Modern Greek Society and Politics
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
STUDIES ON MODERN GREEK SOCIETY AND POLITICS by George A. Kourvetaris EAST EUROPEAN MONOGRAPHS, BOULDER DISTRIBUTED BY COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS, NEW YORK 1999 344 Studies on Modern Greek rlr:rk and Turkish Interer Russian expansion. under British rule, the Greek cypriot nationalist id fumalist Revolution and r eye_rsed and was spearheaded by the Greek orthodoi church. Enosis t fu 1920s. There was an ar of the island with Greece was the major objective in the fSm, *A* mm:onalism. It was, after y1r uy ernr (the progressive of1,".y,'^::L:r-t1f Working people) ln: ".h.n"_neej rmueilg high among those for"**n the political leadeiship of Cyprus. fn ,nJrrrli. i in the pursuit of Makarios, the Greek orthodox Archbishop the *i nrrt"pr.riffi;# il; traces the historical of cyprus, appealed for support for self-determination r -a i"orp""or# st and nationalist Britain' Greece took the issue of cypriot self-determination to ui.6r a the communities Assembly in 1954 (Xydis, 1974). T]ne armed struggle for enosis was wa :ical importance. The r EOKA' the Nationar organization of cypriot Fighters. In response to the r.:jor issue of ethnic dir movement, the Turkish cypriots, instigated by the British, ,,*"0 ,n no movement eading role in the Enosi known as talcsim (partition). The tal<sim *ourrn"nt Jo On a different level partitioning of the island between oj the two motherlands, Greece *ti-** polarization 1960 Zurich in Cypru and London_accords which gave cyprus its independen". oil both the nal framework i enosis and tarcsim movements. In retrospect, Turkey and te rr r"nply, the Cyprus confl in de facto parritioning or tne isianO .o,i,ru.y Zurich9.{l:t:o^:1".:rdrg io o. ::. It is as much a pr and London accords. The Turliish inuurion-oi-;;; 'ention, * as it is a prol accomplished the partitioning of Cyprus.l aggravated by the forn :*ms of ethnicity and TIIE ROOTS OF ETIIMC COMLICT AND POLARIZATION etl rons stressed the prim ional attachment' ol The roots of conflict in Cyprus have been traced by a number of w iehood" or historical the i'edentist ideology of nationalism (Kitromilides, igTg; rurrnJo r, stressed theories r Nationalism in cyprus can be traced back to the nation"tiri ,oou.r", , (1982) defined "ethni Greek Revolution on ,,Great mainrand Greece in 1g21 and to the ldea": the c symbolism including 1840s onward. The ideology of nationalism was ingrained in the riteria of ethnic member of Enosis' Kitromilides (1979) berieves that despite the British cor lead to ethnic m changes and a liberal political culture, the Greek =ctors fo"A Cyprioi- c ilequality, nationalisn developed an extremely intolerant and antiliberal attitude to*-d th. d system theory the union of explain {avore{ cyprus with Greece. Kitromilides (rg7g)*gu.r,n* the period ical units to orgi of irredentist narionalism spearheaded by the Greei oirr"a* along ionalism. This mean with a segment of commercial and professional bourgeoisi", ,h. ; reignty, and cultural plur a,non-liberat t"-.p.1 and intolerance whichivere ingni"*d irredentistilgl-: *ly:g 6 ties. Subnational ethni, ideology of enosis (in Markides quoted by Kitromilid;1r"" ities from the state by According to Kirromilides (1979), ttre turlisn Cypriot developed as a by-product of rhree interlocking "r"_ pr"*u."r, #|#'r*s The Cyprus conflictplu the EoKA enosis movement, and mainland Turkish influence. Thc le of majority rule co cypriot nationalist movement of enosis gave way to the Turkish ( rc minority group. nationalist Each r counter-movement. The latter t*ua-ant can be traced bart ples and as a result no Srudies on Modern Gmert ir:ek and Turkish Interethnic Conflict 345 : Greek Cypriot nalional,rs 6raalist Revolution and the Asia Minor debacle between Greece and rurkey in :k Elunru tr i920s. There Onhodox Church. was an anti-Greek strain and resentment in the Turkish cypriot t'!!d naronalism. objective in the 1930s It was, after alr, an extension of mainrand rurkey's nutionais., bl',AKEL (the Proerqffiffi high among rhose led 5o-c who had fought the Greek armies that lanJed in Asia rship of Cyprus. In the c@ lfid-ror in the pursuit of rhe "Great Idea" (Kitromilides, 1979: 27). s;;;. (r9g4) l and first Fresident of frc ,0rsil traces the historical conflict between the Greek and rurkish cypriots to scermilation and indepenrdcnmr m-:dentist and nationalist ideologies of both mother countries *t i"r, nuu. etrf{etermination to the Ll$ piarized the communities into two distinct interest groups on every issue of ed struggle for enosis q"an milrinol:i:rical importance.i'-n^*^-^^ TheTL^ religious-^r:-:- factor has not adequately been ex"amined as ot Fighters. In response to fu rajor issue of ethnic division and polarization. However, ,t" ,t u."t ptayeo ed b1' the British, startod ffi iading role in the Enosis movement. The taksim moYemenl on a different level of analysis, one can trace the roots of ethnic conflicr notherlands, Greece and TmcbuP " polarization in Cyprus using two interdependent models, an C1prus its independenoe ercommunal framework ''e and the other an internationar relations moder."r" "f"rg To put retrospect, Turkey and fuc i:mply, the cyprus conflict has both an "internal" and "external,, dimension g of the island contrary m fu it' It is as much a problem of externar foreign powers, innuence ano rish invasion of Cypru.s n wention, as it is a problem of interethnic political iiscord. The latter has n aggravated by the former. The intercommunal framework explains conflict :erms of ethnicity and ethnic mobilization theories. Earlier .tuii", on Ltrrnic A}iD POLARIZATIOI{ e,uions stressed the primordial meaning of ethnicity, ttre 'we-reeting" ano rmtional attachment" of one group of people who share ',a sense of leetr traced by a number of rlehood" historical or identification with one another. Later studies, itnomilides, 1979; Markichn. 'eyer, stressed theories of ethnic mobilization. olzak (1gg3: :ss_:zo) anc r to the nationalist moYgrr"Fta el (1982) defined "ethnic mobilization as a collective action based on some "Great tdcn@ ic symbolism [82 1 and to the including skin color, language, [and] te*itorial identification rlism was ingrained in the riteria of ethnic membership." ,,a Rccoroinglo ih" ,"*" authors, number factors rar despite the British lead to ethnic mobilization including urbanization, modernization, Cypriot ic inequality, nationarism, he Greek local rabor market, and-economic competitive models.,, rrld system liberal attirude toward the theory explains ethnic mobilization in terms of world pressure for litromilides (1979) argues tur phical units to organize themserves as states. Nationalism begets eaded by the Greek Orthodot ionalism. This means that principles of self_determination, p;;;i", rfessional bourgeoisie, the ereignty, and cultural pluralism link nationalist ideology to subnationai ethnic which were ingraimd :tities. subnational rlerance ethnic identity is intended to create the exit of ethnic quoted l9f9: rities from ; by Kitromilides, the state by means of a secession movement from the unitary the Turkish Cypriot king pressures: British The cyprus conflict places two democratic principles in opposition when the land Turkish influence. The ;1nle. or majority rule competes against tire priniiple of uutono*y ro, tte c minority group. gave way to the Turkish Each of the two ethnic groups adheres to tt.r.ipporing movement can be traced bmi iples and as a result no sorution is in sight and a state or nostitiiy ano 346 Studies on Modern Greek freek and Turkish Interethnic Co perpetual conflict continues in Cyprus. The Greek Cypriots, as a r r: Grcek acknowledge the rights of the Turkish cypriot mintrity *itrri" , Cypriots. During the lfr democratic"state, n:uggle and enosis but the Turkish cypriots do not accept the minority with Greece. ! stafus. { rosis. Both of the major reasons of invasion and de partition Archbishop Makaric facto and colonization m ,*:der northern part of Cyprus precisely of EOKA who led is the long range objective of Turkey to the figll the demographic balance of Cyprus. has been :he British and those _It suggested (Kitromilides and couroumbis, Lgj5) Creek C-in modernization m-nosphere of mistrust. fosters ethnic conflict and, coupled with ethnic mobilizatim ethnic poriticization, The intercommunal it disrupts ethnicaily diverse societies. clashes il I psychological In a lqoience was directed experimental study, Lumsd"n itqZ:) examines tn. against the B Cyp*, the as a "prisoner's dilemma game" in which "war is self_sacrffice of not seen ;*;il-;. Srirish$ly:u:., Ci by- either side, and peace pareto-optimal ", in the 1950s was absenr offers a solution. " a pareio in I solution mejority of the requires giving up a more nationalistic conservative ,rr"r"-gjt Greek Cypriots *. cooperative strategy. -ri'fakarios was convince In order to understand the cyprus conflict, we m'sr d tiat enosi at both the intercommunal prns.sibility. The 1960 rerations between ttre creit ano rurnsn Cypriom constirution o the nrh enosls external or internarional factors that influence the intemal, of Cyprus with Grw intereihiric s rmrospect, relations between Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots it was Turkey that benefit i" C;;;. r'Jependence from England. Wirh TIM INTERCOMMI.INAL rr lded by force AND IIYTERETHMC DIMENSION into a Greek C11 C..priots,- with the help of Turkish c "coexistence" nonhgrn pan under ottoman millet system referred to the relatir of cypn ;rcvince.:.T:: ": Turkey between the Greek and rurkish cypriots, uut the christian cr*t, *rr. iras &angeA rhe'; (a subservient status). t:?rus. Then, coexistence (1g7g-r955) under British coloniai led to a Greek Cypriot movement lry 1960 power_sharing for independence (Ioannid.r, iq99_ *.,, . constiru communication). How did today's ethnic Cypriot communiry conflict and porarizationcome ab t--.pnot5.3,:9*.f and r of Greek cypriot scholars, including tcitromitioes minority.