prove to TMT that they have converted. In other words they would make their bones to use the mafia term.
Again only according to Ahmet An, the decision was taken by the ‘Bayraktar’.
Ultimately it is our uncle Dengtash that decided. Did Bayrakdar decide it without checking with Buyuk Baba. We also had a fellow called Kaleci they wanted killed and no body would do it, so it was done in Lefkosa.
No wonder that you hate the fascists of CF!
But the worst aspect of fascism occurred when the Police joined in becoming executioners on innocent civilians that the CF members still brush under the carpet, saying EOKA did not exist 60 onwards. Like hell it did not.
I don’t really hate them, I just wish to expose them for what they are. They are brainless sheep. Even if they have political degrees.
The old adage one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter, does not apply here. EOKA wanted to dissolve RoC and hand it over to Greece by any means possible. That is treason in my book.
It doesn’t really matter which side they were/are on, the mentality seems to be the same:
1- Create the false dichotomy that “you are either with us or against us”.
2- Anybody who falls on the wrong side of that dichotomy, i.e. is “against us”, is a “traitor”.
3- Traitors deserve to be beaten up or put up against a wall and shot.
That pretty well sums it up. G Bush said it as well. So much for the democracy and peace loving nation.
I have heard it said that EOKA killed more Greek Cypriots than Turkish Cypriots, and with the TMT it was the other way round. I wonder if this is true? It says a lot about the fascist mind. The ‘traitors’ within are deemed to be more worthy of killing than the ‘enemy’ without, it would seem.
Unfortunately they were so bloody minded that it does not matter who killed who, it matters that most of the killed on both sides we innocent workers. That is the real sad aspect. I would not mind if they only attacked and killed each other, but killing of innocent civilians at a whim was an absolute disgrace. Have you seen Arif Hoca’s video on those times, saying that they were all indisciplined and untrained. The real root of the problem. What saddens me is the CF fascists idolising these murderers. Some very educated amongst them too.
Makarios Droushiotis in his site has a list of GC’s murdered by EOKA, 212 altogether. It is a valid list, it gives the place of the date and place of the execution. In my village two family persons were murdered in 1958, one left a widow with 4 children and the other a widow with 5 children. During that time EOKA even killed a 12 year old girl in the village next door for having participated in a demonstration againts atrocities committed at PEO members in Famagusta.
The other side to that is when they did kill people from outside their community, they were all innocent civilians. Such a shameful history for that period. The real shame of course is the presence of people who idolise these people to this day.
I am glad Makarios Droushiotis has an English translation on his site.
Perhaps the translation is via Google so it is not so good but a fantastic website.
Tim, is there any other clues about the murderers of Kavazouglu in the book by An. I would be greatful for any other little clues that is mentioned.
Has anybody had the opportunity to see Derviş Zaim’s recent film ‘Gölgeler ve Suretler’ (Shadows and Images) – a good title since it is about the murder of a shadow play operator (Karagözcü in Turkish)? There was a lengthy piece about this on last night’s transmission of CYBC’s bilingual Biz/Emeis programme and it looked to me as though this film will have a big impact. It was shot in Karpasia with Greek and Turkish Cypriot actors and examines the intercommunal conflict that erupted in Cyprus in 1963. I was particularly struck by Zaim’s comment in the interview along the lines that there is no such thing as objectivity and one has to be suspicious of anyone who claims to be objective, but, as I understand it, the makers of this film have tried to step back from the accepted narratives of both communities and not tried to portray one communitiy alone as either the sole perpetrators or victims. The current version has Turkish subtitles when the actors speak in Greek, but not vice versa. I hope this will be rectified. I wonder what people who experienced these events make of it?
This will be another nail in the coffin of separatists. It’s a shame that the Turkish bits have not been subtitled for Greek Cypriot so perhaps it can at least be understood by people in the south.
A good director should be able to be objective, they just need a consultant from each community. I hope he told it how it was. I will be very interested to see it. Hopefully it will be available on DVD or video when I get there in the summer.
I see the title of this film translated into English as “Shadows and Faces”, which I find odd, because the Turkish word is “Suretler” and not “Suratler” (although I believe both words derive from the same Arabic root, as Di Menace may be able to confirm).
should have been:
“Suretler” and not “Suratlar”
Suratlar is definately faces. Suretler is “copy, duplicate, exemplar, transcript, counterpart, ditto, repetition ” is the response of the translation on internet. I though it may be a derivative of Sure (Prayer) of some sort.
Where is the old menace these days. It’s been such a long time since our last communication.
Just for the nerds, according to this source:
http://www.nisanyansozluk.com/?k=suret
The root of both ‘suret’ and ‘surat’ as used in modern Turkish, is the Arabic:
صورة
and it seems that there are no records of this solitting into two words before the 19th century.
The word ‘sura’ as used to mean a chapter of the Quran is written as follows in Arabic:
سورة
Arabic has two different ‘s’ sounds, and this ‘sura’ meaning ‘chapter’ is an entirely different word from the above ‘sura’ meaning ‘form’ or ‘picture’.
Also, the first vowel in the first word is long, while the first vowel in the second word is short.
When I think back I did hear the word suret but I though it was a north east Anatolian accent thing. I think De Menace has abandoned us. I was sure he would come u with the answer.
Never mind, Di Menace lives on in our spirits!
Any thoughts about yesterday’s parliamentary elections? I thought it was a good peformance by AKEL, all things considered.
I don’t see any change, unless Akel and Disy resolve their differences and govern together. If they rely on Diko, I am afraid, we are doomed as Frazer would say.
I was very excited when Akel won the presidence. I thought at last the voice of Cyprus only to be let down. Especialy when I read the news that Christofias had a meeting with EOKA men before taking power.
Perhaps Mikis Can give us better hope with his thoughts.
There was an interesting article (in Turkish) in the left-wing TC newspaper Yeni Düzen about the Turkish Cypriots now living in Larnaca. According to this article, there are now over 1000 TCs living in Laranca, which suprised me.
http://www.yeniduzen.com/detay.asp?a=35836
Why?
There was about 3500 living in the south anyway.
From February on – once the talks come to an end – you may find that all people who live in North and have land in the south may well choose to live in the south. Why not?
Why not, indeed. The number just susprised me, and the Yeni Düzen report is surprisingly upbeat. My own impression of contact with TCs living in Limassol – pity you didn’t get the chance to come and meet Ayhan – is that they are not too happy about things, and do not imagine that anybody else will move back from the north.
Dear Tim Drayton,
As fas as I understand from your posting, which I found through Google by chance, you have read some of my books and translated some parts.
Why don’t you write me directly, if I can be of some help in your studies.
twilight@kibrisonline.com
Best regards,
Ahmet An
Dear Ahmet,
It is good to hear from somebody who, as your published work shows, is very knowledgable about Cyprus’ recent history.
I have heard it said that Kavazoğlu, while publicly remaining loyal to the AKEL party line until the end, in private had great misgivings about certain policy changes within the party, in particular its support of Enosis, which was alienating Turkish Cypriots. I wonder how sincere you feel that the article published in a Bulgarian magazine that I translated above was; to what extent were these his real views, and to what extent was he simply toeing the party line?
Clearly the split that took place in the trade union movement – particularly the creation of separate Turkish Cypriot trade unions – and on the political left was a victory for the policy of divide and rule and thus played a role in the tragedy that unfolded in Cyprus. While the shift in AKEL’s policy on the national question was probably not the only, or even main, reason for this split, it must have been a contributory factor.
If you have the time to pass on your thoughts about these points, I would be interested to hear them.
Tim, Kavazoglu never stopped believing in Enosis. But his idea of Enosis was the old one from the war, where they would join with Greece and join the Communist block.
I am not so sure he ever gave that idea up.
It would be very interesting to hear Ahmets thoughts on this matter.
There is talk that an officer is being brought over from Turkey to take over as chief commander of the TRNC police.
http://www.yeniduzen.com/detay.asp?a=44275&z=19
Sad day. It can only mean two things. They fear the future as to where the strike is going or they are going to get ugly. Either way it seems to me it is going to be hard slog for the workers of Northern Cyprus.
The truth is that the world looks the other way as Turkey slowly but surely annexes at least a chunk of Cyprus. Some people seem to think that the ritualistic incantation of hollow UN resolutions can in some way ward this off. They fail to see that the real deals have been done behind closed doors.
It seems that a group of GC trade unions organised a demonstration in support of striking TC municipal workers and in protest against the violence used by the authorities against them:
http://www.yeniduzen.com/detay.asp?a=44365
Only solidarity among GCs and TCs can, in my view, save Cyprus, so this is a welcome development.
I do believe that is a first. Any idea how many people were involved?
I am afraid all I know about it is from that short report in Yeni Düzen.