The European Parliament has repeatedly strongly condemned the Turkish invasion of 1974 and the ongoing occupation of Cyprus. In a new resolution, which is not legally binding, it adopted an amendment - following the initiative of my colleague M. Hadjipantela, who participates in the competent Committee -, which we Cypriot MEPs supported, to consider the creation of a memorial within the European Parliament, for the victims of the Turkish invasion. Since there was another amendment for a memorial for the victims of totalitarian regimes in Europe, Cyprus was aptly associated with it. In my political group (the 2nd largest) there was initially hesitation for procedural reasons, since the main political groups agreed on a commonly accepted text without additional amendments. With my own intervention and argumentation, my group changed its position, contributing to the strong approval of the amendment.
Because the issue of the monument has been the target of ignorance and misleading stereotypes, I quote the amendment in its entirety: The European Parliament “should consider the possibility of allocating resources to finance the creation, on its premises, of a monument dedicated to the victims of the 1974 Turkish invasion of the Republic of Cyprus, including the missing persons.” The proposed monument focuses on the victims of the 1974 Turkish invasion and the reference to the missing persons is illustrative and not the focus. After all, the victims of the Turkish invasion are various categories, e.g. murdered, raped persons, etc. Various voices in the occupied and free areas commented on the monument as concerning exclusively the Greek Cypriot missing persons and not the victims of the Turkish invasion! Why? A reasonable explanation is the common denominator of those who seek to “erase” the Turkish invasion from the collective memory as the greatest crime in the modern history of Cyprus and thus resort to imaginative “equations” e.g. they claim that “Greek Cypriots also committed crimes”, that the coup preceded it, others assume that this is a monument to the missing and claim that “there are also Turkish Cypriots missing since 1964.” In a war there is human suffering on both sides, especially for the missing, but collective historical memory is another. Hence the domestic “militants” distorted a sacred issue, because they oppose the monument itself for the Turkish invasion, without directly admitting it. Any reservations would be in good faith if they argued that the memorial should focus on the victims of the 1974 Turkish invasion of the Republic of Cyprus, as is the essence of the amendment and the long-standing position of the European Parliament.
There were casualties among both communities of Cyprus, but before us we have a historical event, the Turkish invasion. A monument to the victims of the invasion of Hitler's Germany into the Soviet Union does not include the German Nazis. A monument to the victims of the Italian invasion of Pindos in 1940 does not concern the victims of the Italian brigade "Julia". A monument to the victims of the Armenian Genocide does not include the Turkish Chetniks who ... "went missing". A monument to the resistance fighters against the coup in 1974 does not include the coup plotters. Given that the European Parliament has condemned the crime of the Turkish invasion of 1974, the creation of a monument for the victims of the Turkish invasion must find us in agreement, except for the "soldiers" who deny the Turkish invasion.
photo by NoName_13, https://pixabay.com
