Right to return

Right to return

Turkish invasion propaganda poster

Above: Cyprus, 1974 – some of the 200,000 Greek Cypriots who were ethnically cleansed from their ancestral homes and lands by Turkey. Today, the Annan plan ignores UN resolutions that call for an “urgent return of all refugees”.
Enlarge photo

The key to any settlement, as Lobby for Cyprus has consistently argued, is the land of the Greek Cypriot refugees who were ethnically cleansed by the illegal Turkish invasion of 1974. It is their legal and moral right to reclaim what is theirs and resettle should they so wish. As a settlement is in the making (or so we are led to believe) in spite of inherent difficulties, it is worthwhile looking over some of the issues concerning the refugees reclaiming their stolen properties.

Firstly, it should be made clear that the legitimacy of the Greek Cypriots to realise their title-deeds and reclaim what is rightfully theirs is upheld by international law, recently reaffirmed by the European Court of Human Rights of the Council of Europe. The difficulty is in ascertaining whether the refugees will return or not in great numbers to any Turkish administered area. Many have their homes, family and friends in the free part of Cyprus; many live in the Diaspora in the UK, Australia and north America. Irrespective of where they live, they have the legal right to reclaim. The irony is that one suspects many of those who will be most adamant in not surrendering their properties either by way of compensation or land exchange, are the refugees in the Diaspora. There will undoubtedly be many refugees both within and outside Cyprus who will never renounce their homes or lands. This is not just because of the economic or financial advantages of reclaiming their properties but a mixture of reasons: love of their village and township, returning to their roots, a sense of patriotism and outrage that Turkey should benefit any further from its illegal and brutal occupation.

Many of the refugees will be aware of the economic advantages of reclaiming their lands and properties and how their value will increase exponentially because the title-deeds issued by the occupation regime are illegal. Under such circumstances and out of self interest, the refugees will hang on to their properties and see the value rise far in excess of the valuation given under any UN/US/EU sponsored ‘compensation’ programme. Many of the refugees will use their existing homes as collateral to raise funds to rebuild/renovate their reclaimed properties. A building boom like no other in the history of Cyprus will take root in the northern area, as ordinary refugees and those with commercial assets fuel the reconstruction programme. Those refugees with commercial holdings obviously stand to gain the most. The area will all be subject to renewal but only through extensive capital input. Turkish Cypriot registered banks will be able to be a part of this renewal process as they become involved in lending, but the recent spate of collapses and scandals will have deterred all but the brave.

What is problematic is the physical number of Greek Cypriot refugees who will return. A refugee with extensive holdings in the north can live in Nicosia or Limassol and direct from afar what will happen to his or her estate. However, the character of the north and how it will change depends to a great extent on the physical number of refugees returning to their villages and towns. In this respect there will surely be a mixture: those who do transplant from the current free areas of Cyprus and the Diaspora; those who will repossess and rebuild their properties to use them as second homes or weekend retreats; and absentee landlords who lease out their renovated properties to Turkish Cypriots or whoever is prepared to pay the commercial rates. There will also be those who repossess but simply want to assess the security situation and watch how far property values accelerate and last, but not least, the refugees who are prepared to rent or sell to the influx of European Union citizens attracted to the island and seeking a holiday retreat in the sun.

The permutations and uses to which these properties are put are doubtless greater than those outlined above, but what this all points to is the key which the refugees hold to any brokered settlement.

Attempts by the UN brokered ‘peace’ plan to stonewall the refugees and coerce them to renounce their properties in favour of ‘compensation’ or ‘land exchanges’ are likely to be rebuffed and must be exposed for their illegality. It is a matter of economics and love of the land.

The government of the Republic of Cyprus must take the interests of its people as paramount and withstand the pressure from those powers that are prepared to sacrifice principles for their own selfish ends and for the purpose of satisfying Turkey and its puppet regime in the occupied areas of Cyprus.