State of Exception in the Mediterranean

Turkey and the Turkish Cypriot Community

Nikos Moudouros

• Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan
• Year: 2020
• Print ISBN:
  9783030568726
• eBook ISBN:
  9783030568733
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: Comparative Politics
• Index: Politics & International Relations

This book examines the evolution of the state of exception in which the Turkish Cypriot community has developed and how its relationship with Turkey has been transformed. It aims at a comprehensive understanding of the circumstances which led to the emergence of a Turkish Cypriot state of exception, as well as the procedures which led to the strengthening of resistance against its normalization. For a more comprehensive decoding of the aforementioned, this book studies the presence of Turkey in the everyday life of Turkish Cypriots in the framework of colonial politics. It examines in detail the transformation of the Cypriot space as it resulted from the pursuit for normalization of the state of exception. At the same time, however, this research underlines the ways in which the Turkish Cypriot opposition hinders the normalization of the state of exception through an alternative political program against the partition of Cyprus. The book aims to contribute to the broader academic research on states of exception and non-recognized state structures, through analyzing the ruptures caused in the hegemonic project. The research concerns the 1964–2004 period and is mainly, but not entirely, based on a large volume of primary sources.

© The Author(s) 2021

N. MoudourosState of Exception in the Mediterraneanhttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56873-3_1

Begin Abstract

1. Introduction

Nikos Moudouros¹

(1)

Turkish and Middle Eastern Studies, University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus

Nikos Moudouros

Email: [email protected]

Keywords

State of exceptionColonialismTurkeyCyprusResistanceOpposition

End Abstract

Episode 1: Describing how May Day was celebrated during the confinement of the Turkish Cypriot community in the enclaves, veteran trade unionist Mehmet Seyis (2015) said: “In those circumstances, such events were forbidden. They were identified by the dominant nationalist ideology as ‘betrayal’. That’s why organized groups of people who wanted to celebrate May Day went to taverns, sitting in silence, dressed in black. Others gathered in houses”. Dressing in black, he adds, was a form of protest.

Episode 2: On 18 July 2008, two days before the 34th anniversary of Turkey’s military invasion of Cyprus, the front page of the Turkish Cypriot newspaper New Epoch (Yeni Çağ) read: “Thirty-four years ago, they came claiming they would restore constitutional order. They created a puppet administration, dependent on them. They usurped the will of the local people by transporting population, which constitutes a war crime. They looted everything in the north of the island. They reached the ultimate stage, wiping out Cypriotness through policies of conquest. Turkification has been completed. Now is the turn of Islamization. Due to Ayşe’s endless holidays, the owner of the house is exiled. Ayşe is now getting ready to take the property title…” (Yeni Çağ 2008).

These two episodes seem completely unrelated. Both in terms of time and in terms of content, they are presented as two unrelated “moments”. They both, however, constitute a fundamental aspect of the Turkish Cypriot community’s evolution: the aspect of reaction against the prevailing relationship between the community and Turkey and the reproduction of this relationship by the Turkish Cypriot nationalist elite.

In the first episode, the veteran trade unionist describes the existence of a form of Turkish Cypriot opposition within the enclaves of the 1964–1974 decade in Cyprus. Seyis’s report reveals Turkish Cypriot ideological forces which under conditions of complete exclusion, “quietly” and using symbolism, declared their reaction against the evolving authoritarianism.

In the second episode there is a historical continuity, but there is also a qualitative difference. Opposition against Turkey’s domination continues, but it is expressed even more “publicly”. Particular political allegations and aspirations are openly expressed. In this particular example, it is Turkey’s policy in general, referred to as “Ayşe’s endless holidays”, which is criticized. “Ayşe goes on holidays” was the code name of the order given for the launching of the second military invasion of Cyprus in August 1974. In this way, the newspaper denounces the tutelage regime Ankara created in Cyprus. The article criticizes the colonization policy and the attempt to impose a particular identity. At the same time, it expresses concern over the process of alienation of the Turkish Cypriots.

Such political messages, although not new in the Turkish Cypriot context, were “new” to a large section of the Greek Cypriot community. At least up until 2003, when the checkpoints opened for the first time, Greek Cypriot contact with the occupied areas of Cyprus was only through the tragic memories of war and destruction (Ioannou 2020). This contact was reproduced through the narratives of Greek Cypriot refugees and memories of pre-1974 Cyprus. In this context, the absence of the Turkish Cypriot community was deafening (Anagnostopoulou 2004). The Turkish Cypriots were absent as individuals, as a community, but also as different ideological identities and political visions. This absence, in turn, led to a lack of comprehensive knowledge of both the community itself and its relationship with Turkey, as well as of the changes in area of military occupation, i.e. the northern territories of Cyprus.

The “Turkish Cypriot absence” was due to many factors. One of them was the fact that the partition of the island is real on the ground, but at the same time it is ideological as well (Yashin 2012, 10). The 1974 war is a tangible reality in substance, in everyday life, in the natural environment and the landscape of Cyprus. It is a reality reproduced through mass graves, checkpoints, fortifications, military camps, bullet-ridden buildings and bombarded ruins. At the same, time partition is also “imaginary”, i.e. it produces specific ideologies. The year 1974 is for all Cypriots, Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots, simultaneously memories, nightmares, dreams, ideologies and visions (Yashin 2012, 10). This combination of the partition’s reality with the production of a specific collective consciousness and of specific identities and ideologies in Cyprus results from the dynamic character and the evolutionary course of the Cyprus problem itself. It is also a result of political, social and economic changes which the very situation of partition has caused in recent decades.

These dynamic characteristics often cannot be clearly expressed in the public discourse of all those who have lived for decades with the Cyprus problem. Both in the case of the Greek Cypriots and the Turkish Cypriots, the general description of the division of Cyprus is embodied in the concept of status quo. The Greek translation of the word refers to the “existing state of affairs”; to the current or ongoing situation. The term that prevailed in the Turkish language also refers to the current “continuing situation” (sürer durum) (Erhürman 2010a). The concept of status quo therefore holds a sense of stillness and stagnation. It mainly describes the present, the current situation. This sense of stagnation can indeed epitomize the longstanding non-resolution of the Cyprus problem. It can express the continuation of an open political problem that seeks solution. However, this concept fails to describe the dynamic consequences and transformations that territorial division produces. The status quo alone cannot express the changes that have occurred and continue to occur in Cyprus’s society precisely because of partition.

An important dimension that challenges the sense of stagnation is the relationship of Turkey with the Turkish Cypriot community. This particular relationship is not of course the only element that has changed in the modern history of Cyprus. However, the changes and shifts in the Turkish Cypriot community’s relations with Ankara are of particular importance on many levels. These relations and their transformation have played a decisive part in the evolution of the Turkish Cypriot community itself. They affected not only the social structure of the Turkish Cypriots, their political system and their economic development, but also their relations with the Greek Cypriots. The transformation of Turkey’s relations with the community has significantly affected the relationship between the Turkish Cypriots and their own space; that is, Cyprus. Turkey–Turkish Cypriot relations have marked the course of the Cyprus problem and the ideological and political positions expressed for its solution. Furthermore, the course of these relations has influenced transformations in the wider geopolitical field of the Eastern Mediterranean.

The aim of this book is to understand the role Turkish Cypriots themselves played in changing their relations with Turkey. Precisely because of the complexity of these relations, this book strives to avoid a simplified approach of viewing the Turkish Cypriot community as a “homogeneous extension” of Ankara’s will in Cyprus. The imbalance of power between Turkey and the Turkish Cypriots is a given. However, this specific fact alone cannot describe the importance of social dynamics and developments in the Turkish Cypriot community. This book aims to precisely address the type and forms of power exercised by Turkey over the Turkish Cypriot community. It seeks to identify the consequences and reactions this power causes. It focuses more on the “details on the ground”. In this way it seeks to understand the differentiation between the Turkish Cypriot forces working as “passive recipients” of Turkey’s policies and those forces acting centrifugally, challenging the boundaries of the division politics.

The main theme of this book is, therefore, the analysis of the transformation in the relations of Turkey with the Turkish Cypriot community during the period 1964–2004, through the Turkish Cypriot opposition. It does not present the opposition as a homogeneous, undifferentiated political situation. It recognizes the internal differentiations which emerged throughout the period researched. The Turkish Cypriot opposition is, however, a specific ideological and political group of actors who have stated their disagreement with the politics of partition in different ways. The concept of opposition, therefore, mainly refers to the politically expressed reaction against the strategies of Turkey and the Turkish Cypriot nationalist elite, which aimed to finalize the partition of Cyprus. More specifically, the Turkish Cypriot opposition, in this book, consists of different Turkish Cypriot political parties, organizations and trade unions. They are, therefore, organized groups which by their political interventions have influenced the community’s relations with Turkey.

This book focuses on the period 1964–2004. This is not a random choice. Due to the 1964–1974 bi-communal clashes, the vast majority of the Turkish Cypriot community lived within enclaves, separately from the Greek Cypriot community. Hence, 1964 is of particular importance as it symbolizes the first form of territorial partition. Turkey’s military invasion in 1974 effectively began a completely new era in the history of Cyprus—a result of the war and its consequences. Since Turkey’s invasion, the Turkish Cypriot community has been shaped in a completely different environment, created through the deep and violent reshaping of the entire social, economic and political fabric of Cyprus. Therefore, the significant historical weight of 1974, in itself, renders it necessary to the time frame of this study. Finally, 2004 also constitutes an important political moment. The majority of the Turkish Cypriot community voted in favour of the proposed solution to the Cyprus problem in the referendum. The Turkish Cypriot YES ...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Front Matter
• 1. Introduction
• 2. Turkey in Cyprus, the Exception and the Turkish Cypriot Opposition
• 3. Claiming the Homeland in a “State of Siege”
• 4. Ideological Awakenings Against the “New Homeland”
• 5. The Birth of the “TRNC” and Its Contradicting Interpretations
• 6. Cypriotism as Anti-neoliberalism
• 7. Post-Cold-War Geopolitical Quests
• 8. Alternative Geopolitical Visions
• 9. Towards the Ideological Collapse of Partition (Taksim)
• 10. The Victory of the “Parallel Society”
• 11. Conclusions
• Back Matter