Customer Reviews

The Cyprus Conspiracy: America, Espionage and the Turkish Invasion

5 star:		(10)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

I first would like to challenge the last reviewer to explain when Turkish Cypriots ever accounted for a 33% minority on Cyprus during those turbulent years. Statistics consistantly show the number to be around 18%. With that said, this is not a book which engages in finger pointing. Atrocities were undoubtledy commited by both parties. In fact, the authors on several occasions give us numbers of the Turkish Cypriots killed, wounded, or fleeing. I wonder just how much one reviewer took a hard look at this book when mentioning pictures seen in occupied Cyprus of Turkish Cypriot children dead in a bathtub, yet the picture is IN THE BOOK!!! Personal acounts and personal tragadies of the invasion and events leading up to it are not the main focus of this study. Rather it is the 'how' and 'why' of the unfolding events.

O'Malley and Craig do a good job of this I believe. I would have liked to see a more detailed analysis of how exactly the US pushed the junta in attempting a coup to remove Makarios. Did Kissinger know Turkey would invade and the cards would play themselves out, or did Kissinger have to work more with Turkey "under the table" to broker what seems to be a playing out of the 1964 alternate plan to partition Cyprus? Two other brief criticisms are 1) the sometimes general and arbitrary footnotes to "Interview with the authors." O'Malley and Craig interviewed several people so it can be confusing just what "interview" they are refering to, and 2) the sometimes frustrating footnotes to the House sub-committee papers and other government documents, which to no fault of the authors, isn't exaclty readily available at the local library for personal reference.

That said I think the book is an excellent study into the rather unfortunate methods the United States implements its foreign policy in order to protect military interests at all costs. Lets hope that in the future the Cypriots (both Greek and Turkish) can decide their own fate rather than Ankara, Athens, London, and especially Washington at their necks. A unified, peaceful Cyprus is attainable, especially in the EU. Let's not lower our hopes and aspirations in saying that partition is the only solution.

Whilst reading the other reviews to this book it just forced me to add my own.What I like to see is people writing books without worrying about whom they upset.Even though the book is brief compared to the actual history that should be included to create a full apprehension of the situation in Cyprus,it hits the most important issues and gives a good understanding of what is going on here.

What I don't like to see,is reviews from people who have visited the North of Cyprus for their holidays,purchased a book,and have become historians overnight without having a clue about anything

Thank you

Good insight into US foreign policy. This book is factual and very well written. You get a great understanding on how small counties have been used over the years by powerful nations like the US, Soviet Union, and various regional powers in the world.

Stemming from its strategic position; Cyprus became an obsession for the quasi-party's self serving interests at the behest of the Cypriots. Cyprus a divided stated emerged from relentless back room politics between the U.S, Britain, Turkey and Greece. Hidden away within its unassuming territory lies an overworked highly active agency mandated to keep track on advances in enemy nuclear missile technology; early warning of attacks and controlling the passage of water ways for the free flowing of oil for the free world. All this attained at a minor price of gross negligence of human rights.

Cyprus has suffered for its strategically important position in the eastern Mediterranean. Colonized by the Greeks in the second millennium BC, it was tossed from Persian, Roman, Byzantine, and finally to Ottoman empire. The Turks retained possession of the island until it was annexed by Great Britain in 1914. From the 1930s onward Greek Cypriots agitated vociferously--and after 1955 militarily--for independence from Britain and union with Greece. Reeling under the pressure for independence the British sought a way to accommodate and still retain control by dividing the two communities and giving them a constitution. In 1960, the Greek and Turkish Cypriots agreed on a constitution for an independent Cyprus, with the Greek Archbishop Makarios III as its first president and Kutchuk as its Vice President. This agreement came into being with the Treaty of Establishment, Treaty of Alliance and the 1960 constitution and Britain as the guarantor of unified Cyprus. This setup was fatally flawed, as it established a system of government envisioned by outside powers neglecting to address the deep rooted divisions within the Greeks and the Turk Cypriots. In late 1963, after Makarios made 13 constitutional changes that would abolish the Turkish power of veto over legislation on defense, security, foreign affairs, elections, municipalities and taxation lead the Turks withdrew from the government. A decade of internecine warfare and assassinations followed between the two communities that were mediated or, more precisely, "observed" by the United Nations.
Ultimately--and some would argue, inevitably--the two most interested powers were drawn toward direct intervention: first Greece, which attempted to unite the island under its own form of benign military dictatorship on July 15, 1974; and then Turkey, which responded far more effectively and invaded the place five days later. Cyprus constitutes one of the great unresolved conflicts of the late 20th century.

The Greek Cypriots feeling betrayed by the Western began to look towards the Soviets for help. With this realization and a long-standing plan to save its strategic assets on the island from what U.S. officials feared might be a left-wing takeover if the crisis in Cyprus were not resolved. Cyprus, became invaluable to Washington for monitoring both Soviet nuclear missile activity in Central Asia and potential military threats in the Middle East. Ongoing instability threatened these assets. By mounting an invasion, Turkey saved them. The Americans had judged that to let Greece and Turkey fight it out would be disastrous for the Western interests, would destroy the NATO's southern wing and leave the entire eastern Mediterranean vulnerable to Soviet take-over. According to McNally the Turks had threatened that if there was any military intervention against their invasion, they would leave NATO. Since the Americans badly needed an insurance policy against the Soviets; Kissinger put "no credible pressure" on Turkey "not to go ahead with an invasion." He then did "everything" he could "to help the Turks make up their mind that intervention was the only way they could get satisfaction." And having quietly encouraged the Turks to invade, while systematically "ignoring the advice of his own experts," he played what even the Turks called a "constructive and helpful role" by not protesting the invasion and the subsequent division of the island.

The Greeks have suspected that there was a conspiracy and insist that Turkey could not have acted alone. The Greek sentiment was described by Makarios after the Turkish attack: "The United States is the only country which could have exerted pressure on Turkey and prevented the invasion.". The charge itself is perhaps based on circumstantial events by observing that the United States tilted toward the more powerful and stabler Turkey over Greece for their interests; and that Kissinger not only knew about Turkish plans to invade Cyprus but may have tacitly approved it. Kissinger's main concern was to control the invasion and force Turkey to assume defensive postures in order not to flare up a direct confrontation Greece and Turkey two key NATO allies. United Kingdom being the guarantor of Cyprus unity considered placing their between Cyprus and Turkey to deter the Turks; but was vetoed by U.S. However U.K decided against such an action to prevent a confrontation with a NATO ally (Turkey) and create a rift with U.S.

In a report submitted by the MP's of British parliament it was stated that Britain had a legal right, a moral obligation and military capacity to intervene, but choose not to do so. Britain had considerable forces at hand, and could have intervened with or without Turkey, to reverse the coup and had little doubt that either alone or as part of the U.N force, Britain could have forestalled the first Turkish invasion. The chairman declared that Cyprus crises had been a true test of Britain's standing in the world, which should be measured not by its military might or economic wealth, but by its standard of justice, integrity and humanity, and by the way it protects the weak, On all these counts Britain had failed Cyprus for reasons which the Government refused to give.

On Reading the book, I of course still have many questions that are unanswered and probably will be until the powers that be decide that we (The Genereal Public) are mature enough to handle the truth.
In reality it will probably never come to pass that all the facts are revealed, but what is clear is that the people of Cyprus were used and deceived by unscrupulous individuals with a personal agenda and the Cypriots as a whole are still suffering the consequences to this day.

Well written, full of facts and light on 'opinions' - just the way history books should be written.

When I started reading this book I just couldn't put it down. Excellent reading, informative and well researched. The only critism I have is that I would have liked to have seen more about the role of Rauf Denktash and his TMT (Turkish Resistance Movement)organization and the fact that his design for the partition of Cyprus was the driving force in the conflict between the two communities. The TMT is only mentioned breifly in the book. Rauf Denktash and his TMT were the said "agitators" or instigators of the clashes between Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots. His murdering of both Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots in order to get the two parties fighting, and his inflamatory retoric were the main cause of the intercommunal violence of the late 1950's and 1963 - 1968. The book's reference to Turkish Cypriots being forcibly persuaded by thier leaders to move to Turkish enclaves is correct. The leaders the book is referring to is Rauf Denktash and his TMT cronies. He was recruited by Turkey to create a case for the partition of Cyprus.

Sorry,I have not read this book yet,I certainlly will. As someone serving in the Greek military the days of the invasion I would like to point the following. It was well known in Greece that when "Atila" starting rolling on the island many fleeing Greek Cypriots gave the keys of their houses for safe keeping to ***their Turkish Cypriot neighbors***. I think this speaks volumes. It was talked about in our army that the pupet of the US inspired regime in Athens Mr Sampson, who had led the coup against Makarios that meant to anex Cyprus to the dictatorship in Greece had gathered many Turkish Cypriots in a foot ball stadium with some very bad plans for them. We should not forget that the attack on the Turkish Cypriots was part of a general attack on the Cypriot republic. Readers may want to go back to the interview of Makario's in Oriana Falatsi's "Interview with History". Britain of course had been practising for a while there the old and tried "Divide and Rule". I saw with my own eyes right wing connected members of the Greek military cheering at the overthrough of the government of Makarios. It was their dream come true, of course some days later they saw that the Turkish generals had been ready for a very long time to take advantage of that unique oportunity, clearly for the generals in Ankara the well being of the Turkish Cypriots was not a major concern. NOTE: The reviews of the book on this site do bring all sorts of important points to the attention of the reader. This is the most informative collection of reviews I ever read at the Amazon site.

Incredible book, describing everything that happened in the backstage of CIA, USA, Britain and Turkey and Junda. No doupt Kissinger blueprinted the entire conspiracy and Turks took advantage of it.

I too feel compelled to write upon reading a prior review which said "The Turkish government used its right to get in and saved the lives of thousands of Turks out there. Why did they only took one third of the island? Because at that time the Turk population was the one third of the population of Cyprus. What do you expect?"
What do I expect? That land was my grandparent's village where they were born and raised. Explain to me why someone else is living illegally in my grandparent's house without ever compensating them for a penny of its worth. Regardless of that even, they hold that village dearly in their hearts as their home. It's sad that they are not welcome or allowed there because "the turkish government used it's right to get in" according to someone's view. Let's not all forget that there are individual human beings involved in this and their pain and suffering runs deep. Illegally occupying one's land and house does not seem like a "right" to me.