Just over a decade later, in , a right-wing coup sponsored by the military junta then in power in Greece, overthrew the government of Archbishop Makarios. In an alleged attempt to protect the minority Turkish Cypriot community, Turkey invoked its guarantor power and invaded the island from the north.
In the Turkish Cypriot leadership unilaterally declared independence. Peace talks have been ongoing for over four decades on the basis of a bizonal, bicommunal federation and although convergences have been made, major points of disagreement include territory and power sharing. The election of Turkish Cypriot leader Mustafa Akinci in sparked new hope for a solution after negotiations began with President Nicos Anastasiades who was elected in and is now on his second term, as both leaders had the common bond of hailing from Limassol.
Several confidence building measures have come into place since, including scrapping visas for crossing the border between the two sides and linking mobile telephony networks. Cyprus joined the European Union in , and adopted the euro as its currency in January , while the breakaway state continues to use the lira, though euros are often accepted with transactions.
All rights reserved. The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached, or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of CountryProfiler.
The plague wipes out over half of the population. Does the future of Cyprus lie in a new political integration or in an arms length relationship based on willing and active co-operation between two peoples, each secure in its own sovereign territory and each with its own customs, traditions and identity? On 15th August The Daily Telegraph wrote "Turkish Cypriots have constitutional right on their side and understandably fear a renewal of persecution if the Turkish army withdraws.
Almost nowhere in the world is there a lasting peace that is not based on people's rights to govern themselves. They do not however go back before 20th July Refusal to consider the preceding 15 years means that important legal and political issues wrongly determined in favour of the Greek Cypriots remain as a continuing source of tension between the former partners.
The most important of these issues is international acceptance of the Greek Cypriot regime as the government of all Cyprus and refusal to recognise the right of the Turkish Cypriots to establish their own structure. It is therefore necessary to look in some detail at the reasons why the present situation has arisen and why, in consequence, both sides and particularly the less numerous Turkish Cypriots need reliable safeguards for their future.
One of the most remarkable features of the Cyprus question is the extent to which the Greek Cypriots have been able to repudiate solemn international agreements and violate the human rights of the Turkish Cypriots on a massive scale and yet by a quite astonishing feat of public relations, have secured for themselves recognition as the government of all Cyprus and have persuaded the world that they, and not the Turkish Cypriots, are the victimized party.
The consequence of this is that they have been able to extract one sided resolutions from the United Nations and other international organisations, and have been able to secure court judgments based on the fact of recognition which have been immensely damaging to the Turkish Cypriots. The Turkish Cypriots have, for about forty years, been deprived of an official voice in the world and have been deprived of the financial resources to match the Greek Cypriots in the presentation of their case to the world community.
For more than forty years - ever since the overthrow of the Agreement - the Turkish Cypriots and their government have been faced with one of the hardest tasks in the whole range of international affairs - how to get the world to change its mind after it has got hold of the wrong end of the stick and clung to it year after year.
The alternatives to this partnership were: two separate states, a condominium, division of the island between Greece and Turkey, return of the Island to Turkey under the Lease, or continued British rule.
The negotiations in Zurich and London preceding independence were long and difficult, but it was eventually agreed by way of compromise between all five participants; Britain, Greece, Turkey, the Turkish Cypriots, and the Greek Cypriots; that the new state would be a bi-communal partnership Republic with a single international identity, but a unique Constitution which embodied an agreed political partnership between Greek and Turkish Cypriots, and which prohibited the political or economic union of Cyprus with any other state.
As a compromise solution to the conflicting aspirations of the two ethnic peoples, the Republic of Cyprus was established in The Zurich and London Agreements of paved the way to a new Cyprus Republic, which was a bi-national partnership State, based on the political equality of the two peoples as co-founder partners of the new Republic.
The sovereignty of Cyprus was limited by the guarantor rights given to three countries, namely Turkey, Greece and the UK. Therefore, the settlement was a "sui generis" one. At the conclusion of the negotiations, the then Greek Cypriot leader, Archbishop Makarios, said "Sending cordial good wishes to all the Greeks and Turks of Cyprus, I greet with joy the Agreement reached and proclaim with confidence that this day will be the beginning of a new period of progress and prosperity for our country".
On 6th March , President Eisenhower endorsed the agreement as "a victory for common sense" an "imaginative act of statesmanship" and "a splendid achievement. In the first Presidential elections in Cyprus Mr. John Clerides father of Glafcos Clerides stood against Makarios on a platform of opposition to the Agreements and lost by a majority of two to one of the Greek Cypriot electorate. The bi-communal structure was fundamental to the accords, on the basis of which the Republic of Cyprus achieved independence, and recognition as a sovereign state from the international community.
Accordingly, from its very inception the Republic of Cyprus was never a unitary state in which there is only one electorate with a majority and minority. The two communities were political equals and each existed as a political entity, just as both large and small states exist within the structure of the European Union. They did not however have the same constitutional rights because the agreements took into account the fact that there were more Greek Cypriots than Turkish Cypriots.
Knowing that they could not enforce the agreement themselves, the Turkish Cypriots would never have agreed to join the new Republic if the Greek Cypriots had not accepted a Treaty of Guarantee which gave Turkey a legal right to intervene, with troops if necessary.
Independence was formally granted on 16th August As stated above, the case of Cyprus is sui generis, for there is no other State in the world which came into being as a result of two politically equal peoples coming together by the exercise by each of its sovereign right of self-determination, to create a unique legal relationship, which was guaranteed by international treaty, to which each of them consented.
In , the two peoples brought about the bi-national state of Cyprus in line with the Zurich and London Agreements of They together, under agreed terms of cooperation and partnership, shared the legislative, executive, judicial and other functions. Matters which the two peoples had managed on a "Communal" basis over the centuries - like education, religion, family law, etc. In effect, a "functional federative system" had been established by the two co-founder peoples of the Republic.
On 28th July the Greek Cypriot President Makarios said "the agreements do not form the goal -they are the present and not the future. The Greek Cypriot people will continue their national cause and shape their future in accordance with their will. They were told that the statements were just rhetoric, or were for internal consumption within the Greek Cypriot community. However, the Turkish Cypriots were to discover very soon that when Greek Cypriot leaders make statements of that kind they should be taken seriously.
Similar statements are still being made by Greek Cypriot leaders even today, and Turkish Cypriots are still being urged not to take them seriously. The Constitution provided that separate municipalities be established for Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots. The Greek Cypriots refused to obey this mandatory provision and in order to encourage them to do so the Turkish Cypriots said they would not vote for the Government's taxation proposals. In February Cyprus Mail On 25th April the Court did rule against them and they did ignore it.
The President of the Court a German citizen resigned and the rule of law in Cyprus collapsed. Even Greece was embarrassed by this Greek Cypriot behaviour. On 19th April , Greek Foreign Minister Averoff had written to Makarios "It is not permissible for Greece in any circumstances to accept the creation of a precedent by which one of the contracting parties can unilaterally abrogate or ignore provisions that are irksome to it in international acts which this same party has undertaken to respect.
The aim was to reduce the Turkish Cypriot people to the status of a mere minority, wholly subject to the control of the Greek Cypriots, pending their ultimate destruction or expulsion from the island.
Insofar as the Constitution became unworkable, it was because the Greek Cypriot leadership refused to fulfil the obligations to which they had agreed. The doctrine of necessity in international law applies to supervening impossibility due to extraneous and unforseen causes. It does not apply to self-induced causes.
There is in particular no doctrine of necessity known to international law which could justify the slaughter of innocent men, women, and children. At Christmas the Greek Cypriot militia attacked Turkish Cypriots across the island, and many men, women, and children were killed. On 2nd January the Daily Telegraph wrote "The Greek Cypriot community should not assume that the British military presence can or should secure them against Turkish intervention if they persecute the Turkish Cypriots.
We must not be a shelter for double-crossers. A UN peace-keeping force was stationed in the Island in March , which was not able to improve the situation since political power was usurped by the Greek Cypriots.
The United Nations not only failed to condemn the usurpation of the legal order in Cyprus by force, but actually rewarded it by treating the by then wholly Greek Cypriot administration as if it were the Government of Cyprus Security Council Res. This acceptance has continued to the present day, and reflects no credit upon the United Nations, nor upon Britain and the other countries who have acquiesced in it. Judging from the English newspapers and many others, the feeling is very strong indeed against Makarios and his so-called government and nothing would please the British people more than to see him toppled and the Cyprus problem solved by the direct dealings between the Turks and the Greeks.
We are of course supporting the latter course, but I have never seen any expression of the official disapproval in public against Makarios and his evil doings. Is there an official view about this, and what do we think we should do in the long run? Sometimes it seems that the obsession of some people with "the Commonwealth" blinds us to everything else and it would be high treason to take a more active line against Makarios and his henchmen. At other times the dominant feature seems to be concern lest active opposition against Makarios should lead to direct conflict with the Cypriots and end up with our losing our bases.
I ask these questions, partly for background and partly because it really would be useful to know how far you feel we really are inhibited from taking up a more actively hostile attitude to the Greek Cypriots. Their representative here is, as you know, a horror, and even the communists are thoroughly fed up with him, and it is therefore really not necessary for us to do anything more to weaken his position.
But it is curious and sometimes very frustrating to sit in the Security Council and walk around the UN and have to listen to all the stuff about the wickedness of the Turks and their threats of invasion, when I and all my staff know very well what the real state of affairs is and how much Makarios and co. One can say what one thinks of course to a few people, but one cannot produce the evidence or argue the case fully with the vast majority of my UN colleagues so long as the official public attitude seems to be not to say anything rude about Makarios and his gang.
These, I realise, are not entirely easy questions and I suspect that the answers may well depend on differences of view and attitude at your end, revolving round such questions as the Commonwealth and the truth about our defence needs. Nevertheless I hope you can give us some of your real thoughts, if only for our private consumption. It would be a help to know what the thinking and the planning is and how far and for how long it is going to be necessary to continue to behave in, what at times does appear an unrealistic way and contrary to the popular feeling in Britain.
The General was of course referring to the notorious "Akritas" plan, which was the blueprint for the annihilation of the Turkish Cypriots and the annexation of the island to Greece.
Some gossans may also contain magnetite as a supergene mineral Blain and Andrew, During gossan formation, large amounts of iron are fixed above the water table as goethite or hematite. Other metals can be leached by groundwaters and may be precipitated nearby, variably as oxides, carbonates and sulphates Parvaz, Gossans may be in- situ or transported.
Exhalite formation commonly represents the distal facies equivalent of a massive sulphide orebody. The most intimately associated exhalites with VHMS deposits are umbers which are Fe-Mn-rich sediments which precipitate from hydrothermal plumes above black smoker vent fields Boyle, or through precipitation from off-axis thermal springs Robertson and Fleet, They are commonly brown to black, very fine grained, microscopically porous and composed of iron and manganese oxides Boyle and Robertson, They vary from massive to finely laminated.
Limonite is a general term for mixtures of amorphous iron oxides, finely crystalline goethite with minor silica, hematite, jarosite, lepidocrocite, or manganese oxides in various proportions Blain et al. Ochre is defined by Parvaz as a bright red, Fe-rich, finely bedded sediment intimately associated with massive sulphide deposits.
Ochre mineralogy is dominated by goethite, jarosite, quartz, along with amorphous Fe oxides and traces of hematite and gypsum Herzig et al. The presence and concentration of secondary copper sulphides are also indicative of the proximity of primary VHMS mineralisation, albeit their distribution will depend on local topography, the nature and juxtaposition of different lithologies and structures, and the hydrological regime Parvaz, Modern seafloor volcanic centres are also areas of intense hydrothermal activity, which can deposit massive sulphide accumulations, commonly referred to as Volcanic-Hosted Massive Sulphide VHMS deposits.
Ancient forms of these deposits are the exploration targets in Cyprus. The basic ore-forming processes of VHMS deposits are well understood — broadly coincident with magmatism, seawater is drawn down into the oceanic crust where it becomes progressively hotter and richer in metals and sulphur.
The richest deposits are those that erupt onto the seafloor. The size and grade of a VHMS deposit is primarily controlled by the size and persistence of the hydrothermal system. The location of VHMS deposits is controlled by the available pathways for the hydrothermal fluid, i. Given the dynamic nature of seafloor volcanic domains the VHMS deposits are typically buried by subsequent volcanic eruptions.
VHMS deposits are stratabound concentrations of sulphide minerals precipitated from hydrothermal fluids in extensional seafloor environments. The term volcanogenic implies a genetic link between mineralization and volcanic activity, but siliciclastic rocks dominate the stratigraphic assemblage in some settings.
The principal tectonic settings for VHMS deposits include mid-oceanic ridges, volcanic arcs intra-oceanic and continental margin , back-arc basins, rifted continental margins, and pull-apart basins. The composition of volcanic rocks hosting individual sulphide deposits range from felsic to mafic, but bimodal mixtures are not uncommon. The volcanic strata consist of massive and pillow lavas, sheet flows, hyaloclastites, lava breccias, pyroclastic deposits, and volcaniclastic sediment.
Deposits range in age from Early Archean 3. Deposits are characterized by abundant Fe sulphides pyrite or pyrrhotite and variable but subordinate amounts of chalcopyrite and sphalerite; bornite, tetrahedrite, galena, barite, and other mineral phases are concentrated in some deposits. Massive sulphide bodies typically have lensoidal or sheet-like forms.
Many, but not all, deposits overlie discordant sulphide-bearing vein systems stringer or stockwork zones that represent fluid flow conduits below the seafloor.
Pervasive alteration zones characterized by secondary quartz and phyllosilicate minerals also reflect hydrothermal circulation through footwall volcanic rocks. Other features spatially associated with VHMS deposits are exhalative chemical sedimentary rocks, subvolcanic intrusions, and semi-conformable alteration zones.
The basic ore-forming processes of these hydrothermal systems are well understood, and research indicates that sulphides can also be deposited in the intrusive units beneath the volcanic rocks, associated with sheeted dike and ultramafic complexes.
Koski et al.
0コメント