Cyprus War 1974

Melvin Loh

During Turkey's 1974 invasion of northern Cyprus, British forces stationed as UN peacekeepers on the island were placed at high combat readiness in order to defend their Sovereign Base Areas at Dhekelia and Akrotiri from potentially being overrun by the Turks, including where RN carriers were deployed just offshore and RAF F4 Phantoms were scrambled to fly CAPs. OTL, the crisis was eventually resolved diplomatically, but WI British and Turkish forces had actually engaged in open combat with each other ? Could a fullscale conflict have erupted between these 2 erstwhile NATO allies in addition to the Greeks ? What about the status of the UN Blue Helmets from other countries (Canada, Austria, the Scandanavian countries, Australian Federal Police, etc) during such an exchange ?

Hope this issue hasn't already been discussed on previous threads ?
 

Abdul Hadi Pasha

Banned
Melvin Loh said:
During Turkey's 1974 invasion of northern Cyprus, British forces stationed as UN peacekeepers on the island were placed at high combat readiness in order to defend their Sovereign Base Areas at Dhekelia and Akrotiri from potentially being overrun by the Turks, including where RN carriers were deployed just offshore and RAF F4 Phantoms were scrambled to fly CAPs. OTL, the crisis was eventually resolved diplomatically, but WI British and Turkish forces had actually engaged in open combat with each other ? Could a fullscale conflict have erupted between these 2 erstwhile NATO allies in addition to the Greeks ? What about the status of the UN Blue Helmets from other countries (Canada, Austria, the Scandanavian countries, Australian Federal Police, etc) during such an exchange ?

Hope this issue hasn't already been discussed on previous threads ?
Click to expand...

No. The Turks had no interest in fighting the British, or even beginning a permanent occupation. The agenda was to halt the forceable unification of Cyprus with Greece by a rabid nationalist military government. If British and Turkish troops had fired upon each other for any reason, it would have been settled diplomatically.

The British were acutely aware that the Turkish invasion was prompted in the first place by their abject failure to keep their treaty committment to guarantee the independence of Cyprus.
 

Prunesquallor

The Turks had no interest in fighting the British, even less did the British fighting the Turks. You'll still find the occasional victim of "transferred nationalism" writing in to the British press screaming that Britain should have intervened (Greece, like Poland, Ireland, and Israel, has always had its British devotees) but to the average Briton at the time, Greece had sweet F.A. to Periclean Athens, it was run by a rotten little junta which had started shitting itself at the prospect of taking on Turkey. And as for the Greek Cypriots, as far as the British were concerned, their only real characteristic was the distinctly unLeonidan habit of shooting British troops in the back. I make no claim, by the by, that these stereotypes are justified- I merely point out public opinion at the time- at least as I remember it.
 

Lysander

Abdul Hadi Pasha said:
No. The Turks had no interest in fighting the British, or even beginning a permanent occupation. The agenda was to halt the forceable unification of Cyprus with Greece by a rabid nationalist military government. If British and Turkish troops had fired upon each other for any reason, it would have been settled diplomatically.

The British were acutely aware that the Turkish invasion was prompted in the first place by their abject failure to keep their treaty committment to guarantee the independence of Cyprus.
Click to expand...

So i guess thirty years of occupation is not really permanent, what are they waiting for? For the sun to rise from the west? ! It would be good if you got a bit realistic about what happened in 1974. Turkey then wanted and still wants strategic control over Cyprus and is willing to get it with any means possible (we´ve allready discussed this extensively in another thread), even if it means ethnic cleansing (i have to admit turkey is very efficient in executing such actions).

As for the brits fighting with the truks no chance. The brits were assured that nothing would happen to there bases and that was that. They were happy to sit at the sidelines. Besides the invation was the calmination of their divide and concour policy.
 

Lysander

Prunesquallor said:
I assume that by "realistic" you mean agree with you? Your logic is as eccentric as your spelling.
Click to expand...

Spelling was never my strong suit. And no realistic does not mean agree with me but in my own "eccentric" logic a country which occupies another for the thirty years and has no intention of leaving unless it ensures that it keeps exersising control through a minority population and statutory intervention rights has more or less permanent plans and i expect the facts to speak for themselves. Last time i checked there were a number of UN resolutions codnemning turkeys actions but then again since they amounted to nothing i guess they are irrelevant.

Just out of curiosity what exactly is your view on things?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top