SIR,—May I be allowed to reply to two letters which
appeared in your issue of January 7 under the heading 'Enosis'?
In the one, Mr. Harold Soref says that the Cypriot Greeks in Cyprus and in London are indifferent to enosis; in support of this allegation he states that '300 London Cypriots passed a unanimous resolution denouncing enosis,' but he omits to mention that these 300 Cypriots are not Greeks but Turks. He also contends that supporters of cnosis are fewer in Cyprus than among Socialists in Britain. If Mr. Soref's assertions were in any degree correct, Britain should not hesitate to consent to a plebiscite in Cyprus and thereby safely dispose' of a thorny problem with a result in her favour and, what is more, in a manner consistent with the principle of self-determina- tion and the Charter of the United Nations.
Mr. Sorel further refers to the people of Cyprus as being 'well adMinistered and free'; if, however, an absolute rule with no safe- guards for essential human rights can be set up as a standard of good administration in freedom, one may well wonder why all the sacrifice in fighting the last war.
In the other letter, Mr. T. W. Cain suggests that young Cypriots should be given. 'the' opportunity of seeing . something of the finer side of British citizenship.' But how can that be done under colonial rule, when everyday experience shows to them quite the other side? Recently, British soldiers in the island have been identified with the unwarranted shooting of unarmed schoolchildren demonstrating for self-determination. As 4a result three were gravely and dangerously wounded by British bullets. Mr. Cain's commendable desire for the finer British side being brought in evidence in Cyprus could only be achieved by a change of policy towards the Cypriots and their legitimate claims to freedom. — Yours faithfully,
ZENON ROSSIDES
Delegate of the Ethnarchy of Cyprus Park Lane Hotel, W.I
Previous page
