Monday, July 27, 2009

Israel’s role in the invasion and occupation of Cyprus part 2

The previous post titled, “Israel’s role in the invasion and occupation of Cyprus part 1” (which can be accessed here) provided some background on the diplomatic maneuverings between Cyprus, Greece, Israel and Turkey before the Turkish invasion in 1974.

An article recently posted on Infognomon (which can be accessed
here) written by M.Michail provides some information on the role of Israel around the days immediately preceding and following the invasion of Cyprus.
The German magazine, Der Spiegel in 19 August 1974, revealed that “... hiding behind this issue (i.e. the Turkish invasion of Cyprus) was Israel” and that “... the telephone line between Nicosia - Tel Aviv had been connected two days before the coup and only the embassy of Israel or Israeli journalists could use it” (from the Greek newspaper Kathimerini, 20/4/1975). This probably means that Israel and its embassy in Nicosia were aware of the coup to oust Makarios [this is interesting but probably many secret services knew about the invasion of Cyprus]

The Jews were, with a series of “errors” and “coincidences” during the Turkish invasion, continuously on the side of ATTILA [the code name used for the Turkish military operation]. The Athenian newspaper Ta Nea (27/2/1975) published that Israeli planes, at the beginning of July 1975, “accidentally” violated the Greek airspace of Cyprus and twice during the Turkish invasion of July 1974. However, amazingly the following event was also made to appear as “coincidental”: an Israeli navy boat coincided (!) to be within the Turkish invasion armada. And, indeed, collected the castaways of the Turkish destroyer, which was accidentally bombed by Turkish airplanes (from the newspaper Greek Tharros, 15/12/1979). The 42 survivors of the sinking of the Turkish destroyer "Kotzatepe",which previously belonged to the U.S. Navy, was transferred to the Israeli vessel in Haifa! [this is particularly strange as one would expect that Turkish ports would have been closer and more convenient]

At the end of 1972, the secret services of Israel sold to EOKA B "Kalasnikovs" "under the direction of the CIA". The Cypriot journalist Spyros Papageorgiou wrote in his book “The Attila impacts Cyprus”, p. 27: “In connection with the acquisition
of Kalashnikovs, despite being sold by the Israeli secret service, they were acting under the direction of the CIA. However, it can be said with certainty, regarding the negotiated purchase of weapons in Beirut, the leader of the operation of EOKA B, Kikis Constantinou was under the impression that he was dealing with illegal arms traffickers". Of course, the readers can draw their own conclusions. The attitude of Israel during the Turkish invasion of 1974 cannot be described as positive. The same “coincidental” attitude was there during in the invasion of Turkey in 1963-64. [unfortunately the article does not provide details of this assertion]

Without further evidence some of the inferences made above appear tenuous. However, we can state with reasonable certainty that Israel's role during the invasion of Cyprus was not constructive.

Of course, any country is free to pursue a foreign policy which best serves its own interests but Israel could have played a more neutral role if it genuinely believed in developing better relations with Greece. Perhaps, as some people have suggested, there was a longer term motive of gaining control of parts of Cyprus which was one of the options in the early Zionist project before the creation of Israel.

Israel's enmity towards Greece and the Cypriots throughout the 1950’s to the 1980’s, should not preclude Greece and Israel forging closer diplomatic and even military ties going forward - international relations should be based on interests rather than historical grudges, loyalty or sentiment. However, history should not be forgotten and Greece must choose its "friends" wisely.

Source: Infognomon (M.Michail), Antipodes


  1. In a sea of dictatorships and apartheid states, the Republic of Cyprus stands alone as the ONLY democracy in the Middle East.

  2. And look where that has gotten us?

  3. That is a loaded question, A. I'll pass on it.

    Nonetheless, would you rather live in any country in the Middle East other than the Republic of Cyprus? Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, that abomination Saudi Arabia... what a mess. Even the for-Jews-only democracy, Israel, should be nearing its "expiration date" soon.

  4. I would not be surprised if the Israeli intelligence agencies were privy to the ongoings of ΚΥΠ, the Greek intelligence agency. Because ΚΥΠ was founded, supported, and financed by the CIA, no doubt sensitive information trickled down to the Israelis, and they in turn passed it on to the Turks. Moreover, the White House Chief of Staff and the Secretary of State were Alexander "I am in charge here" Haig and Kissinger, respectively. These two sons of Israel basically run the U. S. government in the crucial days before and during Turkish invasions; Nixon was basically hung up over the Watergate scandal and thus useless. Anyways, A, it may explain why the Turks were always one step ahead.

  5. Of course, I would prefer to live in Cyprus. However, is our current form of democracy conducive to achieving our national aims. Perhaps a stronger executive and higher hurdle for minor parties would help. I am not sure. But the results are less than impressive.

  6. You know, it's very hard to run a municipality, let alone an entire country. That is why at the very least I do not want a dictatorsip. I would prefer our military concentrate on military matters and leave the everyday running of the nation's affairs---laws, trade, etc.---to civilians. I understand your concern, though, A.

  7. Peter, when fully armed jets are flying over inhabitated areas, is this a political or military problem?

  8. Please excuse the tardy reply to your question, A.

    Now, I am not sure what you mean? Is this a question on what is an effective model for the governance of a state?

  9. Peter, my question is in relation to what duties are given over to politics or the military. I agree that civil life should be governed by politicians but when civil life is in danger then at what point does the military step in?

  10. Why would the military need to "step in"? If the Greek Republic, let's say, were ever threatened, either by external or internal forces, then would not the government declare a state of emergency and govern by decree and use the military accordingly? If, as you said, "fully armed jets are flying over inhabitated areas," a well-prepared, well-trained military should be able to immediately respond to such a situation when the government calls upon it to act.

    But then again, A, we're talking about Greece... you know, the "sovereign" country that just sits there with both thumbs up its ass as Turkish jet fighters routinely violate Greek airspace... a country that hasn't produced a decent, courageous leader in over three generations... a country that can't pay its doctors a decent salary but can find the money to bail out the Greek banksters. (On a per capita basis, the Greek government has spent more than the United States for bank bailouts. If a Greek homeowner were to miss a mortgage payment, they'd be on the street---no ifs, no buts.)

    With Greece, A, I'm afraid all bets are off.

    PS: Please excuse my rant. I sometimes feel that the situation in Greece is hopeless.

  11. Greece is terrorists, crooks, and Lazy !.

    1. If Greece is a terrorist crooks and lazy then you are very smart, a very smart guy, smarter than your ass