30.11.2024 – The Union of Cypriots represented Cyprus at an international theoretical conference on National Liberation from Imperialism, organized by the NDFP and held in Amsterdam, Netherlands, from November 29–30.
The two-day conference focused on the national question, exploring various approaches to asserting and exercising the right to national self-determination, both armed and unarmed, within the framework of national liberation movements.
The event brought together 114 individuals representing 57 political parties, national liberation movements, and anti-imperialist organizations from 19 countries. Participants discussed submissions presented by representatives of groups engaged in national liberation struggles. These included contributions from the Union of Cypriots, who represented Cyprus, alongside organizations and movements from the Philippines, Colombia, Eritrea, Nepal, Senegal, Turkey, Kurdistan, and Palestine.
The Union of Cypriots’ contribution to the international theoretical conference on National Liberation from Imperialism was as follows:
National Liberation Against Imperialism: “Ruin or Revolution is the Watchword”
Claims that Marxism is Eurocentric, unconcerned with nations and colonies, or that it addresses “the right of nations to self-determination” solely on a bourgeois-democratic basis stem from incomplete and eclectic readings.
Presenting the ideas of Marx, Engels, and Lenin on the national question and colonial issues as rigid, final thoughts by dogmatizing their historically contextualized formation stages constitutes the greatest betrayal of revolutionary theory. Lenin said, “Mankind can achieve the abolition of classes only by passing through the transition period of the dictatorship of the oppressed class, so mankind can achieve the inevitable merging of nations only by passing through the transition period of complete liberation of all the oppressed nations”.
The views Marx and Engels expressed on non-European societies, ranging from India to Russia, Algeria to China, hold an important place in their body of work. Avoiding an eclectic approach and examining their ideas as a whole reveals how they shaped their politics on nations and colonial issues. Their approach to the national liberation struggles in Poland and Ireland became the foundation for Lenin’s development of the principle of the right of nations to self-determination. Writings on nationalism, colonies, and non-European societies occupy a significant place in the body of Marxist literature.
Lenin foresaw the development of revolutions in colonial and semi-colonial agrarian countries, such as China, Vietnam, Korea, and Cuba, through national wars against international imperialism. He wrote, “The social revolution cannot come about except as an epoch of civil war of the proletariat against the bourgeoisie in the advanced countries, combined with a whole series of democratic and revolutionary movements, including movements for national liberation, in the undeveloped, backward and oppressed nations.” Marx supported Irish liberation, saying, “The English working class will never accomplish anything before it has got rid of Ireland. The lever must be applied in Ireland.” Engels repeatedly emphasizes that the establishment of a democratic Poland is a fundamental prerequisite for the creation of a democratic Germany.
When it comes to national liberation struggles, history demonstrates their interconnectedness, with the freedom of one nation inspiring and strengthening others. International solidarity is the most powerful weapon to dismantle systems of oppression and exploitation. In this context, Cyprus, known as NATO’s “unsinkable aircraft carrier,” plays a strategic role in the fight against imperialism. Its liberation is essential not only for the people of Cyprus but also for securing a truly free and independent West Asia and North Africa. Breaking NATO’s grip on Cyprus would weaken imperialist dominance and advance the global struggle for justice and liberation.
Cyprus and National Liberation
The roots of the national question and the colonial issue in Cyprus trace back to the Ottoman era, branching out and taking deeper root under British Colonial Administration, enveloping Cyprus like an octopus and spreading into West Asia.
The national question and colonial issue in Cyprus represent a long struggle for nationhood and independence, hindered and delayed at various stages by the Ottoman Empire, British colonialism, Turkish-Greek chauvinism, Turkish occupation, and settler colonialism.
In July 1821, the Ottoman Empire launched a campaign of massacre and terror against Orthodox Christians in Cyprus, seeking revenge for the March 1821 Greek Revolution, whose roots also stemmed from the French Revolution. The repercussions of this campaign lasted for years. In 1831, Christian and Muslim Cypriots alike revolted against Ottoman taxes and usurers. By 1833, the uprisings in Paphos, Larnaca, and Karpas aimed to overthrow Ottoman domination of the island in a Pan-Cyprian rebellion. Leading this uprising was a Muslim Cypriot known as Gavur Imam from Paphos. Although the Ottoman massacres of July 1821 had ignited this rebellion, the revolts that re-emerged a century later in 1931 under British Colonial Administration had the same source: a struggle against oppressive taxation and usury. This enduring fight against taxes and interest systems forms the basis of the Cypriot struggle for national identity.
The events of 1821 also had another significant impact on the Cypriot struggle for national identity. The Ottoman response lit the fuse of a nearly 150-year-long struggle for enosis (union of Cyprus with Greece). In this sense, the enosis movement had a dual character: it was progressive as a struggle against foreign powers like the Ottomans and British, but reactionary insofar as it opposed Cypriot independence. A similar assessment of the enosis movement was made by Soviet sources about EOKA (National Organisation of Cypriot Fighters), which was founded 134 years after the July 1821 massacres to combat British colonialism.
In 1878, when Britain leased the island from the Ottoman Empire, it implemented a divide-and-rule strategy from the outset, replacing the Ottoman religious-based categorization of identities with an ethnic-tribal framework: Muslims were now labeled as Turks, and Orthodox Christians as Greeks. Despite this, Greek-speaking and Turkish-speaking Cypriots cooperated in various ways against British colonialism until 1931. However, in October 1931, the British dissolved the colonial assembly when Greek-speaking and Turkish-speaking Cypriot representatives jointly blocked a tax bill, forcibly implementing the law instead. This led to a revolt against British taxation in 1931, echoing the 1831 rebellion against Ottoman taxes and usurers. Though enosis was a motif in the uprising, its emergence highlighted the growing sentiment of Cypriot nationalism and the rise of a “Cypriot consciousness,” uniting Greek-speaking and Turkish-speaking Cypriots in a shared sense of national identity and destiny.
The fire that engulfed the Colonial Governor’s Palace during the October 21, 1931 revolt illuminated British colonialism and prompted the colonial rulers to take measures against Cypriot nationalism. In a 1936 report to London, British Colonial Governor Richmond Palmer stated:
“In order to have ease in the future on the island, we have to continue the administration on the basis of exceptis excipiendis (opening the way to exceptions), on the basis of districts. Thus the concept of Cypriot nationalism – which will be emerging as a new concept after Enosis becomes an eroded value – should be pushed away as much as possible and left in the dark.”
Another event that alarmed British colonialism after the Governor’s Palace was set ablaze was the 125-day strike in 1948 by Cypriot miners of all ethnic backgrounds against the American company Cyprus Mines Corporation and British colonial authorities. Facing this, British colonialism resorted to dividing Cypriots along ethnic lines, using the Church and the Turkish-speaking Cypriot leadership as collaborators to suppress the workers.
In 1947, under the Truman Doctrine, Turkey and Greece were positioned as bulwarks against communism and admitted to NATO in 1952. This ushered in a new phase in Cyprus’s national question and colonial issue. In 1954, Ankara declared, “We have no issue with Cyprus.” Yet in 1955, Turkey was invited to a conference in London by Britain to discuss the island’s partition. Britain’s decision to involve Turkey and Greece in the partition of Cyprus in 1955 was motivated by EOKA’s guerrilla struggle against British colonialism as well as other factors.
In response to EOKA’s anti-colonial struggle beginning in 1955, Britain and Turkey established the counter-guerrilla organization TMT for Turkish-speaking Cypriots in 1958, continuing Britain’s divide-and-rule policy.
The armed struggle led by EOKA between 1955 and 1959 culminated in the establishment of the Republic of Cyprus. The Republic’s first President, Archbishop Makarios, represented Cypriots at the anti-colonial Bandung Conference even before Cyprus gained independence. Rejecting NATO membership, the Republic of Cyprus became an integral part of the Non-Aligned Movement. This marked a new phase of struggle between imperialists and the Republic of Cyprus.
The Republic of Cyprus, a consociational state based on ethnic quotas, whose constitution was drafted by the colonialists in English and French, was part of the Non-Aligned Movement alongside leaders such as Gamal Abdel Nasser, Nehru, Tito and Fidel Castro. When President Makarios wanted to amend the constitution in 1963, a “constitutional crisis” began and the Turkish-speaking Cypriot leadership abandoned the state and put its separatist agenda into action. In 1964, NATO proposed deploying troops to Cyprus, which President Makarios rejected.
In August 1964, Turkey orchestrated an operation similar to the U.S. Bay of Pigs invasion in Cuba, arming Turkish-speaking Cypriots and triggering the Battle of Tillyria.
At the 19th United Nations General Assembly on December 12, 1964, Ernesto Che Guevara said:
“Peaceful coexistence has also been brutally put to the test in Cyprus, due to pressures from the Turkish Government and NATO, compelling the people and the government of Cyprus to make a heroic and firm stand in defense of their sovereignty.”
In 1964, the U.S. proposed the Acheson Plan, which would dissolve the Republic of Cyprus, cede a military base to Turkey, and unite the rest of the island with Greece. President Makarios rejected the plan. Between 1964 and 1967, Turkey and Greece negotiated to divide Cyprus but failed to reach an agreement. In all proposed solutions by the U.S., Britain, Turkey, and Greece, the goal was the dissolution of the Republic of Cyprus, the division of the island, and the statelessness of the Cypriots.
The agreement reached between Turkish-speaking and Greek-speaking Cypriots between 1968 and 1974 on constitutional amendments to the Republic of Cyprus was ultimately derailed by the Greece-backed coup and the Turkish invasion of Cyprus, which occurred between July 15 and 20, 1974.
This brief summary of the Cypriot national question and colonial issue from the 1821 Greek Revolution to the 1974 Turkish invasion highlights the historical dynamics between oppressor and oppressed nations.
Even the neo-colonial state Cypriots achieved through the 1955-59 guerrilla war was deemed too much for them by imperialists. Since 1964, the U.S., Britain, and the United Nations have devised plans to dismantle the Republic of Cyprus.
The key frameworks for understanding the national and colonial issues in Cyprus are the processes of statelessness and the prevention of nation-building.
But as we often emphasize, the intense efforts to divert the international community’s attention from what is happening on this island clearly demonstrate that the “Cyprus issue” is not an issue of Cypriots. Because when we talk about the liberation of Cyprus, we are actually talking about the freedom of all West Asia and North Africa, as well as cutting off the windpipe of imperialism in the whole region. The liberation of Cyprus signifies freeing the “unsinkable aircraft carrier” of five NATO powers—Turkey, Greece, the United Kingdom, the United States, and France—positioned at the junction of three continents and located just a few miles from the shores of Palestine, Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, and Egypt.
This reality resurfaced following the latest Palestinian resistance, which began on October 7, 2023. NATO-occupied territories on the island of Cyprus have been used to support “Israel” in perpetrating war crimes and crimes against humanity. Furthermore, these territories have been employed for bombing operations in Yemen, targeting those resisting the imperialist forces responsible for atrocities committed against Palestinians.
Cypriot Nationalism as Nationalism of an Oppressed Nation
Lenin’s showed the inseparable connection between socialist revolution, the national question, and colonial issues, building on Marx and Engels’ ideas. He stated that “abstract presentation of the question of nationalism in general is of no use at all” and stressed the need to differentiate ” the nationalism of an oppressor nation and that of an oppressed nation, the nationalism of a big nation and that of a small nation.”
The united struggle of Cypriots against oppression is an important part of the history of Cyprus, from the Gavur Imam Revolt against the Ottoman occupation in 1833 to the movement of the Cypriot miners against the American-owned Cyprus Mines Corporation under the British occupation in 1948. In Cyprus, the class and national struggle of Cypriots are rooted in the anti-imperialist ideology of Cypriot nationalism, or Cypriotism.
Since Cyprus came under British control in 1878, the colonial authorities fostered ethnicism as part of their divide-and-rule strategy. At the same time, they worked to suppress Cypriot nationalism as much as possible, with Colonial Governor Richmond Palmer emphasizing that such suppression was crucial for maintaining the exploitation of the island.
From the decision taken at the 1971 NATO Foreign Ministers’ meeting in Lisbon to divide Cyprus into “two regions,” through the Turkish invasion in 1974, the 1979 “ABC (American-British-Canadian) Plan,” the Annan Plan of 2004, and the 2017 Crans Montana talks under the auspices of UN Secretary-General António Guterres, policies have consistently been pursued, as Palmer suggested in 1936, “on a regional basis.”
The report written by the colonial governor in 1936 now reappears in modern times as a “UN parameter.”
Against this imperialist agenda, the foundation of progressive Cypriot nationalism lies in the shared culture, history, identity, and, above all, the belief in a common destiny among Cypriots. Cypriotism promotes the democratic unity of all Cypriots, envisioning not only a unitary homeland free of barricades and foreign military bases but also a secular, pluralist, and progressive society. Cypriot nationalists oppose “ethnic quotas” and advocate for equal political rights based on the trully democractic principles. The idea of Cypriot nationalism highlights the significance of a unifying national upper identity that overcomes institutionalized ethnocentrism, supports the independence of the Cypriot state, and resists neo-colonial attempts to divide and control the island.
What is the significance of the statelessness of Cypriots and the attack on their national unity in the context of imperialism? Across Africa and Asia, there are dozens of “Cypruses.” The story of Cyprus is the story of all oppressed nations. Through processes of de-statification and the fragmentation of nations, peoples are systematically subjugated and enslaved.
Settler Colonialism, Cyprus and Palestine
Unlike classical colonialism, which relies on the exploitation of raw materials and labor, settler colonialism is a form of colonization based on the destruction and displacement of indigenous populations. Examples include the United States, Australia, Brazil, New Zealand, Zimbabwe, Algeria, South Africa, Ireland, New Caledonia, occupied Palestine, and occupied Cyprus, where colonization has been carried out by removing the indigenous peoples.
Marx compared settler colonialism in Ireland to the conquest wars waged by English colonizers against Native Americans in North America. He stated, “The plan was to exterminate the Irish at least up to the river Shannon, to take their land and settle English colonists in their place.” In Palestine, the objective has been to eliminate all Palestinians from the river to the sea. In Cyprus, in 1974, one-third of both Greek-speaking and Turkish-speaking Cypriots were forcibly displaced from their homes, with many forced to migrate abroad due to the destruction of their “living spaces.”
In Palestine, where the land is bombed by warplanes, and in Cyprus, where it is exploited by construction companies, the political goal of settler colonialism is evident on a daily basis as it seeks to dismantle the foundations of indigenous society and sever the natural and historical ties to the land.
In 1948, 800,000 Palestinians were ethnically cleansed and exiled. In 1974, 200,000 Cypriots were similarly displaced. Palestinians refer to the events of 1948 as Nakba, meaning catastrophe, while Turkey celebrates 1974 as the “peace and freedom day.”
In both cases, settler colonialism emerges through the replacement of displaced indigenous populations. Israel filled occupied Palestinian lands with Jewish settlers from around the world. Similarly, Turkey brought settlers to occupied Cypriot territories from Anatolia.
A central mechanism of settler colonialism is settlement laws. The laws governing settlement in occupied Cyprus and occupied Palestine are nearly identical. In Cyprus, it is called the Settlement, Land Distribution, and Equivalent Property (İTEM) Law, while in Israel it is known as the Absentee Property Law.
Through İTEM in Cyprus, the property rights of the original owners were annulled, and these properties were reallocated to settlers from Turkey, creating an illegal framework for selling the seized lands. Similarly, Israel’s Absentee Property Law of 1950 defined Palestinians displaced during the 1948 occupation as “absentees,” denying them the right to return to their homes or reclaim their property.
The goal of settler colonialism is not exploitation but genocide. Since 1947 in Palestine and since 1974 in Cyprus, the ongoing process is the elimination of indigenous peoples. Unlike other forms, settler colonialism does not exploit but seeks to annihilate. For this reason, the struggle against settler colonialism must continuously innovate new methods and receive active support from the revolutionaries of the imperialist nations complicit in land theft.
Our Political Program: Unitary Republic
For 60 years, occupiers, colonizers, and imperialists have sought to dismantle and dissolve the Republic of Cyprus, obstructing its path to full sovereignty, beginning with the first U.S. plan in 1964.
After Turkey’s initial invasion on July 20, 1974, U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger told the Cypriot government, “Give 30% of Cyprus to Turkey, and we will stop the Turkish army.” When the Cypriot government refused, Kissinger declared on August 13, 1974, “There is no American reason why the Turks should not have one-third of Cyprus.” The following day, on August 14, 1974, Turkey launched the second phase of its invasion, accompanied by widespread ethnic cleansing.
Imperialism’s political program has never changed, remaining audacious enough to admit to inciting the Turkish army to attack Cyprus and arrogant enough to propose that Cypriots gift their land to Turkey without a fight. The colonial governor Richmond Palmer articulated this approach in 1936, advocating for policies “to push Cypriots nationalism away as much as possible and left in the dark by continuing administration on the basis of districts.” This strategy of de-statification and fragmentation of nations remains central to imperialism, targeting both new and old colonies.
The liberation of colonies and revolution in the “homeland” are inseparably linked. Until colonies are free, the oppressor nation remains bound by chains. The program of Marx and Engels in the 1848 Revolution was to achieve “national unity”. Because in a homeland that has achieved national unity, “a battlefield can be created” between the working class and the bourgeoisie. For this reason, Marx and Engels fought for a “unitary republic”, opposing the division of Germany into states with a Swiss-type federation.
The struggle of Cypriots follows this same path. For over 50 years, Turkey has occupied Cypriot territory, while the United Nations has been tasked with proposing apartheid-like solutions aimed at “federalizing” our homeland based on ethnic-tribalist logic.
Our program to resist imperialism’s attempts at de-statification and national fragmentation is clear: a pluralistic, fully independent, genuinely democratic, and unitary Republic of Cyprus, free from foreign military presence and all forms of ethnic, religious, or other segregation and division. The struggle of Cyprus, like that of all oppressed nations, is a testament to the enduring fight for justice and sovereignty. It reminds us of the inseparability of national liberation and revolution. In this fight, the watchword of Marx resonate across generations: Ruin or Revolution!
