“The demographic composition of the northern part of Cyprus”
The New Cyprus Party (YKP) Nicosia District Organization organised a panel discussion regarding the structure of the population in the northern part of Cyprus, which took place at Arabahmet Cultural Center on Tuesday evening, May 6, 2008. The Vice President of the Publishers’ and Booksellers’ Union and interim spokesman for the Cyprus Peace Platform, Halil Paşa, moderated the panel discussion.
The New Cyprus Party Foreign Relations Secretary, Alpay Durduran, the academician and investigative author Mehmet Hasgüler, International Peace Studies Institute (PRIO), Oslo, Researcher Mete Hatay and Sociologist/researcher, Muharrem Faiz were the speakers at the panel.
The text below is the presentations of the speakers at the panel discussion which has taken its final form after it was edited by them. The entire panel discussion is also available on CD.
The full texts of the presentations at the panel discussion are as follow:
Gülay Kaşer (YKP Nicosia District Secretary): The New Cyprus Party voices the realities and established facts of the country like no other political party does. Without worrying about not being liked, not being praised, or not being accepted, YKP always tells the truths and continues its work with the responsibility towards the Cypriot individual.
This is why the New Cyprus Party aims to bring into the discussion the structure of the population in the northern part of Cyprus which plays a key role and has direct influence on the solution of the Cyprus problem.
And we would like to thank the speakers this evening, for their contribution to the panel discussion on the structure of the population in the northern part of Cyprus, for your contributions as participants and the Nicosia municipality for allowing us to use this facility. With the wish that this evening’s discussion will grow and become beneficial for the community, I invite the speakers to take their places. Mr. Alpay Durduran, New Cyprus Party Foreign Relations Secretary, Mr. Mete Hatay, International Peace research Institute, Oslo, Dr. Mehmet Hasgüler, academician, Mr. Muharrem Faiz, sociologist, and Mr. Halil Paşa, interim spokesman for the Cyprus Peace Platform.
Halil Paşa: Dear guests, I welcome you all. Tonight we will discuss the structure of population in the northern part of Cyprus. The speakers will have 15 minutes each. We will save time if you write your questions for the panel speakers onto the slips of paper that will be distributed during the presentations.
I would like to begin with a few remarks. The Cyprus Peace Platform today visited AKEL and discussed for about one and a half hour. The main topic of our discussions was the structure of the population in the northern part of Cyprus. At one point the Member of the Political Bureau Andros Kyprianou asked this question:
“What’s the population? Can’t we solve it? That is, what is the total population? Are the settlers the only total population?” he said. We looked at each other and finally our answer was like this: At the latest census the de facto population was around 260 thousand, but Talat says that the population is around 500 thousand. In addition, we can give you two more pieces of data, we said. One, that there are 223,275 registered vehicles in the northern part of Cyprus, and also that there are 385,000 telephone subscribers. Of course, we submitted this data without any comment.
I hope that we can get some answers from the speakers tonight. Alpay Durduran has the floor.
Alpay Durduran: Dear friends: This is in fact the most difficult question of this country.
One day a few people were arguing about something in a hall. They were talking about which is at the centre, the world or the sun? One of the young persons said: Hey, instead of making so much noise and wasting our time, let us go and talk with people who say the opposite to what we do. That is, I get out in the street, I look around, and don’t I see the way? If every day I exchange greetings with several people on the street, but now I do not see any of them around, it means the question is not difficult. But if in a country there is no answer to the population question, there is no reason to look for other things, the administration there is your enemy; it is that clear.
We always discussed these kinds of topics. No one said we were wrong. Some said we were exaggerating. But these days, those who were with us on these issues in the past, when in government they accused us as racists, firstly we need to clear this out. First of all, with your permission, I want to say this: We are in favour of free movement in the world. Because of this it is not possible for us not to support free movement in Cyprus. As free movement throughout the world is beneficial and is necessary for world peace, since the free movement of capital throughout the world is seen to be beneficial and at a time when free travel rights are on the increase, without free movement of labour, that is free movement of people, it is a fact that the liberation of labour will not be possible. We need to look at the problem from this angle.
But it is also a fact that wherever there is foreign oppression, working people have to oppose this. Why? Because this situation serves the rulers. They are using today’s cheap labour to oppress the labour force of their country. Measures are needed to be taken to remedy this situation.
The population issue is an important problem for us, because it is the biggest obstacle in solving the Cyprus problem. The problems we are facing today are obvious. No committee has been established for this issue. Despite this omission (the lack of a committee on the issue of settlers) the Greek Cypriot side gave the go-ahead for the committees to begin work. This will continue to remain as the biggest and hottest issue. They ask us this question everywhere. This question needs to be answered. Our problem is not with anyone’s face, skin colour, or language. We only want to find a political solution to this problem and to protect the national, ethnic, or whatever you want to call it, character of the Turkish Cypriots.
The situation being what it is, a census was held. We’ll say something having in mind this census. As I believe that this census was not done correctly or that it was done to conceal the political truth, I look at it from this angle. The first thing I see; some people came to Cyprus as settlers and took citizenship… some did not and at a census this is the result. I see that the mothers and fathers of these people came from abroad; I say that some of these are Cypriots and some are mixed. What do I look for now? In these numbers I am looking to see; do these people who come here ask for low wages? Do they live in a humane way? Those who bring them here do they provide them with housing? Are they provided with support to live humanely and have living conditions similar to Cypriots and to develop culturally?
No one has any intention of doing such a thing. Because they do not tell us that these people came, their number is such and such, how many planes or how many ships came to bring them. There is nothing of the sort. What kind of census is this, anyway?
You do a census at a place where there is so much arguing and you do not bring out correct results.
I looked at it from this angle and began to study the matter. I look and see that before 1979 13,296 persons came here. OK, of the 13,296 persons who came before 1979 how many died until 2006? This number can be determined from the ratio of death. When such census researches are done, with the number of deaths and according to how much they multiplied, the number of persons would be 30,755.
And in 1981 we brought 90 thousand persons. Most of these returned and about 30 thousand remained in Cyprus. This information was given to a House of Representatives commission by the housing minister. This means that these ratios, that is the decrease in population, and the birth rate confirms the information I gave. I have been saying this for thirty years, but I have always been refuted, however, the statistics they provide now confirm my argument. According to this, when you do the calculation, the number is in fact 321,368. They came to Cyprus and now it is their fourth and fifth generation. The first, the second, the third and now it is the fourth generation who live among us. Even if you count only these generations their population is more than ours. Never mind those who came, even those who were born here exceed our population. We can now say that there is no issue here and no property problem. They have done the same thing to Antalya, they have multiplied to earn money from tourism, but now the people of Antalya are complaining.
This is why it is not an acceptable situation. It is not politically viable, either. And the Cyprus problem will not be solved due to this reason. We are always told lies. And the source of these lies is the reports. The 1982 population report shows all the age groups in tables and this was published in 1987. This report was republished in 1989 as if there was no change. And it’s a lie. Here’s the lie. In 1981 a delegation came from Turkey. They sat down and told us what information we should give to the community and to the world and by using the most advanced census formula they created tables and every year they wrote the results in these and told us lies.
Now look here it shows the other table. When we look at the population distribution, it more or less follows a regular pattern in communities like ours where people eat well. Every five years this lower one should go up and I wonder what happened. Who gave birth to all these people? Every year they repeat this. These come out yearly. How is it that although there are so many in the age group 0-5, the number of the 25 to 30 age group is almost twice that number? And we look here and when we look at other reports we see that although the population increases, the number of primary school pupils do not. We go to the grave and they come to this country.
The population issue has become a scandal. Why is it that this issue has now become so important? Because it is known that settlers will go back in the event of a solution.
I go around and go into coffee houses. We look and see that people in the coffee houses come from other places. We say let us solve the Cyprus problem and they ask, no, what’s to become of us?
Their population is a lot more than we are. Some still think that the population from Turkey is concentrated around Karpasia and Varosia or that they are around Famagusta. But this is wrong. They are everywhere. They are at every neighbourhood, at every apartment, in every family. They are the majority. As we have just said the population from Turkey should be more than 300,000 according to the 2006 statistics. And when we add the ones that are born here, the ones that are written down as Cypriots, we see that our population reaches 590,000 together with those that are not yet citizens. When I say these things they point to the lunatic asylum. And Mr. Talat openly insulted me. And then they declared me as a racist, giving my name. The Republican Turkish Party representatives visiting foreign countries say that we are racists and xenophobes. There are those who accept these accusations and there are those who do not; and there are those who ask questions. I definitely do not claim to be as such, but I am doing everything possible to protect the Cypriot culture, and the Cypriotness of this country. In this respect, the population problem is important for us.
Let us now turn to aforementioned 225,000 motorized vehicles and around 400,000 mobile telephone subscribers. Notice that we are saying subscribers and not the number of phones. There are no such things in the world.
For this reason this is also a politically important matter. And we won’t allow politically the removal of our will. Mr. Hatay conducted a study and using samples of substantial majorities of people from Turkey and Cypriots showed that the electorate from Turkey did not affect much the structure of population. His source and his study proved him right completely, but his source was not correct. This state is lying. Because of this, I went another way and I proved that Turkey can dictate its will on the population from Turkey. She even succeeded in making them to say yes to a plan that would have uprooted most of them. Thus, by also buying off the Cypriots she will impose her will. So, if I somewhat exaggerate in this, forgive me.
Halil Paşa: Thank you very much. Now I immediately turn to Mete Hatay.
Mete Hatay: I agree with some of the things that Mr. Durduran said except the last one.
Two points of view emerged in Cyprus concerning the subject of population. The first view talks about a colonization that numbers up to 500.000 to 600.000. That is it talks about a population transfer. The other view claims that this is normal, it is a global phenomenon and it takes place all over the world. Both points of view are to a certain degree right in themselves.
There was a population transfer to Cyprus. Together with collaborators here, a population transfer took place after the events of 1974 in order to fill up vacant Greek Cypriot villages so as to keep them. That is, a population transfer was realized in order to establish a Turkish Cypriot state or whatever entity on a 38% territory. This transfer was done in an agreed plan between the then Turkish Cypriot authorities and the then rulers of Turkey. We can find all this in a book by Gül Inanç called ‘The Ambassadors are telling.’ In interviews published in this book the ambassadors clearly explain how this population transfer took place.
Is that all? Of course it isn’t. What is missing in this point of view? The Turkish Cypriot businessmen or their capital that completed its financial savings especially after 1974, were attracted to bring in lots of cheap labour for exploitation from Turkey. I think that it would be wrong to include these people to the claims of colonization. If we look at the aftermath of 1974, we will see that about 30.000 people were brought within the above mentioned plan. Who are these people? Were these people filled up with an ideology like Zionism in Israel? No, if we look at these people, if we go around from village from village, we will see that most of them were already displaced people. We see that they were brought here to be rehabilitated after their places were under water with the building of Atatürk Dam from the region of South-eastern Anatolia. We see that people were brought here from coastal regions due to landslides and erosion. We see people who were brought here from border regions of Turkey. We are face to face with a heterogeneous group of people who speak five different languages and belong to seven different sects. That is there was a deliberate policy, but it is debatable if the people who were brought here themselves had a political agenda. But what are the political leanings of this group of 30,000 people? In order to look at these political leanings, I looked at 25 villages which were, as Mr. Alpay says, completely populated by people from Turkey, and I looked at 50 villages where the population is more than 90% Turkish Cypriot. As far as voting is concerned, we see that during the early years, that is when they had begun to use their right to vote in 1981, they brought their political identities with them from Turkey. For instance, some of these people before they came here were social democrats. I found that those who were social democrats or belonged to a fraction of the Republican People’s Party (CHP) voted in Cyprus for the Communal Liberation Party (TKP) or for Democratic People Party (DHP). A much smaller fraction had even more socialist leanings and voted for CTP, while Demirel sympathizers voted for the UBP. Far right wingers voted for the Turkish Unity Party, a party formed by a retired colonel who bragged about being a friend of Evren Paşa (head of the 1980 junta) and intended as a party catering to settlers. In 1981, we see a pattern where 30% supported the left and social democrats, 30% conservative /liberal andd 30% the settler parties. In other words, we see here a very heterogeneous profile. As we move to 1985 we see that this structure becomes more settler-oriented. That is, the various political cultures these people brought became more homogeneous, more “Turkey-fied,” in other words, more settler-oriented. What was the reason for this? What reasons were there for these people to form the New Birth Party (YDP)? Was it just because the Turkish ambassador asked these people to form a party in order to punish the Turkish Cypriots? Or was this movement formed because they were not given enough place in a patronage system that the National Unity Party (UBP) established? Both reasons had an element of truth in them. The party that the YDP hurt most was the UBP. In 1981 the UBP got 35% of the votes of people from Turkey whereas we see that this percentage dropped to around 20% in 1985. During this period Turkeyfication was more apparent. There were criticisms from both sides of the political spectrum. From the left there were accusations that they were causing division among the working class. The UBP’s reaction was to the effect that they were causing division among Turks. It was saying that there is no difference between us. Later in 1990 we see that due to specific reasons this party joined the Democratic Struggle Party (DMP) movement (together with CTP and TKP) and when we look at those villages during that period we see that 55% of the votes of people from Turkey wet to that movement. At the same time we can see that votes went to Ismail Bozkurt against the candidacy of Rauf Denktaş in the presidential elections.
This was mainly due to economic reasons and it was said in those days that because these people were brought here they were given houses and land temporarily, unlike today with no title deeds, in order to sow barley, wheat, and tobacco. If you look at Ortam newspaper and other newspapers of the 1980’s you will clearly see the tragedy of workers being carried with buses from Karpasia. These workers were taken by bus from Varosia and Karpasia to Morfou in order to pick the oranges. They did not have any other alternatives for work. As soon as these people demanded to organize they were fired and a new wave of workers was brought from Turkey, starting a new trend: ever cheaper labour. In the same period, the suitcase trade greatly increased, helping to build the Turkish Cypriot capital. The suitcase trade grew quickly, for example thanks to the nuclear accident at Chernobyl, after which tons of tea were sold from Cyprus to Turkey. In those days there were businessmen who accumulated considerable amounts of capital and money. In addition to this, we see that in the early 1990’s these firms directed their attention to construction. These same firms again looked to Turkey to fulfil their ever-expanding needs for cheap labour. As you know, because of the war in south-eastern Turkey, hundreds of thousands of people fled to Turkey’s big cities in Turkey, creating areas of poverty. Because of these reasons, that same population began to flow to Turkey’s west and to Cyprus. During that period, hundreds of those people who came from Turkey’s southeast to Cyprus settled in Nicosia’s walled city. These people began to be used as cheap labour in every sector of the economy. Why am I telling you this? In the first period there was a type of colonization, but the population flow to the island has been due to many other factors. During this period universities opened. Many people come under the name of foreign students. At this time the number of foreign students in our country is 32,500. 26,000 of these come from Turkey, constituting about 10% of the de facto population. Girls with headscarves, who have no right to education in Turkey, come here and add to our scenery. Another factor that contributed to the population explosion was the 1996 amendment to the property law. Title deeds given during the CTP-DP coalition government, especially those given to early settlers and to those who had deeds of exchange for property which they left in the south, enabled the sale of those properties, and we see a boom in the construction sector. At first, real estate agents bought these properties very cheaply. After 1999 we see that these construction firms used these cheaply-bought properties to meet a global demand of a second home, the “dream home” project and built approximately 35,000 houses. Are we going to say that we didn’t build these approximately 35,000 buildings? We know that during that period approximately 40, 50, and even 60 thousand workers came here. Where do these workers come from? A large majority of these workers come from around Hatay, Kahraman Maraş, and Mardin. Why do they come here? Because there are no job opportunities there. Why do the people here bring them? Because there is no labour force of this magnitude here. What is the situation of these men? Do these men get citizenship as soon as they come? No. We observe that many of these people come here to work for 8 months and then return home. That is we see people who after sowing cotton and working in rice fields, they come here in summer and winter to work for 8 months in construction and then return home. We see that these people are very mobile. Along with the construction sector, they also come for orange picking etc. During an interview at the ministry of education I asked about the population in Morfou schools. Answer: According to what, should I give you population figures, according to Yafa oranges, according to mandarins or according to lemons? That is with the workers bringing their children with them, the population at schools increases or decreases accordingly. Similarly, the population figures also change in parallel to the construction season.
In the meantime, what is happening in terms of space? In Nicosia, one of the symbols of Turkish Cypriot identity, we see houses abandoned by their Turkish Cypriot owners being used as accommodation for workers. According to the latest census 65% of the population in inner Nicosia are citizens of Turkey, 15% have dual nationality, and 25% are TRNC citizens. I think that these numbers are somewhat different. That is, 70% citizens of Turkey, 15% people with dual citizenship and 15% TRNC citizens. Who are these citizens living in inner Nicosia? That is we know who the citizens are, but I am talking about those with Turkish citizenship who make up 65 to 70% of Inner Nicosia. We see that they are those people and their families who came here during the suitcase trade or to work in construction and stayed here establishing ethnic markets to meet the demands of about 35,000 Turkish soldiers stationed here selling military goods (uniforms, under wares, socks etc) mobile phones, and blue jeans to them. In addition to this, we see that many pension-type accommodations and businesses cater for the workers. Now as I look at numbers, I am tired of talking about them, let us look at other numbers. Let’s look at the number of deaths during the last two years: the number of people who died from falling at construction site is 22, the number of those injured is 270, that is, if we talk more about these numbers, the exploitation of workers here cannot be ignored only as colonization. I am not saying that you are ignoring it, but I am saying that it is not being examined sufficiently and that, hidden under the shadow of the Cyprus problem, we are going through a period of intense exploitation. As a Cypriot I am ashamed of this. Thank you.
Halil Paşa: I thank you. Before moving on to the third speaker, I would like to summarize what the first two speakers have said. Mr. Durduran said we are in favour of free movement throughout the world. If there is no free movement of labour there will be no end to exploitation. The population issue is one of the biggest obstacles to the solution of the Cyprus problem. And the committees have not yet taken up this subject. Cheap labour has various dimensions to it; lifestyle, have they adapted? When we ask such questions they accuse us with racism, he said. It should be questioned and studied why there is immigration to this country. Those who came before 1979 number 13,296 and when births and deaths are taken into account the number today reaches 30,755. This is in harmony with Mete Hatay’s number of 30,000. In 1981 a delegation came from Turkey and the age group 25 to 30 increased continuously, but the increase in the age group from 0 to 5 was very low. The reason for this was the continuous increase in immigration of the 25 to 30 age group without any plan or program. According to their calculations, he said, the population reached 590,000 and Talat confirmed the 500,000 number. 225,000 motorized vehicles and more than 400,000 mobile phone subscribers confirm that the population is over 500,000.
Mete Hatay mentioned a 30,000 number after the population transfer of 1974. The early settlers were from 5 different provinces and 7 different religious sects. Some of these returned home. The first-comers voted for TKP, then DHP, that they were leaning in the direction of social democracy and they were towing an Ecevit/Kemalist line. Right wingers supported the UBP, and socialists who were few in number leaned towards CTP. Between 1981 and 1985 there was Turkeyfication. With the formation of the YDP a possibility of a left coalition with the CTP appeared. Apart from this it moved to the right. He mentioned suitcase tourism and in 1990 the construction sector. Due to the war in Kurdistan there was population movement to big cities and to Cyprus. According to the numbers he gave 32,500 foreign students, 25,000 of them from Turkey, study at the universities in the northern part of Cyprus. With the new property law passed by the CTP and DP coalition, there was an increase in the number of real estate agents, buildings were erected to meet global demand and second homes were constructed. Mr. Hatay mentioned 35,000 houses and 45 to 60,000 workers to construct those buildings. He also touched on seasonal workers.
Now I am giving the floor to my friend Muharrem Faiz.
Muharrem Faiz: I find it useful to discuss the population issue by looking at the situation throughout the world and by looking at the population movements in the EU. According to one calculation, for every 35 persons in the world one is a refugee. It is important to look at this from two angles. First, from the angle of “new” conditions brought by the capitalist system and learning the influences these conditions bring on the population movements. And secondly, from the angle of understanding that it is no longer possible to live as a “pure”, something which is only a fantasy, or as a completely “separate” community. Firstly, we need to accept this simple reality. After drawing attention to this point, I will try to discuss how these population movements are met in various countries (legislative arrangements and attitudes towards incoming people.)
First of all, the ways and conditions the new comers are entering the country are being discussed throughout the world. After this, the conditions of temporary reception of these people are on the agenda. Finally, residence conditions of the family and how or under what conditions will families be reunited are discussed. Then citizenship rights, cultural and identity rights, and problems of representation follow.
Those dealing with these issues generally approach the matter in four periods. At the first period, it was massive population movements due to wars. Then the need for workers arose in France, Germany, and Britain and during that period there was massive immigration especially to Britain from Cyprus, from 1974 to 1980 workers were employed and families were formed. Together with this, in countries like Britain, Germany, and France laws changed repeatedly. From 1980 to 2002 there were those who sought refuge and political asylum. Questions like “how about the rights and legislation for these people?” came forth. In recent years the period of illegal entries into countries appeared. In a world where one out of 35 people is considered to be a refugee, it is said that the number of these illegal refugees reached half a billion.
When we look at the basic dynamics of this process, people who in the past promised and demanded a different world used different concepts, all concepts are historical anyway, a concept which is functional during a historical period, in a different period and in the hands of different people they can be used for different reasons and with different meanings. For this reason, it is very important that these concepts should be historically evaluated. For example, democracy and civil society. Today, civil society has become one of the main tools of new expansionism. That is, when certain new ideologies are being created, this situation should be taken into account. For instance, non-governmental organizations or civil society which is formed from hundreds of organizations, are being used by the state for the creation of new ideologies. For example, let us say Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots had a fight, you call Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots to Ledra Palace, they meet and if they do not throw stones to each other until the project ends, that activity is considered to be “successful.” It is the same in Kazakistan and in Africa. This is one of the methods in reproducing ideologies, of course, if we look at it with a critical eye. Hence, when we talk about free movement, we should also remember that in the past restrictions were very strict. Countries and even Europe would talk about a European fortress. But within the framework of the new needs of the capitalist system, its need for labour movement, the idea of having a “reserve army” everywhere and always, came to being. That is, global capitalism through creating imbalances, left people with no homes. Everywhere, for instance in the Mediterranean area, they overflow in ships, in Mexico they pass through rivers, under barbed wire etc, Putting their lives in danger they try to get to countries where they think there are more opportunities for them. The motherboard section of a computer is made in Scotland. Its chips are put in Indonesia. If our evaluations about all these developments are restricted to refugee rights, we will miss all the main dynamics that expose people to all kinds of exploitation and trade. And I think that this is the process going on. The fact that the literature on the subject is concentrated on refugee rights strengthens the missing link on this topic. And this missing link is more of a burning issue in the understanding of what is going on in our country. This problem is a reason for memorized speeches on the subject and for legalization of what is happening. Rather than being more tolerant towards population movements, arrangements are made according to needs. Legislative arrangements on population movements is one of the most important topics the UN and the Council of Europe occupy themselves with. They have a busy agenda on harmonization and prevention of human trafficking.
Neo-liberal phraseology on one hand and on the other the conditions brought about by the needs of capitalism, bring forth freedom in the area of human rights. This means the accompaniment of a certain right by the system. At this point, one cannot say that capitalism’s potential of mentioned accompaniment is absolute or irresistible. But the main dynamic that gives it strength is the quality of implementation and phraseology in our daily lives. If we put into action concepts and the phraseology of rights as if they have a movable value in themselves, at the end of the day, it leaves an effect of reproducing given structural capitalist factors. In other words, it would be best to give up questioning and within this framework deepening the meanings of concepts that are the strongest system factors capitalism uses/accompanies to nurture its power of accompaniment.
If it is evaluated within this framework, the most dangerous phraseologies are not “those who went are those who came anyway” or “those who come are Turks and those who go are Turks”, but the neo-liberal phraseology on “rights” that pretends to voice refugee/human rights. It is dangerous, because from the point of view of reproducing ideologically the given relations, it has the same function as the phraseologies in the past. However, both (the nationalist and the neo-liberal) are the different versions of the same hegemonic understanding. What is happening today is that instead of a phraseology experiencing a crisis of legality, a new phraseology (at the same time financed) dominant throughout the world is being set up. At this point it should be stated that the differentiation whether a person moving from one place to another did this voluntarily or by force had a relative significance in the past, today is losing its importance. At this point I will aim my criticism towards Mete Hatay. In the special case of north Cyprus, the view that “those who came from 1974 to 1980 came voluntarily, but those who came after are here due to economic reasons” is a differentiation not meaningful enough to explain the process of “demographic engineering” which we are experiencing and is causing the legalization of the process taking place today.
What is happening in north Cyprus? All these stem from the fact that immigration is seen as a threat.
In the light of all these developments discussions around definitions have increased. While the meaning of de-facto is being used for foreigners in a given country including tourists, de-jure is used for people whose permanent residence is within certain borders. For these to come together is not coincidental; when there was a census in our country in 2006, it was said that to have stayed or staying in the country for six months was enough to be considered for permanent residency. As it was accepted as such, it was declared that besides the 265 thousand de-facto population, there was also 256 thousand de-jure population; something not seen in another part of the world. This was because the permanent residency of a worker from Hatay was declared to be Cyprus, whereas if you had a child studying abroad he/she was not included in the census. I do not believe that the definition of the de-jure population in our country is very innocent. In Germany, for instance, if a child is in England for studies during the census, he/she is considered to be in Germany.
If we come to the subject of citizenship, some become citizens because of blood relations, for instance, in Germany, when reunification with East Germany took place, a child could become a citizen if it could be proven that he/she was a German citizen three generations back. This is a common trend in northern countries. In countries like the United States, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia, the connection to territory, that is, if one is born in that country it is enough to become a citizen. However, if you look at all the trends there is something like this: Conditions are very difficult while entering some countries, but after one enters citizenship is very easy. This is a widely accepted principle. In other countries entrance into the country is easy, but the time for refugees to stay there is considered as an adaptation period and citizenship is given after a long period of time. There are two trends in the world like this.
If we consider our country, we see that not only entering is easy, but so is obtaining citizenship. Hence, it is not possible to put the trend in our country among the trends in the rest of the world. And additionally, this is not something that came about coincidentally by itself.
There are people who were brought en masse from Turkey to our country starting from 1975. The way these people were settled and their way of contacts are important. In order to understand the situation of these people who were settled in north Cyprus, we need to look into this dual concept called “economic force” and “non-economic force” that is political force and how they affect each other. And if we do not tackle these within an integrated whole, our evaluations will turn into an empty political phraseology that misses the political dimension of the process and into a demographic text just dealing with numbers or into an empty political phraseology of mere words that does not give importance to the area of demography’s content. We need to deal both of these phenomena together.
What is meant by economic, non-economic or transfer of population with a political aim? There is what we call ethnic dilution within the non-economic transfer of population. Ethnic cleansing was the dominant view at the end of the 19th century. Today methods considered to be more legal and more acceptable are being used. This is to prevent the population where the transfer has taken place from becoming dominant. Israeli settlements in the West Bank and Golan Heights, and what Hitler did in Poland. We are diluting the population structure here by settling another population. Ethnic transfer is done to strengthen the decreasing population; for instance transferring population from other parts of Pakistan to increase the Pakistani population in Kashmir. Another method is ethnic cleansing; for instance, what was done to the Armenian population of Anatolia in early 20th century.
If one looks at north Cyprus, as opposed to the period 1975-1976, today people come here and decide to settle after a while because of the demands of the market for labour and those who come here and go decide with advice from relatives and friends to settle here after certain stages. All this process shows similarities with the process in Europe and the rest of the world. However, from the moment this process begins, the accompanying factors of non-economic forces make it different from other countries. Let’s look at what these factors are:
The process begins by itself these days, but after it begins it is being inspected by the Turkish ruling circles. When the flow is towards north Cyprus, in order to facilitate the incoming people as much as possible, entry rules are implemented less strictly than even in the most liberal European countries and there is insistence to keep this state of affairs. Arrangements for permanent residency and citizenship are changed to facilitate the permanent stay of those coming from Turkey and attempts are made to legalize this situation. However, there are some exceptions to the rule where state organs, the security forces, for instance, come into the game as the final decision-making authority in situations where someone illegally overstayed in the country. This is something that is undeniably taking place. If today the Labour Office says that someone had illegally overstayed in the country, the reaction of the army is in the direction that they have the final say on the matter. We need to be clear on this. As far as the population is concerned, there is the factor of non-economic force. This is still in action and it has its connections with the ruling power in Turkey. This force is in action even on those who at this moment are listening to us to convey to them what we say. We should not forget this and Turkey is continuing to get worse on this matter. This is the policy towards the Kurds and the policy concerning Cyprus is the same. Although as a country in the periphery of capitalism Turkey does not have the power for expansionist policies, she does whatever she can to a degree allowed for her as a subcontracting country. Turkey has periphery ambitions for expansion. And her breath is not sufficient for her expansionist ambitions; she has to stifle her desires, because her duties are restricted to a subcontractor. That is why sometimes we witness outward leaps to accomplish her ambitions and also inward spasmodic reactions. We see this every day. This ideology is today in action in this country, too, and it is behaving in such a way that it is reproducing itself. Dear friends, the fact that no one in this country, including the New Cyprus Party (YKP), has never made any announcement, a satisfactory one, on the Kurdish problem, urges me not to come to any such meetings anymore. Not a single person is making any announcement on the scandals in Turkey. One may feel sad about it, but the important thing is to make the criticisms publicly and reflect it to the public arena. Can there be a greater scandal than this? I am saying this in parenthesis. This silence is a policy of approval of Turkey’s official circle’s population policies here. That is people will elect to come and they will be sent here, there is no such a thing. There is a population increase and return is being made difficult, 6 trillion Turkish Liras is allocated from the budget for worker houses. And this surveillance continues. We should not forget that this way a non-economic force is in action.
OK, now that there are diluted constitutional frameworks, that is something that can be stepped on, for instance, according to Geneva Convention article 49, the subject of protecting civilians after war, protocol article 85 “cannot transfer its population to the region under its control”. Turkey has transferred and has committed a war crime. I was surprised at my friend Mehmet Hasgüler recently, he was speaking on TV, He is someone I like very much and value his opinions, as he spoke he was saying every now and then that Turkey could be in a difficult position. Dear friends, Turkey is doing this knowing that she will be in a difficult position. Turkey’s foreign minister thinks about such things and nothing else, anyway, these are the only things he thinks about. He acts very carefully and we are thinking about warning him; is this our duty? The UN is working intensely to bring about a new content to the concept of ethnic cleansing. Ethnic dilution is being applied to the Turkish Cypriot community, this is the policy.
And we have some numbers. I want to share these with you:
As it is known, censuses were carried out in north Cyprus taking into account neither international standards nor the needs of the country. Hence, the numbers contradict each other. For years, the day was saved with “projections” and both the people of this country and the international community were ridiculed. While in March 2006 the State Planning Organization announced population figures based on projection as 216,000, in April of the same year when the census was carried out the result was declared as 256,000. In the census there was not only a serious omission as far as the scope was concerned, but there were also serious mistakes in definitions and the difference between de jure and de facto population was shown to be only 9,000. According to the study based on the figures announce, the number of those who are of Cypriot origin (ancestral home) are shown to be around 133,000 and of those who came from Turkey and made citizens were 46,000. However, in addition to this there are around 74,000 people who are from Turkey. In numbers alternative to this census a different result is shown. For instance, one of the alternative sources is the arrival and departure statistics to north Cyprus of citizens of Turkey.
Table 1: TR and TRNC arrivals and departure statistics to north Cyprus
| TR arrivals | TR departures | TRNC arrivals | TRNC departures | |||
| 1974–2001 | 4924228 | 4833111 | 91117 | 2092729 | 2138112 | -45383 |
| 2002 | 316193 | 310514 | 5679 | 133317 | 134083 | -766 |
| 2003 | 340083 | 321447 | 18636 | 119682 | 119583 | 99 |
| 2004 | 434744 | 402578 | 32166 | 134886 | 135343 | -457 |
| 2005 | 488023 | 487440 | 583 | 152804 | 152347 | 457 |
| 2006 | 572633 | 570533 | 2100 | 175081 | 179915 | -4834 |
| 2007 | 598529 | 555193 | 43336 | 184181 | 178906 | 5275 |
| 7674433 | 7480816 | 193617 | 2992680 | 3038289 | -45609 |
Although there may be some discrepancies in the calculation of population through the statistics of arrivals and departures, it is a valuable source in showing the general picture. As it can be seen from table 1, after the arrivals and departures of Turkish Republic citizens are calculated, 193,617 remained in north Cyprus. Undoubtedly, their children born here should be added to and those who died should be subtracted from this number. Also approximately 26,000 Turkish students and officials should be subtracted. However, the number of Turkish citizens in north Cyprus is probably not around 120,000 as calculated from the census of 2006; it is between 220,000 and 230,000.
If one looks at when this number was reached, it will be seen that the aftermath of the UN Annan Plan has a place of special significance.
Table 2: The number of arrivals according to years of those permanently residing in North Cyprus
As it can be seen from table 2, after 2003 a total of 59,849 persons came and permanently settled in north Cyprus. When one looks at these numbers (the number of officials and students from Turkey should be deducted) it can be witnessed that the period after 2003 is a time when population flow was most intense not counting the period 1975-76.
If one looks at the arrivals and departures of TRNC citizens after 1974 a tendency towards emigration is observed. When from among the TRNC citizens the number of those who are of Turkish origin seeking asylum in Britain and other European countries and those Cypriots who went abroad for various reasons numbering 3,500 to 4,000 are deducted, it can be seen that approximately 35,000 Turkish Cypriots have left the country permanently.
If one looks at the general picture without getting lost in detail, it can be deduced that during the last 30 years there has been an intense population flow from Turkey to north Cyprus and that there has been emigration, at times more intense, from among Turkish Cypriots to foreign countries. When one looks at numbers, it is clear that this means a “radical demographic change” in north Cyprus.
The increase of population brought from Turkey from year to year. There has been a noticeable increase after 2003. These are people who came to stay permanently. Those who came during the period of 1975-79, I am not sure if these can be read from this graphic. These are general numbers. This has increased much more especially after the Annan plan. I get these reports monthly. I have them all. Friends, we know the number of arrivals and all the departures after 1974. The remaining number is 193,617. 1.8% of these died. But at the same time, others are being born. And if we consider the ratio of population increase in a village in Turkey, the increase would be 1.2%. But if we calculate the arrivals and departures to TRNC, we find that 45,000 are missing. If we add to this the yearly population increase, we get the number that went abroad. Hence, when we make comments about the population, the door numbers may involve some risks, but these risks are not great. Among these there are also those who sought asylum.
Okay, what are those who try to deal with this problem within the framework of just refugee rights doing? What are the points coming out of the “new” phraseology? “There is racism against people from Turkey”, “there is discrimination against people from Turkey” and the like. In fact, this sensitivity is a false one. Because those who belittle, discriminate against, and exploit most heavily the people who come here are the capitalist class. However, the famous “devilish business, devilish actors” process operates and by having them to work under worst circumstances, providing them accommodation where even animals won’t feel comfortable, not providing the workers (most of them are in fact peasants) hygienic living conditions and on top of this they are being belittled by saying “they live like animals, they smell like animals, they do not deserve more than this.” In other words, those who are the cause of them living like this explain their bad situation with their “personal characteristics” and they throw their responsibility on to working people with the word “racism.” The attitudes of discrimination, racism, and scorn spread to other strata of society from the upper classes of north Cyprus. It is true that the Turkish Cypriot left is also affected by this every now and then. Hence, instead of exposing the population policies and the hegemonic phraseology, the wide strata of society focus on people, criticizing their way of dress, their way of behaviour on the beach and the like. This is exactly the tendency to allow a free hand to liberal phraseology. It talks back and forth from a secure (without any risk) position, without seeing at all the structural policy and with a false sensitivity that does not even come near class analysis. There is neither the initiative to unionize the people in question nor the worry to carry their problems to the public arena. Their targets are only the dissidents who oppose the ongoing population policies. The Turkish Cypriot community which has become, as the poet Mehmet Yaşın, would say “like an egg struck by lightning” and in its daily relations feels itself without breath every passing day will be saved from so called racism. The position is apparent and at the end of the day it is the reproduction of the hegemonic phraseology with different accessories. Okay, what is happening in other countries on this matter?
It is accepted that in problems concerning refugees each country has its own conditions. Even among EU countries there are restrictions in areas concerning transportation and settlement. Especially the European Parliament is working on preventing secret immigration and it is possible that the time for the reunification of families will be extended. Okay, what can be done on this matter? The Turkish Cypriot Community has said no to these policies that have been implemented successfully. What can be done from now on? What we need is a class outlook. I am not saying this for the sake of using a fashionable word; I am also quoting from conversations among high level bureaucrats who are saying that for capital to reproduce or amass itself here, it needs a certain amount of population in this country. Write this somewhere.
However, the relationship between north Cyprus and the Republic of Turkey which is asymmetric and not innocent, (because it has also expansionist effect) it is also “internal”. The reason why it is internal is because the said relationship, at the same time, stems from the fact that it functions as the main dynamic for the development of capitalist class here. In other words, the population who “were brought/forced to come” (this distinction lost its meaning) to north Cyprus in order to protect or strengthen the de-facto situation and to reproduce, at the same time it has become the most important component of North’s accumulation structures (capital accumulation crisis, the expansion of capital, the minimization of the market problem, looting of property, land utilization etc). In other words, the prominent members of the north Cyprus capital are not simply a collaborator class. At the same time, as a class whose developmental possibilities have been blown up/paralyzed, they have become organic actors of the process. Hence, the population transfer which is one of the most important factors for Turkey’s hegemony over Cyprus is also essential for north Cyprus’ capital. It is essential both economically (cheap labour + rearrangement of the labour market + destruction of the means of organization and solidarity + the suffocation of demands in the areas of education/health/social policies and the like); and for many non-economic processes. The plundering of Greek Cypriot properties and land and their usurpation in north Cyprus, the use of the land in Karpasia other than the natural park use are available examples of this.
Local resistance policies should be developed in this country. What do I mean by that? In this country, ten people sat down and having in mind the population policies, too, changed the names of places. If this is the case then I would write Abohor on all of my letters and mail. Inside I will write Cihangir so as not to have confusion in communication. If you bring population and force me to unionize then I will unionize. I will not permit the creation of a hierarchy in the labour market. You will remember that capital asked for a different minimum wage for immigrant workers in this country, hence, this is what it can be done here. And as far as racism is concerned, which is one of the most important issues and it is something that capital does, they criticize people instead of policies. This struggle needs to be carried with these people. If not, no one should daydream, because it is not people who should be criticized but policies.
Halil Paşa: Thank you. In the mean time let me tell you that we are ready to take the questions. We’ll be glad if the question slips are collected. And now I give the floor to Mehmet Hasgüler.
Mehmet Hasgüler: We have many valuable friends here. Many things have been said before me. I will speak very briefly. There is something like this; we need to underline some of the things. The population issue began with the transfer of population after the circular #60 dated May 2, 1975, with Turkey’s aim to close the labour force gap here. From 1975 to 2008 34 years have passed and however you look at it, this policy still continues. This document was published with the word “confidential”. If we take a look at 1974, if you find it read it, it is by Erbil Tuşalp “the paşa and the general”; by having a general who lead the 1974 and Lala Mustafa Paşa (the general who lead the Ottoman army to conquer Cyprus) talk to each other, he says that it demonstrates with care how each step in Cyprus should be made to correspond to international law. That is, the view, sometimes expressed by Rauf Denktaş and sometimes by other politicians, that today in Cyprus ceasefire conditions exist and if with the April 24th referendum the Annan plan was accepted other conditions would have prevailed, but what we need to take as the first reference point is the ceasefire conditions after the July 20th – August 15th’s second operation and the population transfer during these conditions is first of all against the Geneva Convention and the penal court established in The Hague in 2002. This court is very much different from the de-facto courts established for Ruanda and Yugoslavia, because it can serve as an example to the world. Hence, one can say that the illegal transfer of population here is a crime against humanity. It is also a known fact that after 1990 politics, this population has become part of the internal politics and has been a vehicle for intervention. And this intervention as been increased by the security forces commander through 5000 new citizenships and there are statements saying they did this to facilitate the election victory of New Birth Party (YDP). These are statements that can constitute a war crime by themselves. You can find this in Özker Özgür’s article dated 20 August, 1990 and he directly refers to the security forces. I think that this is the first point of reference, that is, since ceasefire conditions exists, illegal transfer of population to north Cyprus is contrary to international agreements. The second point and for me the more important one, of course I also agree with the views of friends expressed earlier, that is, both racism and economical/class conditions can be discussed. However, the second point is that at the stage where the Turkish Cypriots would use their right to self-determination, with the population brought here after 1974 becoming twice as the population we call the “original” population that was here until 1974 and the truth that the population brought from Turkey would blow up the right of self-determination of the people here.
This problem has not been solved yet and still continues. Hence, I think that we should approach the subject at hand from these two points and we should also be able to discuss these from the point of view of human rights in Europe and other related issues. But the fact is that there is the determining aspect of the population transferred here, that is the aspect which is crucial for us, our political life, the aspect of determining the existence of Turkish Cypriots living in this country, and preventing its right to self-determination. We know that this is done openly in many parts of the world. For instance, in 2004 the Kurds transferred population to Kerkuk and by referring to 20 July 2002 penal court in The Hague which Turkey has not approved yet, by referring to the Geneva Convention, and by referring to the 1998 Treaty of Rome, it is being said that they have committed a war crime. If so, isn’t a war crime to transfer population to Cyprus? I just wanted to say this and learn the views of distinguished persons here.
Thank you for giving me this opportunity.
Halil Paşa: We also thank Mehmet Hasgüler. If we summarize the words of the last two speakers, Mr. Muharrem Faiz said that 1 out of 35 persons in the world are refugees, capitalism has become global, the concepts of placeless-ness and being without a homeland has changed accordingly, and this took place not voluntarily, but with the globalization of capitalism. He said it is difficult to enter some countries, but when entering citizenship is given easily. This is one application. The other application is that entrance to the country is easy, but the integration period is kept long. For Cyprus both entrance and citizenship are easy, he said. And expanding on this he explained the reasons for becoming a refugee as political force and economic force. As examples to ethnic consolidation and ethnic diluting, he showed Israel’s applications and to ethnic cleansing the Armenian problem. To summarize what is happening here, the population being carried here under the supervision of political power comes as a result of Turkey’s perceived imperialist ambitions which she ideologically imposes on her citizens. This state of affairs came to the attention of the Geneva Convention, because whatever the reason for the transfer of this population to the region, it is an ethnic dilution against the Cypriots. What Muharrem Faiz proposes against all this is, if they change the names of villages we will use the old names, if they impose obstacles against forming unions, we will unionize or if they impose cheap labour or wage differences, we will campaign for equal wages, and against racism we should resist ethnic dilution.
Mehmet Hasgüler said that this work force has begun to be transferred to this island after circular #60 dated 2 May, 1975, ceasefire conditions exist on the island, under these conditions it is a crime according to the Geneva Convention to illegally transfer population, furthermore, the illegal transfer of population could be a crime against humanity under The Hague International Penal Court. He added that the transfer of population here prevents the Turkish Cypriots to exercise their right to self determination.
In the meantime the questions came. I will take the questions and start with Alpay Durduran.
Those born in Cyprus after 1975 should be counted as Cypriot or as refugees in a census? For instance, those whose parents came from Turkey but were born in Cyprus?
The second question, is it possible for each refugee to agree with an employer and get a work permit? Isn’t there a restriction on this by law? Can you explain your struggle against unregistered work force?
And lastly, the plundering and assimilation in these lands and the wholesale of Greek and Turkish property is a bloodless genocide. Why doesn’t Europe, the world and their famous laws see all this? Are there any other such examples of this kind in the world?
Alpay Durduran: Let me say from the beginning that I do not find it correct to use very legal or suitable terminology. Let me say this without paying much attention to all that; in order for someone to be a refugee one should be a refugee or have a lawful status as one. What law? The Geneva Convention was mentioned here, thus, anyone who is not here temporarily is illegal. We can neither say they are Cypriots nor refugees. There is a political problem here and it is very important today. It is more important than where one would reside. It is even more important than the property right. Many Cypriots have even given up their right to property so as to facilitate a solution to the political problem. There is the threat of war everywhere so a political solution is important. It is true that the census should have been done properly.
The second issue is about human rights. If you want to protect the human rights of these people, if you want them to live humanely in this country, if you want the establishment of good relations, if you do not want them to become a social threat, then this issue should be taken up in categories.
They have approved it in parliament without our knowledge on May 2, 1975, had they announced it even the most nationalist would have opposed it. People are still in Limassol, don’t bring people from Turkey, they would have screamed and shouted. The aim was to bring 90,000 people in 1990, but only 30,000 remained, because they could not look after them. This is the policy of the Ottomans. The chairman of the Aid Commission said this. We implemented this in the past and now we are implementing it in Cyprus, he said. They attached a pipe from above which flows and another one from below emptying it; they will accumulate as much as possible. When they saw that after 1980 no work was given to people coming from Turkey, they decided to leave everyone free to stay. There is a court decision to the effect that our national policy is to increase the population in Cyprus. This was put forward as a reason and the court approved it. This court accepted that the national policy is greater than the constitution. Because of this people are not settled here for humanitarian reasons. I did not understand what I heard tonight and I am very sad.
Every year social and economic coordination packets are signed between Turkey and TRNC. No policy stays out of this. I do not see anything done to solve the problems of these people. All these are for a purpose. All these serve to prevent a solution in Cyprus. For this reason this is a threat for us. This is the first time I hear a Cypriot whose house has been encircled to put forward such loose comments. I am very sad. Whether you consider them to be Cypriot or a refugee none is correct. This census is not correct, either. The prime minister announced on TV that we will count even those who couldn’t be counted. We are still waiting.
Can anyone who wants to agree with an employer to get a work permit? This reminds us of something, there are many agreements between Turkey and this state and there are as many cooperation agreements between Turkey and Germany as there are in these agreements. That is there are standard agreements concerning the labour force. If there is a demand from Germany, employers make their needs known and this demand is communicated to Turkey. Turkey takes the necessary measures and makes announcements, people are chosen through tests and those chosen are sent to Germany. When he goes there he cannot change jobs, conditions are ready and the place he will stay etc is determined. If the employer does not need him he goes back to his country and when there is a need he comes back. Here he can apply for a job by just reading a notice on the window while walking around. Here he has the right to change jobs. There is no inspection or control. In Germany a foreign worker can only work at a place where the union has collective work agreement or where it has formed a committee to control wages. I do not know if you saw in Germany signs like “Siirt kasabı” or “Sarı çizmeli Mehmet Ağa”. Such signs were put up by those who in time stayed in Germany and you can see how Germans are beginning to get angry against the Turks who remained there. You cannot settle there by bringing your children. And here we say that we should legalize them so that they will become legal. Of course they went to primary schools as well… Look at the majority at the primary schools… Now they are in the hands of people from Turkey. 55% of the policemen and 88% of the soldiers are from Turkey.
I would say this for the last question: In a small place like Cyprus and in only one part of this, our problems hurt only us; they do not care about it very much. Some friends said that the situation here is a crime according to the Geneva Convention; yes we think it is, too, and it is a crime according to any ordinary citizen. But since the adversary does not care and no penalty is in place, they do not even see it as a crime. Hence, this is our problem and we shall continue to talk and cry about it. Today Turkey has her EU adventure, she has membership relations, and because it creates some handicaps as far as these relations are concerned, they show some interest in the Cyprus problem, not to solve our problem, but so as not to become an obstacle for them. And we complain, but they warn us to the effect that “They do not look with sympathy to movements against foreign workers!” The Greek side is also complaining about these things and so are we. Right is on our side, but unfortunately there is not much we can do. I hope that Cypriots will learn to demand rights for themselves, too.
Halil Paşa: Now I am going to read the questions addressed to Mete Hatay.
According to your assessment economic reasons are the main cause for migration. As Turkish Cypriots emigrate to England and other countries, do those who come from Turkey use Cyprus as a stepping stone for emigrating to European countries? Is there a research on this topic?
The second question, Turkey sees the population policy as an instrument in directing the Cyprus problem. Is it racism when Greek Cypriots bring this matter forth to counter this? What should the Greek Cypriots do? Should they allow Turkey to rule the south, too?
Mete Hatay: As I explained above, about 30,000 people were brought from Turkey to Cyprus between 1974 and 1980. Of these, approximately 6,000 were of Kurdish origin. Some of these persons of Kurdish origin who had acquired TRNC citizenship applied for asylum to Britain between 1990 and 1997. Because of this, in 1997 Britain began to apply visa restrictions on TRNC nationals. While some of those who went to Britain in this period acquired residency permits, others asked for asylum. We know that those whose demand for asylum was accepted settled in various European countries. In addition to this, there were many Turkish nationals of Kurdish origin who went to the south crossing the green line. More correctly, we know that not only TRNC-Turkish citizens, but also those who were only citizens of Turkey went to the south and demanded asylum. In many studies conducted since 1985, data and numbers are given.
To answer the second question, it’s important not to blame Greek Cypriots on this matter. For Greek Cypriots, Cyprus is now a country which after 1974 accommodates many people who lost their property and fled to the south. And it is a known fact that the property of these people are being shared and distributed here. I believe that the constant exaggeration of the numbers of Turkish nationals who have come here lessens the interest of Greek Cypriots for peace. We passed onto them our fear and I think that they wonder about how they can live in peace with us. Because they also know that there is the Geneva Convention, but there is no provision to return populations by force. There is no sending back the population after the transfer has taken place unless there is an international agreement, because the incoming population has certain human rights, as well. Hence, in the event of an agreement a substantial portion of this population will stay here. Of course, the number of this substantial portion is not exactly known. The larger this number, the further away the Greek Cypriots will stay from peace. And this kind of exaggerated publications pushes them away from the table.
For the last question I have a proposal which I made in my book. First, we need to tackle the citizen population. This data is in the hands of all parties. In addition, the list of people who voted in all elections has been given to parties. All the parties can come together and establish the ethnic makeup of the voting population in 4-5 days. They can also give these results to representatives of international organizations and say, this is the number of our citizen population. They can also relieve the stress resulting from this problem by saying that from among this population, this amount is of Turkish origin. The remainder are the workers working here. So long as they have a work permit they work here and the day their work permit expires they will go back. There are also students and when they graduate they too will go back.
Halil Paşa: The AKEL Secretary General said this today: “The must in our population policy is that a number which does not affect the right of self-determination of the Turkish Cypriots can stay.”
Mete Hatay: This number is about 50,000 they say.
Muharrem Faiz: I want to make a proposal. Without bothering ourselves with numbers, the State Planning Organization (DPÖ) says there are 178,000 citizens in this country. During the presidential elections it was said there were around 150,000 voters. That means there were 28,000 citizens under the age of 17. However, there are 40,000 on the population register today. That is the numbers do not match.
The DPÖ tells us that they counted those whose permanent residency is Cyprus and found their number to be 256,000. The minister of internal affairs tells us that legislation is prepared for those who are not among the 178,000 citizens and those who are here for five years will be given permanent residency. That is the DPÖ is doing a census based on supposed permanent residency, whereas the minister says he will give permanent residency.
Let’s speak the truth about what is happening in this country. These are not unknowns. Here we say to our people, do not pay any attention that they are against Turkey. The Republican Turkish Party (CTP) has no political stand. They have never been to Çağlayan Park in their lives and now because they changed its name they oppose it. Do you go there? There cannot be such a false sensitivity.
What did they do in the books that Mr. Alpay Durduran has shown? In 1996 they did a census. The UN asks that a census be carried out every ten years. When there is a census every ten years, one can obtain a certain rate of increase according to the change in the population. This way you cannot play with numbers. In April 2006 before the census was carried out, the DPÖ’s website showed a population of 210,000 in March. After the census it turned out to be 265,000.
Mete Hatay: What I am talking about here is the electorate, if you carried out a census and the result is 178,000, lists of voters can be sent to regions the same way it is done during elections. With these data at hand can’t 8 parties determine the result?
Halil Paşa: Let me intervene here. The question was how to solve the population problem. And our friend Mete Hatay put forward his proposal. What Muharem Faiz said was also confirmed by Alpay Durduran; that is the DPÖ has no reliable data whatsoever.
In order to ease the atmosphere of this discussion let me read a note given by Şener Şenocaklı. A guest from Turkey saw the slogan “no to becoming a province” on the streets of Morphou and said that in Turkey they are giving a big struggle to remain as a province.
Now let us continue with the questions. Hadn’t Turkey committed a war crime by invading this place?
Mete Hatay: Of course, she has. Turkey committed a war crime by invading this place. But the content of the war crime and sanctions to be implemented for this crime are ambiguous.
Halil Paşa: There is also one question directed to all the panellists: How do you see the population whether brought or came to north Cyprus on their own? Do you see it as a normal migration to any country or do you think of it as a practice against international law and the Geneva Convention? I think this question has already been answered.
The next question is as follows: How do you see the elections under a structure completely under control where Cypriots are a minority? Are elections a solution? What is to be done?
Mete Hatay: I respect YKP’s stand towards elections. But I am going to vote.
Halil Paşa: How was inner Nicosia settled? Was it an empty area before? Did it have a historical characteristic? Who decided on settling incoming people into inner Nicosia? Of course, the state. However, thousands of people who did not have a work or residence permit were sent back with ships and planes. If they were to be sent back why were they allowed to enter the country?
Mete Hatay: Muharrem also made a study on inner Nicosia. 85% of the property owners of inner Nicosia are Turkish Cypriots. Most of the people living here are tenants. How did they come here? I explained this before, in the 1980’s suitcase trade etc. many people started to come to Cyprus. They were serving as middlemen or subcontractors. When Turkey was isolating herself from the world, we would bring goods from the Far East and by getting them into Turkey we were earning money. And these people were acting as middlemen. The population of inner Nicosia was to a large extent decreased after 1974. About 3,000 refugees from areas like Kaymakli area lived there between 1963 and 1974. After 1974 these people scattered to areas like Kızılbaş, Yenişehir or other places. There was a decline in population in this area. Then home owners of this area began to move to more luxurious or newer buildings, and after the building of social houses the middle classed moved there. People dealing in the suitcase trade gradually began to fill up the empty buildings. In the meantime, the textile industry developed and approximately 10,000 workers came. Most of them are from Turkey, some from Pakistan and India and for a time from Albania etc. The inner city became a place of residence for them until dormitories were built behind the factory in the industrial region of Nicosia. Huge pensions that resemble prisons were built there. At this time there are about 5000 people living there. Later as the construction sector grew and workers arrived, as the Yenikent in Gönyeli appeared, as the houses and villas in Hamitköy mushroomed, those places emptied and these places filled up. That is, what we call depressed areas of the city came into being and people came to these depressed areas. They came not because they like the Ottoman houses and the Lusignan mansions, but because that is where they were able to find a place to stay.
Halil Paşa: What is the ratio of marriages between those of Cypriot and Turkish origin? Is there a number? What is the ratio of marriages between Cypriots and mixed ones? What is the number of children resulting from these marriages? What is the number of children from marriages of Cypriot origin? In developed countries what can be the highest ratio of refugees in comparison with the local population?
Muharrem Faiz: Terminologies like origin or mixed should be used very carefully. Words that can hurt people should not be used. One should take into account the psychology of people. The ratio of refugees to the population is a fair question. In all European countries, we studied 34 countries on this subject; the acceptable ratio is between 9% and 13%. Mr. Alpay Durduran is right on this matter. That is, what the official policy of Turkey and the collaborator capital is doing is very shameful. On the one hand, they are forcefully bringing people here, and on the other hand, they are suffocating the local population. Let us express these things. The ratio is very high. In Britain when there are 5 or 6 refugee children in a class of 40, they oppose this. That is there is so much racism and they are developing discrimination policies. Even if they are registered, how can you find these children through workers? We should develop strategies within the classroom. Here people from Turkey also. If in a class of 40, 20 to 22 children are from Turkey, you cannot develop classroom strategies. Everything public becomes unusable. That is you cannot enter the hospitals and you cannot ride the buses. And the trend towards private sector increases. Let me relay to you a conversation that took place in the parliament in 1985. Mr. Durduran will also recall this conversation. The speaker was Raif Denktaş. He talked as follows: “They are giving citizenships to anyone, what can one say about importing voters. The best thing we can do in the parliament is to accept Mr. Durduran’s proposal and give this authority directly to the parliament; because the social fabric of this country is worsening. We somehow need to put an end to this. We want to put an end to this through peaceful and legal means.” The late Raif Denktash was saying this. I read all the minutes of the parliament of that period. During that period Salih Coşar was also was in parliament and they did not raise their voices. Why don’t you speak? Chronologically if you had raised this point during that period you would be listened to. Now I do a research and see that this topic is not on the agenda. I have a leftwing magazine in my hands. There is not even a word about plans to create an ethnically based region. Although they cancelled the work permits of people from Turkmenistan, why is it that they did not do the same for them? Why did they terminate the work permits for Turkmenians, these are the things we should ask. This leftwing magazine has no such issue. The only thing that exists for them are the rights of people from Turkey. It is fashionable to write about “the other”. How nice, one can say anything from a safe and intellectually risk free stand. For the sake of discussion, the phraseology on this subject kills the public arena.
Here we also need to look at what is being done in other parts of the world. Let us see what we need to do. The Turkish Cypriots lost the first round. In the second round, something called the Zambia Initiative was established in the UN. The Angolans came in so suddenly their numbers reached 220,000 in a short time. When they first came they began to use these people as workers etc. Then they established themselves there and sending them back became impossible. There they became miserable. Send these people back too they are worse off here, even when they go on vacation there they cannot stay. That is you are creating a humanitarian problem and you are not even aware of it. And especially people from the Justice and Development Party (AKP) who have no intellectual accumulation and are spiritual twins of the fascists in Turkey, they have been told about the population problem during their visits here and their reply was, and I heard this from a few people, “we can take them back”. People who have lived here for 30 years and their way of living have changed, how can you take these people back? That is why in the Zambia policy the government helps with housing for these people who want to stay and pays compensation for others who want to return. The same thing happened with people from Sudan in Uganda. And a new concept, rights of the indigenous people, came into being. Because wherever there is an influx of population social mechanisms are hampered. That is there are examples of this, in Uganda and Angola. This means everyone should make their contribution. Our criticism should be directed towards policies and not towards people. I see that criticizing people has affected the left, too, I mean didn’t Turkish Cypriots back in the 1960’s also lived 4 or 5 families in one house? We are behaving shamelessly on this matter and from this point we become reactionaries. In one interview I remember criticizing YKP, too; what I said was this: When we see pictures in the newspapers we say that Cypriot identity is important, strategically it is important, but as we step back to defend this strategy, if we forget why we step back and start to run backwards then what we do can also be perceived as racism. Mr. Durduran is very careful with his phraseology, but sometimes I see that among the left also there is haphazard talk; I repeat, one should aim policies and not people. There are examples about what to do, as well, these can be developed, these need to be discussed.
Mete Hatay: It was asked how many “mixed” children there are, they are about 16,200. As far as the number of immigrants in a developed country is concerned; the numbers are low, but in a country like Luxemburg, an EU country, the ratio of immigrants can be up to 45% of the population. She has a population of about 400,000 and also about 70,000 workers cross the border everyday from countries like Germany and France to work there. In Britain, for instance, it is 15%, in London up to 35%, this number goes up to 60% if second generation children are taken into account. That is London has become a migrant city. In larger countries the refugees are concentrated in bigger cities. Of course, this situation changes from country to country, some countries have a very strict policy on accepting migrants, for instance, Finland did not accept migrants into the country for many years, but after she became an EU Member she began to slowly accept migrants, in Sweden the ratio reaches 20% and it became one of the most liberal countries in accepting refugees. Of course, they, too, had a strict refugee policy up to the 1980’s.
Halil Paşa: There is a question for Mehmet Hasgüler; is there the possibility that we accept this population structure? Do the citizenships that were handed out have international acceptance? Is it a weakness of the UN that during the referendum on the Annan plan in the north the right to vote was also given to the population that was brought in?
Mehmet Hasgüler: There was a report prepared by the rapporteurs of the Council of Europe on April 27, 1992 which we, the opposition, should have paid attention to during the 1990’s. They prepared this report on behalf of the refugee and population committee. There is a recommendation here; this recommendation was to cooperate with the authorities in the north and the south to obtain reliable data about the population rather the unreliable numbers we are discussing now. At the same time, they proposed to the Republic of Cyprus and to the north, they do not say TRNC, that all incoming foreigners be registered and a register be kept at the Turkish embassy for citizens of Turkey, their residence be identified, and to keep a record of those Turkish citizens visiting Cyprus. They also wanted that a census be carried with international observers present. Of course these things were not realized and were not publicized. The ceasefire conditions here are in line with international law, but the handing out of citizenships after 1974 is against the Geneva Convention. If we look at the population structure in the 34 years after 1974, I think that there is a fall in the authority of the Turkish Cypriots and there is the danger that the international community will lose its credibility due to the change in the structure of population here. Firstly because, the agreements made according to those conditions have been eroded. Secondly, since the population brought over from Turkey exceeded the original population of Turkish Cypriots, partition has in fact been realized, something contrary to the first paragraph of the second article of the second paragraph of the treaty of guarantees. And this is forbidden by the treaty of guarantees. Right before the Annan plan a dishonourable situation as far as the UN is concerned took place, that is while on the one hand such things were published in Europe and while in the UN General Assembly resolutions were passed to the effect that the demographic structure has been changed, while on the other hand, on April 24, 2004, 50,000 people brought over from Turkey took part in a referendum as if they were citizens in the self-determination of this community. This is one of the internal problems of the UN, because the Cyprus problem is a matter of prestige for the UN, a matter of solving the Cyprus problem to serve as an example, and because of that it was a matter of honour. According to agreements made here the population brought over from Turkey should not have voted, but the political view of the opposition, for instance, in July of 1992 Ferdi Sabit Soyer said many things relating to these reports. But this changed in 2004, because the objection then was political, they were upset about the 1990 elections, because those with dual citizenships (Turkish and Turkish Cypriot) were voting in favour of those in power, but when they voted for them it was something reasonable. And unfortunately today we are face to face with a lack of political will. Whether this will be contrary to international law has also to do with the political will here. But I think that so long as no strong political will is exhibited apart from a small minority, it will remain a suspended issue.
Halil Paşa: The question is for Mete Hatay. I heard that the Greek administration has the information on identity and places of residence of Turkish citizens brought over from Turkey after 1974. Is this true? It is known that 54% of land belonging to Greek Cypriots in the north was distributed to people brought over from Turkey. Who will pay for these lands after a possible agreement?
Mete Hatay: There is no need to pass on this information. As I said before information on the population and electoral lists were handed out on CD’s before the elections. The Greek Cypriot police are looking at the information on those CD’s when making checks at checkpoints. They look at this information and by finding out the data on births they know where the mothers and fathers of those children born here are from. As far as the second question is concerned, there is an agreement already submitted, but I do not know what kind of an agreement there will be in the future, according to the Annan plan the individuals there would have to leave these properties and apart from the alternative houses to be built for them, they would have no claim on any other land or house. That is if they are not refugees from the south they would not have any of these rights. In any agreement property rights are within human rights, the person living in that house has certain human rights. That is the person who would have to vacate a house would be provided another one so that it can be returned to its original owner, and if the owner does not want it than the person occupying the house will have to purchase it. Perhaps the AKP or the founding state will pay for it, I don’t know, whatever happens, in the end we will have to decide. But the lands will be returned to their owners in the event of an agreement.
Halil Paşa: Finally, I will give each speaker two minutes to conclude. Before getting to that I would like to mention the announcement in the south today concerning the period of staying there which is 4 years. As you know, when you go to inner Nicosia in the south you will see people from Philippines, from Indonesia etc. In the announcement today it is said that these people can stay only 4 years. After 4 years they take the necessary measures and send them back to their countries, because if they stay more than 4 years they will have certain rights. They will have to be provided housing and made citizens. And this is another point.
Mete Hatay: Before that, I would also like to touch on certain issues. For instance, a news item was published in Kibris newspaper that there are 225,000 registered vehicles in north Cyprus. About 120,000 of these are saloon cars. And these are all the vehicles registered since 1974. That is at this moment there are not 225,000 vehicles in traffic. There are also 421,000 mobile phone subscribers for a population of 300,000. If we look at the south, the population of south Cyprus is 750,000 and there are 1,250,000 mobile phone subscribers. More than the population too. Here (in north Cyprus) there is a concentrated, mobile population. University students come here and buy a phone card and then they lose it; the same thing happens with the soldiers and tourists. The issue is not whether the number is more or less, I just want to say that one cannot calculate the population using these numbers.
Halil Paşa: And first I give the floor to Alpay Durduran.
Alpay Durduran: First of all, someone says something and someone else comes and says that this is what is correct according to another source. Both of them are not correct, for instance.
The first 250,000 motorized vehicles are working motorized vehicles. The number 217,000 comes from another source. You know there are car associations, the two associations who have fights on prices and in tourism, the tourism that people come from Germany and want to return without spending anything, this number was given in one of these meetings to criticize this kind of tourism and there were many high ranking people there and no one objected to this. If you look at the traffic today, you will see that the number of vehicles in traffic is still 225,000 since 1975. Probably vehicles more than this number dropped out from traffic. Because of this we need to see and accept the reality before us. If we take things piece by piece, we can always find something to object to at each piece. You can look at the world and find something in there, too. If your duty is to find excuses, it is easy to find them. Due to many reasons Britain is the most generous in accepting refugees, because people are looking for a government in Britain. The government in Britain is not Britain’s government. And the government in the United States is not the United States’ government. I saw people in the United States demonstrating and asking where their government is, because they are the government of international capital. They govern the world. They do not care about what happens in their country. Those who are in the government and occupy high positions hide away, putting barbed wire and guards around their premises so that when school children are on vacation the unemployed youth will not come and harm them. So this is what the situation is in the United States and Britain.
That is it is not correct to look at their ratios of refugees and say something. Whether this ratio is 15% or 50% it is not an excuse. What society has accepted the ratio of foreigners to be 100%, 105%, or 110%? Who has accepted this?
Mete Hatay: Mr. Durduran, I am not saying that more population should come. Do not misunderstand me. In 1974 there were collaborators, and they brought population from Turkey. At the time, Cypriots saw themselves as Turks. Now, with a new identity construction, starting in the 1980’s, we’ve become more Cypriot. We found our identity. But now, I’m saying “Let us not be collaborators anymore”. That is, let us not become collaborators and bring anymore population here together with the newly created bad bourgeois and capital. There is construction everywhere. There are foreign workers in the textile industry in the industrial sectors, etc. Let us question the relations of production here. Let us look at ourselves a little. We are also collaborators in this matter. I have no objection if tomorrow they stop bringing them altogether. The infrastructure is not sufficient. The social cost is too much. But as we question this we must also question ourselves, our relations of production etc. It is not only the capitalist circles we also contribute to these developments by hiring cleaning ladies for house chores, etc.
Alpay Durduran: Let us not only talk about the workers with the baggy trousers. I think that those who come with a Bond bag are more dangerous.
Halil Paşa: I think that Mr. Durduran means that we should look not only at cheap labour, but also at mafia-fication. OK, Muharrem Faiz has the floor now.
Muharrem Faiz: I think that it would be better if Mete puts at the beginning and at the end of his book this discussion between himself and Durduran, that is the relations in production of the capitalist system of the collaboration, how these dynamics work, and Turkey’s official policy.
Mete Hatay: It’s there. Perhaps you have not read it. I even put Vedat Çelik’s objection, I put the objection he sent to the UN in 1975. I put it in the book how with a rejectionist attitude they tried to hide the transfer of population here.
Muharrem Faiz: Okay. These are well known stupidities now. These are things that are now inevitably written about. And writing this means missing a phraseology whose language has been surpassed and renewed. For instance, they criticised Beşiktepeli for trying to deduce numbers from the number of loafs of bread consume. Instead of being ashamed of what they have done, what can this man do other than trying to find through his own effort. I think that in the book the structural analysis should be done first. Writing about other stupidities is nothing. And in reality these things do not come out with the number of cars or loafs of bread. And in Mete’s book the structural analysis is missing.
Now we mentioned 178,000 citizens, among 256,000 persons there are 80 to 90,000 who are not citizens. Let us insist on this. If the law passes 75% of these will receive permanent residency and after a number of years you cannot prevent the citizenships of these people. That is the real blow will come here, this should be prevented. Because, if those who will stay are from the 178,000 this number is tolerable. Social policies can be developed and together something can be done. But the law being prepared now contains many dangers. We must quickly put it on the agenda and oppose it.
Halil Paşa: Lastly, I am giving the floor to Mehmet Hasgüler.
Mehmet Hasgüler: I think it would have been better if we discussed the population problem together with the property problem. Because another dangerous point is in how many hands are properties in the north are being concentrated with construction in mind. As we were discussing the population problem we of course touched on very different issues, but it seems that this will become an important issue in the coming days. How many people got rich here, many great lands have been closed and lots of money gained. These find their way to some newspapers, the prime minister and the president have talks with Jewish businessmen, and some places are being offered. In tourism the hotels are 25% full at their best and still big hotels are being built destroying the environment. We need to take these up in a wholesome way and oppose them. The population is of course an important problem, but with the population property, with construction and because of construction the problem of employing the population continuously coming here, there must be a serious need for these people to come and after a while, thanks to CTP, they will also become citizens. Since they are registering them this law will become like the law on Housing, Land, Equal Value (ITEM). What will happen if they are registered, it means you will make them citizens in 5 or 6 years. Hence, our job is becoming more difficult and we almost cannot see what is in front of us. President Mehmet Ali Talat was sent there to solve the problem, but he says he will not discuss the situation of his citizens. That is it would not be correct to expect not even the most progressive person of this community to sign an agreement with this structure. That is we will kill time during these negotiations it seems. The responsibility is ours, of the trade unions, the civil society organizations and to all those who are worried about the present situation. I am very much worried about the present situation, because the dynamics for a social struggle have lost grassroots support or have slid. A difficult period is waiting for us in the process ahead, and to show that the solution is behind the door, and especially when we look at the situation in Turkey, that is to war conditions, among so many problems, we should not think that this problem will be solved so easily. First of all we should stop being a merchant of hope and make practical proposals to solve the population problem. I thank you all.
Halil Paşa: And I thank you all for your patience.
