Trauma, historical memory and justice: an insight into Greek Cypriot policies of retaliation
The latest events regarding the cancellation of the Barcelona football camp in north Nicosia and a music festival at Keryneia castle have sparked debates about Greek Cypriot (GC) attitudes towards the Turkish Cypriot (TC) side. GCs cite legality and the need to not normalize occupation, while TCs talk about nationalist attempts by extremist elements and opportunist leadership to torpedo peace talks between the two sides. This comes after a relatively recent increase in vigilance against real estate agents and investors who profit off of usurped GC properties in the north, among them the infamous case of Simon Aykut - an Israeli-Turkish businessman behind the various “Caesar” hospitality projects in the north, particularly in the GC village of Trikomo.
In order to understand where these reactions come from and why they aren't just "ELAM did it" or simply self-interest and maximalism, it's crucial to see the GC perspective on the current situation and their position on the status quo. Note that what will be described here is a matter of perspective and understanding it, not necessarily a blanket acceptance, endorsement or justification of everything about said attitude. As it will be made apparent further ahead, the GC side sometimes acts not necessarily solely out of foresight or long-term strategic thinking, but also through retaliatory dynamics which have characterized bicommunal relations ever since 1963.
A good starting point is to stop creating an artificial line of separation between politics and broader society. It is after all an easy excuse for both sides to pretend like their political class is somehow disconnected from true popular will. In the case of GCs, political interventions such as in the cases above reflect in part the state of a deeply traumatized society in an unresolved state of grief, stuck between denial and anger. For GCs, the invasion and occupation have brought up a markedly different tangible material reality for the two communities. The conventional understanding among GCs is that they lost way more by comparison: not just their ancestral homes, but also massive pieces of their historical and cultural heritage, and - perhaps most pertinently for our case - vast amounts of property and livelihoods.
The more bitter and hostile elements of GC society view TCs as "squatters": people coming predominantly from poorer regions and finding themselves taking up prosperous former GC land. A particularly prevalent talking point when mutual grief is mentioned is them "suggesting" that the TCs can go back to their little Paphos mountain villages and allow GCs return to Morfou. It's an attitude that is fundamentally built upon not just the more subjective personal tragedy of displacement, but the objective material imbalances it brought about. It speaks to deprivation and a sense of humiliation in what the “swap” granted them by comparison.
But even people more moderate in their views have been traumatized by the GC refugee reality: having to leave inside tents, forced into makeshift "προσφυγικούς καταυλισμούς" ("temporary refugee housing") in areas they felt like outsiders, having their former communities broken up and split across the island (and not only). At the same time, their view of TC refugees are limited to the realities post-1974 rather than the preceding decade when many TCs found themselves in similar circumstances. As a result, they subconsciously don't view GC and TC refugee suffering on the same level, thus feeling uniquely wronged by historical events.
The way that each side politically handled it and how they understood the state of affairs post-1974 played its own role. TC leadership made sure to pass the message and perform every action possible to cement in people's minds that "this is where your home is now". A core strategy was moving entire TC villages together in new places and renaming them likewise. For instance, the villagers of Kofinou/Köfünye (renamed Geçitkale in the 50s) moved to Lefkonoiko which was later renamed Geçitkale. Likewise, TCs of Mari (renamed “Tatlısu”) were brought to Akanthou, TCs of Larnaca from the Skala/İskele area were brought to Trikomo, and so on. Communal ties were preserved and functional memory of their places of origin was transplanted into their new areas of settlement.
GC leadership on the other hand has repeatedly emphasized that the people should "never forget"; neither the events, nor their roots, nor the struggle for eventual repatriation - even when it became apparent that it's no longer feasible in its totality. GC refugees were given TC properties that they can't even do as much as renovate without excruciating government paperwork. In part this is consistent with the position of the Republic’s custodian status for TC properties in the south so that they maintain legal grounding in their struggle for GC properties in the north. Yet what this achieves - whether deliberately or not - is that GCs don't feel these TC houses and villages have become (or could become in the future) their true homes.
However, this sociopolitical aspect of it is only a single facet of the origin of this disconnect between the communities' experiences. An arguably more pertinent factor is lingering GC resentment fueled by an inability to accept powerlessness in changing what's going on in the north. The average GC is frequently exposed to images and realities that evoke and reignite this grief and anger. The giant flag on Pentadaktylos is one such obvious example, as well as the state of Varosha with its illegal opening to tourists. In fact, there are way more things that are smaller and subtler, yet more constant that never really let resentment subside.
A GC on social media is bombarded by numerous ads from the north of the island that advertise anything from hotels, plots of land and villas, to restaurants and bars - many of which on land and villages legally belonging to GCs. There are many groups on Facebook where GCs share images from the current state of Christian monuments and churches: usually derelict, destroyed/looted, or repurposed into something disrespectful (stables, tourist offices, dance floors, fighting rings etc). Whether justified or not, it ignites a sense of asymmetry: “we preserve their homes and mosques, while they destroy or exploit our own homes, churches, and historical monuments”.
Resentment in this reality is less of a deliberately maintained attitude out of spite and more of a lingering pain that is being constantly refueled by a diligent placement of ample amounts of salt in wounds that haven't healed. And in the face of this injustice, a section of GC society wants to retaliate with the one thing that they feel they have in their favour: international recognition and through that international law. Every now and then there is a "last straw on the camel's back" or a perceived line that has been crossed and where there is a need to act. And I say perceived because the Keryneia castle music festival or usurpation of GC properties - believe it or not - not very uncommon or special. Even though some events or usurpation cases like Aykut’s are notable for their scale, numerous similar events happen in the north, and numerous investors and real estate firms have been exploiting GC properties for years. At some point there is a culmination of anger or something seen as just too egregious, so much so that the GC political class decides to wield international law as a hammer to strike back.
For TCs, the Republic of Cyprus (RoC) seems like a big bully: they have the international recognition, the big brands, most important events, most of the wealth, and yet they come after these "small things" to make life difficult for TCs. Some TCs even go as far as to say that GCs in these attempts are actually trying to "erase" or make them invisible. But remarkably for GCs this is the exact opposite: they feel like underdogs fighting against a violently imposed and preserved status quo that they are powerless to change. These international law “hammer" moments feel like small wins of a GC David against a Turkish (not TC) Goliath. Like every aspect of the Cyprus problem that's unresolved, the key is that both sides see themselves as fundamentally the primary victims that fight an uneven struggle against a perceived more powerful "other".
Lastly, there is a particular sense of irony on the part of the TC community that many within GC society feel and which causes a fundamental distrust in the former's true attitude. On the one hand, TCs feel entitled (as they should) to their rights as RoC citizens. On the other hand, they are seen as reluctant to relinquish the benefits of the status quo as they are understood from the GC side, such as taking advantage of GC land and using historical sites without GC consent. The end result is that GCs view TCs as having the attitude "τα δικά μας εν δικά μας, τα δικά σας πάλε δικά μας" ("our stuff is ours, your stuff is also ours"). GCs in such moments of retaliation don't feel like they're isolating TCs, but that they're "setting boundaries" in their exploitation.
Ultimately these policies speak to a deep-seated conviction that GCs feel about the status quo: “this is not normal, it cannot be perceived as normal, and I refuse anyone else to see it as normal”. From tourism and real estate development, to sports and cultural events, GC society ascribes to them greater significance than even indirect recognition of the occupation. Those things send a message that TCs and the outside world are apathetic to - or worse yet, perfectly fine with - a state of affairs that has traumatized and keeps haunting GCs for 52 years.