The Justice for Cyprus Co-ordinating Committee, Victoria (Webmaster: Pavlos Andronikos)
The Plumer Document was discovered in the safe of the Minister of Agriculture Fazil Plumer, a Turkish Cypriot and formerly
a Limassol magistrate, in December 1963.
It is believed to
have been written in October or November 1960. The writer appears to be saying that the plan of accepting the Zurich and London
Agreements as “a transitory phase” on the path to partition and/or to “the domination of Turkism over Cyprus” is not working,
and that the Turkish Cypriots are in danger of being absorbed into a unified Cypriot community and of losing their “separate
community” status. He argues therefore in favour of:
1) persuading all Turkish Cypriots that “the agreements are a transitory phase” and that “separate community status is vital”.
2) imposing the aims of the [Turkish] “national cause” on every Turkish Cypriot, and preventing Turkish Cypriots from “engaging in publications and propaganda that might harm the national cause.” Ominously, he adds, “If they don’t believe in the existence of a national cause they must be silenced.”
3) reacting strongly and to the maximum against “every action and endeavour of the Greek Cypriots to destroy our ‘Separate Community’ status”.
4) presenting “a national plan” to the “administrators” (and presumably achieving agreement with them on it), and engaging in “words and actions in accordance to this national plan”.
Who the “administrators” are in 3.d.i (“We request clear cut directives...”) is not clear, but the phrasing suggests quite specific organisation, and a command structure.
Please note that all emphasis in bold is mine.
We accepted the Zurich and London Agreements as “a transitory phase” and it was for this reason that we signed them. If it had been said they are not “a transitory phase” but a “final solution” we would not have accepted, but would have prolonged the intercommunal dispute for a further period and would have left the UN face to face with taksim [i.e., partition], which they stated is “impossible and impracticable”. Regarding the administration of the Republic [of Cyprus] created by the Zurich agreements, we accepted it as a “transitory phase” [because]:
(a) Turkey’s rights on Cyprus would have gained international recognition.
(b) During the time gained by preparing better we would have profited by the blunders and mistakes of the Greek Cypriots, and, in time—by accusing them of violating the agreements—we would attain our total independence.
During the course of the “transitory phase” all our behaviour and actions were to be directed towards the outcomes described in paragraphs (a) and (b) and accepted by us as the “final aim”.
The reasons for us not being able to accept the Zurich agreements and the Republic created by these agreements as a “final solution” are these:
a) This administration which is based on the seven:three ratio, despite existing guarantees, is a Greek Cypriot administration. Under the administration, the Turkish structure which is in any case weak, is condemned to be eroded in time.
b) Because the Turkish Cypriots will not be left with a national cause in the face of the “unification” process started to “Cypriotify” the Turks; that is maximum cooperation with the Greek Cypriots, the non-opposition to the Greek Cypriots, getting on well and viewing with understanding every caprice of the Greek Cypriots in order not to make difficulties; the result of this process means the elimination of the Turkish Cypriots as a separate community.
c) Lack of financial possibilities, material difficulties are of a nature to bring to naught our “separate community” status in a very short time.
d) The agreements have come about based on the principles of mistrust of the communities towards each other, enmities, and on the fact that they could live together only as “separate and equal communities”. Considered from the viewpoint of a final solution, the principle of separate and equal community is destined to collapse unless we maintain it fastidiously, or create an atmosphere of mistrust and enmity.
e) The aim of the community leaders who did not allow the people to lift their heads for 25 years during the British rule was to rear a community “which was always obedient, faithful and bowed down to everything so as not to give cause to the British Government to trample on the community. And now, those who consider these agreements as a final solution are inviting the community “to bow down to the Greek Cypriots forever and at whatever cost not to create difficulties” and thus a community cause is existent no longer. If the Republic is [accepted as] a final solution in the face of these suggestions, the trust of the Turkish Cypriots towards their own community will firstly be shaken, and later their confidence in Turkey. Due to such agents as unemployment and lack of credit, everything will fall into the lap of the Greek Cypriots.
Under these conditions our acceptance of the Zurich Agreements as a “final solution” would mean us placing with our own hands the sentence of annihilation on the Turkish Cypriots.
It was for this reason that before the agreements “a compact had been reached with the Turkish Government of the time to the effect that these agreements were a transitory phase; during this period maximum economic and other assistance would be made to us and that in order to realise our final aim we would continue our ‘separate community’ cause as a national cause”.
Also it is gratifying to state that during our first contacts with the honourable head of state of our Revolutionary Government, Gursel Pasha, “an agreement on the same principles had been reached and it was made very clear in the most categorical fashion that the agreements were nothing but a phase for us and for Turkey”.
There is a major reason for [regarding] the Turkish Cypriots’ acceptance of the agreements and the establishment of the Republic as a phase, and to keep their eyes open in order not to fall into a neglectful sleep: This major reason is that the Greek Cypriots have in their totality accepted the Republic administration as a transitional phase. From the first day all their actions have been directed towards the destruction of these agreements.
a) With their newspapers, their official and non official little words they are disseminating that the agreements are transitional that these agreements could not be accepted by any free person and that they were imposed on them. The foreign journalists who visit the island are swallowing up this propaganda and thus the idea that “the Turks should give up the artificial rights obtained artificially” has been taking root.
b) The Greek Cypriots (rightist or leftist) are arming themselves up at an unprecedented speed.
c) The Police Organisation, Customs and the administrative mechanism are being organised in a way to suffocate the Turks.
d) Practically none of the rights given to the Turks under the Zurich agreements have been handed over. The Greek Cypriots through a policy of delay are busy with wearing out, tiring, splitting the Turks and creating Turkish leaders who accept that these rights are truly superfluous.
i. The municipalities have not been separated. The re-determining of the borders can continue for years; important obstacles and irregularities and injustices which might necessitate our rebellion as a community are expected. As a result of the “wearing away practice” for the last one and a half years the spirit of struggle of the Turkish Cypriots is being extinguished.
The issue of separate municipalities represents a basis of our “separate community status”. Even if this separation is of material inconvenience to the Turks, it is necessary to continue this separation at whatever cost and to maintain the issue of “separate municipalities” as a cause.
Today those few persons who have suffered personal damages due to the separation of the municipalities and those “opponents who blindly follow the claim that at whatever cost to get on well” with the Greek Cypriots, have started exerting great energy to do away with this separation and to unite the municipalities. Messrs Ahmed Muzaffer Gurkan and Ayhan Hikmet who pass as “opponents” are making statements to foreign journalists that the unification of the municipalities is a necessity and that the reason for Denktash and Doctor Kuchuk wanting separate municipalities was the continuation of the taksim thesis.
We request clear cut directives as to whether or not the separate municipalities issue should be upheld as a cause. We are of the opinion that if the unification of municipalities path is followed based on material reasons this would be the collapse of the sound ground on which our “separate community status” is based on.
ii. The difficulties which we have encountered on the issue of 70:30% are known to you. Two and a half months of the five-month period set for the application of this ratio have passed. The Greek Cypriots have no intention of finishing this work within five months. The “method of application and the application schedule agreed upon between Makarios and Dr. Kuchuk is on the verge of being thrown into the waste paper basket by the Greek Cypriot members of the Civil Service Commission. Makarios also has gone as far as saying that “this agreement has no binding value.”
If at the end of the 5 month period the 70:30% ratio is not adopted what will the Turkish side do? Will it apply to the Constitutional Court and struggle for another five years? Or will we be able to choose the path of obtaining our rights as a community?
We should not forget that the 70:30 ratio should have been applied within the period between the London agreement and the birth of the Republic. We have been sacrificed to Greek Cypriot caprices, and by adhering to the “for goodness sake let there be no difficulties” directives, we were not able to wrest an obtainable right at the right time. The result has been that the community’s right has in itself been shaken. If this issue is not finished at the end of 5 months “Dr. Kuchuk and his friends who have promised that this was to be applied within 5 months, will be left in a very difficult position!”
iii. In the Ministries with the incitement and control of the Greek Cypriot clerks the Turkish affairs are being stalled. The Greek Cypriot police and clerks are doing everything they can in order to give the impression that we are living under a Greek Cypriot administration. The principle that “the Turkish clerks will serve the Turkish villages” which is one of the conditions of the “separate community” status is not being applied anywhere.
Should we insist on its application? The Turks of Chatoz (Serdarli) did not give their taxes to the Greek Cypriot collector of taxes who had gone to the village to collect taxes. Now they are to be sent to court. Our demand that “we want Turkish clerks” is a demand which will offend and set off anew the Greek Cypriots.
Our view is that we should insist on this claim and should not make a concession of one more of our separate community rights.
iv. The cooperation amongst the Greek Cypriots in the Council of Representatives in order not to carry out a single act in favour of the Turks has reached its zenith.
Everything is being done in order not to form the Cyprus army. The Army Commander and his Assistant are being offered lower salaries than the Police Commander and his Assistant; it is being said that the soldiers will be given an amount which can be described as ludicrous.
They don’t have the intention of adding even a penny to the £400,000 minimum assistance guaranteed by the constitution of the central government in respect of our £800,000 Educational and Communal Budget. On the other hand up to now the amount of six million British pounds assistance has been made by various “private channels” to the Greek Cypriot Communal Assembly.
We believe that in the face of the path taken by the Greek Cypriots in order to extinguish the Communal Chambers which are the sole symbol of our “Separate Community Status”, the government of our motherland will make the supreme sacrifice and will materially support us.
If we fall into a situation whereby we cannot continue the offices of the communal assembly due to material impossibilities, we would destroy the existing agreements in line with Greek Cypriot desires.
v. Development investments from the budget are being secretly diverted to the Greek Cypriot villages. Not one Turkish deputy can obtain money for an investment he deems necessary. Maximum effort is being exerted in order to make the Turkish deputies into puppets.
vi. The Police appointments have been made in such a way as to make the Turkish commanders ineffective. The Turks of the island are toys in the hands of the Greek Cypriot commanders.
The way out according to us is this:
a) The reality that the agreements are a transitory phase and the belief that our separate community status is vital in realising this objective will be told to every Turk and this belief will be disseminated throughout the island in such a way that it can be passed from generation to generation.
b) To show maximum reaction to every action and endeavour of the Greek Cypriots to destroy our “Separate Community” status. (We believe that it is our right to react in order to protect our Constitutional rights).
c) The main lines of the “national cause” should be imposed on those who love to play the opposition within the community. They should be prevented from engaging in publications and propaganda that might harm the national cause.
Dr. Ihsan Ali  who is an admirer and adorer of the Greek Cypriots and has been confirmed to have connections with the British Intelligence and the extremist Greek Cypriot ENOSIS leaders and his accomplice a sex pervert (Muzafer Gurkan) and Ayhan Hikmet who has been confirmed to have relations with the communists should be made to abandon their actions and writings which serve the Greek Cypriot aims. If they don’t believe in the existence of a national cause they must be silenced.
Today the Turkish Cypriots are in an impasse. The Community does not know what to do due to their daily problems of unemployment, lack of credits and lack of employment fields and the failure to obtain jobs from the Greek Cypriots creates question marks within the community and creates extreme doubt as regards the existence or non-existence of a national cause. In the face of this situation the path of not believing those who speak of “separate community rights” will be chosen. It will be said: “What separate community? There is no employment institution, only those who trust the Greek Cypriots can live, life lines of those who draw away from the Greek Cypriots are cut”. We are face to face with the need to wipe away this belief and to create a society which believes in itself and in the 1955-58 years.
In short a national plan should be presented to the administrators and we should adjust our words and actions in accordance to this national plan. If the basic lines of this national plan is the continuation and consolidation of the separate community status, if it is the domination of Turkism over Cyprus someday”, then we could continue the struggle and we could win over the public. However if this plan will be in the shape of “we have come to the end of everything, get on well with the Creek Cypriots, don’t be spoilt, don’t offend your Greek Cypriot friends whom you are obliged to open your hand by creating an uproar because some of your small rights have been swallowed”; then it will be necessary for us to renew our situation and to think whether or not we will shoulder this responsibility under these conditions.