Don't call me a Turkish-speaking Cypriot

Let me start by saying that holding movements accountable is critical for progress. My criticism of Cypriotism does not mean that I do not support its goals, but it does mean that I will recognise when the approach can cause harm in its attempt to do good. That being said, this is a conversation for the Cypriot left, not the right.

First and foremost, this is in no way to generalise my experience nor to throw shade at those who choose to identify as Turkish/Greek-speaking Cypriots, I recognise the varying factors and micro-contexts that produce the language of identity. It is not anybody’s place to dictate how another identifies. We all have variables that affect our risk assessments. In other words, what may be very beneficial for your experience may be a huge risk to mine and vice versa. One cannot project their views onto another person’s entirely different experience, especially in a language that we are using as a mediator between communities of which English will not accurately encompass the nuance of the terms we use.

I’m writing this to explain myself, not others.

Cypriots have never had the chance to develop a cohesive national identity. Between endless colonisation, ongoing settler colonialism and British occupation, modern Cypriots have never been truly independent. Nationalism is often a response in post-colonial contexts, to recover autonomy that was taken from locals. But, how does that look in a partitioned society where there is a clear majority and various minorities? An island that exists in the geo-political meeting point that enables itself to enact mindless violence upon vulnerable communities seeking safety?

What we seek in a pan-Cypriot identity or Cypriotism is already there. We already identify as Cypriots, we already exist ethnically unified. Our shared self-determination doesn’t come from that, but from political unity. So, why the need for a homogenous identity? Could it be that what we are seeking is actually solidarity, not an ‘identity’? Diverse cultures do not fit nicely into the confines of a nation-state without marginalisation. Attempting to do so is where we risk harm, and epistemicide.

To clear up the differences between ethnicity, culture, heritage and nationality;

• Ethnicity is about shared cultural heritage and ancestry. It’s also not something first and something second. It's intertwined.

• Culture is about shared beliefs, values, and customs.

• Heritage is about the legacy of the past.

• Nationality is about legal citizenship.

Identity is a broader sense of self, encompassing various aspects of a person's life. So, for me, I am a Turkish Cypriot because my shared cultural heritage is with Cypriots, my home country is Cyprus, however my distant ancestry is within Anatolia which is why the language I speak is Turkish. Cypriots have an abundance of similarities in terms of culture, but we speak different languages for a reason. That reason is an important factor in our identities and our diverse micro-cultures.

A misconception that I think makes my previous point so hard to digest is that the British forced these identities upon us. While there are elements of truth, this is not the case.

The British didn’t give us our Greekness or Turkishness - they turned it into a categorical weapon which made us grecophobic and turcophobic. By understanding this, we recognise that the solution to our problems isn’t rejecting our Turkishness or our Greekness and encouraging a Cypriot hegemony (of which Armenian, Afro, Maronite, Roma and Latin Cypriots are also subsumed), it is by reclaiming all parts of our cultural heritage which can be Greek, Turkish, Armenian, Arab, Levantine, Alevi, Alawite, the list goes on and so do the identities within the surrounding region who parallel the Cypriot experience.

Unlearning this imposed phobic narrative is far more justice-centred than manufacturing a linguistic device to accommodate that internalised hatred. By separating the nation state from heritage, Greek Cypriots from Greek Nationalism and Turkish Cypriots from Turkish Nationalism, we embody the organic narrative and solidarity that we require for reconciliation. Instead of losing value, we gain it.

Ethnic diversity is often a tool of imperialism, and Colonial Cyprus was no different. When Cypriots co-existed peacefully, it wasn’t because we ignored our differences. We embraced them. We loved our diversity and recognised ourselves as a non-binary, beautiful mosaic that does not exist without all of its connections. The categories always existed, but they relate, connect and produce together. Our elders didn’t have intercommunal conflict because of their ethnic heritage or the language they spoke - they had conflict because their ethnic identities were no longer ethnicities. They became a membership to an imperial state, dehumanized representatives of their projects. The Greek Cypriot became an agent of enosis, or rather, a Greek person trying to annex Cyprus. The Turkish Cypriot became an agent of Taksim, or rather, a Turk trying to annex Cyprus. Rather than a human on Cypriot land with mundane, petty issues, our issues could only be interpreted through a lens of nationalism. A Turkish Cypriot couldn't have killed a Greek Cypriot for the silly reason of him looking at his wife - it had to be because enosis vs taksim. This, compounded with British divide and rule policies imposed the existence of an annexed state as necessary for survival, not dissimilar to Zionism. They made our identities a threat to each other.

The British institutionalised these differences through governance and education. They enforced an ethnarchy, removing the local governance structures which operated by geography instead of by ethnicity (I do not wish to romanticise Ottoman rule either, there is a history of religious diversity but that doesn’t equate to equity). Britain sought further division by importing nationalist education. They tore apart the Cypriot mosaic, but they certainly did not create it.

Removing the Turkish or Greek prefix to our Cypriot is an understandable response to British divide and conquer - but it certainly isn’t the solution. Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot identities are based on historical and societal aspects which predate nationalism. It is a much bigger testament to the flexibility of ethnic identity, cultural syncretism and peaceful coexistence for us to live together while holding on to our unique ethnic identities and accepting each other.

Diversity was never the issue, nationalism is. So, the remedy isn't to erase those differences through the models of Cypriot or GC/TC nationalism, it's to embrace them for the beautifully diverse and relational culture that Cypriotness is. We see this most obviously when we look at our elders today who survived the violence. They can refer to each other as rum or turk without it having a nationalist sentiment, because that nationalist sentiment was imposed by Britain. Before that, it was just a part of their identity.

Our history of colonisation means we share a creolised culture which is composed of distinct ethnic identities. While a shared identity is well intentioned, simplification inhibits radical solidarity and requires subsumption of vulnerable identities. Asking people to abandon parts of their identity to be considered a ‘good Cypriot’ is nothing short of fascist, and facilitates the assimilation of minorities into the dominant culture, which is Greek Cypriot.

“Indeed, our karchilama dances are strikingly similar. However, this notion also normalises Greek Cypriot as the dominant culture, and denies Turkish Cypriots a distinct identity and the possibility of diversity. Despite its good intentions, such a notion demolishes the possibility of a varying approach to life and its cultural expressions and downplays the cultural damage that resulted from the violent separations inflicted in 1963 and 1974, damage that continues to go unrecognised and is completely outside public discourse.” - Karayanni, S

Solidarity is not conditional upon our similarities. Respect is not dependent on how much we relate. If we want reconciliation, we need to love each other without asking to dilute ourselves.

Documented intercommunal solidarity has always been more prominent across refugees, class and gender lines than any other identifier, and I believe in channeling this because solidarities never needed to erase our ethnic/linguistic differences to be effective. Those differences made them more inclusive, more powerful. Forcing convergence is harmful for diversity, where multi-narratives may be necessary to accurately encompass a pan-Cypriot experience. This is decolonisation in practice, releasing ourselves from the narratives enforced upon us and creating new ones that are truly representative and just.

Healthy conflict resolution doesn't come about by ignoring dynamics that have affected the material circumstances of our lives for 70 years. This may help one personally reconcile with individual identity, but in the pursuit of decolonising the self, do not colonise the collective. Homogenising our collective identity is not solidarity. Undermining cultural diversity, reinforcing power imbalances, prioritising dominant narratives, that is hegemony.

71 years separate, we have more differences than just the language we speak. Our respectives communities have extremely relevant nuances, including the Cypriots from mixed villages who spoke either and/or Cypriot Greek and Cypriot Turkish for no reason other than being in proximity. Assigning the language we speak so much significance is doing the opposite of its intention - it’s a lazy plaster over the root of the problem, and these roots will break the concrete over and over.

It is a privilege to not feel like a Turkish Cypriot because you are not treated as one. It is a privilege to be able to transcend barriers. Many don’t have the option of just being ‘Cypriot’. The RoC and the TRNC decide that for us. This is different for my Greek-speaking friends who have Greece’s wider dynamics to deal with, but as a Turkish Cypriot, I am ancestrally exhausted with having to sacrifice parts of my identity to fit into a nation-state’s mould. I won’t distance myself from my Turkishness to appease you. I won’t be the ‘good Cypriot’.

We are interconnected and we all share so much, with our cultures almost indistinguishable at times and yet we are all positioned so differently and that is okay. We won’t “we are all one race” or “all lives matter” our way to justice. We must refuse to reproduce the coloniality that got us here, and that means an accurate diagnosis of our problem, accountability for our problem, and a resolve that prevents the problem from recurring.

We do not have to agree, but we do have to work towards understanding each other’s language reflecting our lived realities. We can tackle our phobias alongside catching up with all the rhizomatic Cypriotness that was stolen from us, and recognising what is purely unattainable nostalgia.

Side note:

In conversations I’ve had, the analogies that are frequently brought up are Swiss people whose ethnicity and nationality is Swiss, regardless of whether they speak French, German, Italian or Romansh. The development of these languages isn’t too dissimilar to Cyprus considering both nations no longer speak the language of the eldest known inhabitants, and now speak the languages of various conquests. However, Switzerland utilises a confederal model where the cantons are divided by linguistic diversity, supporting its autonomy. The irony is, those who support Cypriotism the most are also stringent advocates for a unitary state. One cannot observe the lack of linguistic political separation in a foreign nation with an entirely different geo-political context and assume that the same model can be applied.

Cyprus is not Switzerland. We can’t look to other models and force them into our own context - we need organic solutions designed by the Cypriots most impacted.

AND, with that in mind, this frame of thinking does not expand to Turkish speaking communities who speak Turkish as a result of Turkification and pan-Turanism. Kurdish, Syrian, Armenian, Arab communities who speak Turkish require this caveat to establish that while their ethnicity is not Turkish, their nationality and language may be. This simply does not apply to Turkish Cypriots who have spoken Turkish long before occupation, and have an established ethnic identity that predates nationalism. We too are victims of Turkification, and share this with our Turkish speaking siblings, however the origins of the language we speak is not violent and this distinction is important. It is also important to recognise the context of which the terms are spoken, as grouping together Afro, Roma and Turkish Cypriots as 'Turkish-speaking Cypriots' is simply convenient, not a subsumed ethnic identity. The same goes for Latin, Armenian, Maronite and Greek Cypriots being lumped under 'Greek-speaking Cypriots'.