Page 1 of 6

Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal – Vol. 10, No. 12

Publication Date: December 25, 2023

DOI:10.14738/assrj.1012.12128.

Saldanha-Álvarez, J. M. (2023). Two Wars in the Order of Time: Cyprus, 1974, Ukraine, 2022. Advances in Social Sciences Research

Journal, 10(12). 227-232.

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

Two Wars in the Order of Time: Cyprus, 1974, Ukraine,2022

José Maurício Saldanha-Álvarez

Department of Cultural Studies and Media,

Federal Fluminense University, Brazil

ABSTRACT

Two cases are studied, the first being the invasion of Cyprus by Turkey in 1974,

when the Greek-Cypriot community wanted to integrate the island into mainland

Greece, threatening the rise of Turkish Cypriots. The government of Turkey invaded

the island, conquering aportion of the territory for its supporters, believing to

resolve the issue culminating in decades of conflict between their communities

whose past dreams do not coincide with the present. The second event is Vladimir

Putin's Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, motivated by the irreversible process

of the dissolution of the former USSR and the attraction of Ukrainians to the western

orbit. From a notion of the strangeness of contemporaneity, anchored in a glorious

but unattainable past, events that erupt in contemporaneity are simultaneously

current and anachronistic Based on a premise of the past and defending ethnic

Russians, Putin recovers the fantasy of a Russian empire encompassing tsarist,

communist, and orthodox religion from the past. In Cyprus, Greek and Turkish

Cypriots dreamed of integration into the motherland, but in both cases,

contemporary and ancient irruption possess the unbeatable force of a cosmic event.

Keywords: History, contemporaneity, past, invasion, war, culture, geopolitics

INTRODUCTION

We discussed the invasion of Ukraine by Russia in 2022 and that of Cyprus by Turkey in 1974,

correlating military operations, old motivations, and current consequences.

Roland Barthes [1] as cited in Agamben wrote that the “contemporary is untimely,” and the

same Giorgio Agamben [2] adds that this untimeliness is due to his dualism. Nietzsche [3] as

also cited in Agamben completes by saying that belonging to the present does not fully

coincide. The present has one foot in an exhilarating and nostalgic past that will never be

fulfilled. This unique relationship with time, which cannot escape the nostalgic past or the

incongruous present, produces a sudden irruption.

For François Hartog, past, present and future are a dark, unknown, and uncertain tunnel,

advocating a disaster that may or may not be avoided. The march of events cannot stop. [4] In

this regard, the Greek playwright Aeschylus (525-456) wrote in his play, Agamemnon: "Now

things are where they are. And will end where they are destined to end."[5]

The Ukrainian conflict surprised analysts when, after a month of military operations, the

Russians made slow progress in the face of growing Ukrainian resistance. In the Turkish

invasion of Cyprus, similarly baffled analysts watched the Turkish military plan complex

Page 2 of 6

228

Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal (ASSRJ) Vol. 10, Issue 12, December-2023

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

operations slowly progress. In the Russian and Turkish cases, the end of military operations

resulted in a narrative reconfiguration different from the Western-Cartesian logic, mediating

the proposed objectives with the results achieved. [6]

CASE STUDY I: THE BATTLE FOR CYPRUS

The Ottoman Empire dominated the Greek island of Cyprus from 1571 until 1878, when Egypt

and Sudan became English protectorates, upsetting the Ottoman Empire. After the conflict,

England annexed the island, protecting the Turkish community from the threat of enosis. [7]

DIVIDE AND RULE

Cypriot communities have coped well with possible outbursts of violence. In the 20th century,

the replacement of the Ottoman empire by the secular state of Kemal Ataturk led Turkish- Cypriots to desire Taksim accession to the Turkish homeland.

The Greek-Cypriots wanted enosis, the incorporation of the island into mainland Greece.

Cyprus' key position for British rule in the Middle East made its administration encourage an

ethnic division between communities. The Turkish-Cypriot minority was protected by the

British, while Greek-Cypriots founded the EOKA in the 1950s, fighting Britain. [8] Orthodox

Archbishop Makarios III was elected president, and his deputy was Turkish Cypriot Fazil

Koutsiouk. Intercommunal conflicts did not end with the peace guarantees agreement signed

in 1959.[9] For Western authorities, Makarios was a controversial entity, not only because of

his religious and political beliefs, but because of his left-leaning with libertarian and

communistregimes.[10]

The Cypriot Republic was born in 1960 under the suspicion of the communities, and as

Makarios approached the USSR, it was harassed by the Turkish Cypriots while the Greek

Cypriots reduced the political power of their neighbors, spreading violence. [11]. Concerned

about the escalation, Turkey unleashed a media campaign calling for military intervention.

The right-wing Greek military junta deposed Papadopoulos and enthroned Brigadier

Ioannides. Repressing the left and its opponents, he encouraged Cypriot enosis but feared

fighting the Turks. On July 15, 1974, EOKA B, supported by the Greek junta, deposed the

Makarios government, instituting enosis. Turkey sent decided to invade Cyprus. [12]

The island passed into the American orbit during the Cold War, whose diplomacy with Henry

Kissinger succeeded in the Yom Kippur War in 1973, failing to pacify Cyprus. Some analysts

develop conspiracy theories to explain the failure. Others consider them more "omission

rather than a sin of commission." [13] Britain and the United States limited Cyprus'

independence to protect their regional interests. Despite the intercommunal conflict, the

island continued to be a military bastion against communism. [14]

COUPS D'ETAT AND USE OF WORDS

The fall of the Greek military dictatorship brought democracy back. However, the Karamanlis

government refused the war option against Turkey, which decided to invade Cyprus in

Operation Attila, which they called "intervention" or "second peace operation," but for the

Greek Cypriots, it was an invasion. [15]

Page 3 of 6

229

Saldanha-Álvarez, J. M. (2023). Two Wars in the Order of Time: Cyprus, 1974, Ukraine, 2022. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 10(12).

227-232.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/assrj.1012.12128

THE TURKISH INVASION

In a complex operation on July 20, 1974, well-equipped Turkish troops landed on Cyprus,

defeating the Greeks with little heavy weaponry with some difficulty.[16] The Turks violated

the ceasefire mandated by the UN Security Council by consolidating their beachhead with air

support. However, the Greek defense hindered their progression by taking advantage of the

mountainous terrain and the dispersion of the attackers.[17] In the end, the Turks controlled

1/3 of the territory of Cyprus and held it back. The fragility of the peacekeepers failed to

enforce an effective ceasefire.[18]

Western observers criticized the Turks' slow tactic by violently expelling the Greek population

or out of fear of reprisals claiming self-defense. The mass of dispossessed refugees pressed on

the Greek-Cypriot side, resulting in massacres and deprivation for innocent Turks. [19]

CONSEQUENCES FOR THE CIVILIAN POPULATION

Turkey sent Turkish settlers to Cyprus, avoiding annexing it to its territory, thus avoiding

more significant international disapproval. Turkish Cypriots realized Turkey's instability

created in 1983 the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, whose recognition was denied by

the EU and the UN despite being recognized by Turkey. It was condemned in 1996 by the

European Court of Human Rights as an "occupying power in Cyprus," and the EU and the UN

ordered the withdrawal of Turkish troops and settlers, the return of Greek territories and

goods.

In 1971 Cyprus, the Greek Cypriot population was 80%, while the Turkish-Cypriot population

was 20%. In 2001, the percentages of the Ukrainian and Russian population approached the

Cypriot population in 1974. If Ukrainians constituted 77.8% of the total population, ethnic

Russians were 17.3%.[20]

CASE STUDY 2 UKRAINE: INVASIVE PEACE OPERATION

In 1948, a secret CIA report informed that Europe weakened after the world conflict, would

be easy prey for an invasion of the fierce Red Army, supported by the local communist parties.

In the context of the Truman Doctrine, NATO emerged in 1948 as a western military barrier

defending Europe against invasion. [21] The dismantling of the Moscow regime in 1988-1989

under Western pressure and the massive failures of the regime, NATO was maintained by

European and North American interests. Its communist counterpart, the Warsaw Pact, closed

its doors. [22]

Vladimir Putin's rise to power in Russia has revived the symbols of Russian national pride. It

was a robust regime supported by the Russian Orthodox Church. Some films, such as Vikings,

2016, showing the exploits of Prince (and Russian saint) Vladimir, endorse the Great Russian

nationalist and chauvinist narrative. In an article, Vladimir Putin glorified the imperialism of

Czar Alexander III, conqueror of Crimea:

He always felt a tremendous personal responsibility for the country's destiny: he fought for

Russia on battlefields, and after becoming the ruler, he did everythingpossible for the progress

and strengthening of the nation, to protect it from turmoil, internal and external threats.[23]

The end of the USSR threw many republics out of Russian orbit. In 1991, tensions between

Ukraine and Russia prompted Boris Yeltsin to threaten to amputate Crimea and Ukraine's