📌 𝗔𝗻𝗻𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗰𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗯𝘆 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗠𝗶𝗻𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗿𝘆 𝗼𝗳 𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗲𝗶𝗴𝗻 𝗔𝗳𝗳𝗮𝗶𝗿𝘀 𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝟰𝟬𝘁𝗵 𝗮𝗻𝗻𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗮𝗿𝘆 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗶𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗴𝗮𝗹 𝗱𝗲𝗰𝗹𝗮𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝘀𝗲𝘂𝗱𝗼-𝘀𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗶𝗻 𝗖𝘆𝗽𝗿𝘂𝘀
Today marks 40 years since the illegal and unilateral declaration of the pseudo-state, which has been condemned by United Nations Security Council Resolutions 541/1983 and 550/1984.
On this sad anniversary, Greece underscores the necessity of all states fully complying with the Resolutions of the Security Council in accordance with international legitimacy. These Resolutions call upon all countries to refrain from recognizing or in any way assisting the illegal entity in the occupied part of Cyprus.
Greece will never accept the fait accompli of the Turkish invasion and occupation. In full coordination with the Republic of Cyprus, Greece works systematically to create the conditions that will lead to a just, viable, functional, and mutually acceptable solution within the framework of the United Nations Security Council Resolutions.
#GreeceMFA
This is all the more baffling, as we’re talking about a first-world country (or two) consisting of two nationalities and ethnicites that also hail from ALLIED first-world countries. That this issue cannot be resolved diplomatically or rather that one involved party would rather risk war then actually resolve this, is a testament to how stupid and unproductive nationalist ideas are.
In this sense - if it hasn’t already been clear for some years - fuck Erdogan and fuck those that are ignorantly following his misogynistic, anti-semistic, islamistic and nationalistic pseudo-rethorical bazar-trading style of leading a country. We should not even talk about Turkey as potential EU-canditate. They don’t possess any of the qualities we like to see in a potential member. Most of all their actual interest in pursuing a common goal of enriching and bettering Europe.
The second half of your post precisely shows how the Cyprus Problem is just demoted to a rhetorical device for people who want a weapon to fight a different battle.
Someone who is actually interested in Cyprus would know that Erdogan is a latecomer to the whole story and that Turkey’s interests in Cyprus have been the same even in the hight of pro-western, -secular, -NATO sentiment. To frame it as an Erdogan problem betrays that someone only started “caring” about Cyprus in the last decade.
Is that so, I’d argue the reason for that lies in the fact that I am not old enough too have seen a Turkey without Erdogan. And while I apparently should read up in the Cyprus problem, I cannot know about every territorial dispute everywhere
Precisely: you do not need to have an opinion on every territorial dispute everywhere. In this case, if your goal is to mount a (well-warranted) criticism of Erdogan’s rule in Turkey, you can focus on those aspects of Erdogan’s rule in Turkey that you are actually familiar with, and leave Cyprus out of it.
If you are going to have an opinion on Cyprus though, yes, indeed, you should inform yourself about the historical background as a prerequisite for construction your opinion. Our history, politics, and war legacy deserve to be taken more seriously than just be used as rhetorical crutches for an argument that isn’t about us.