In timeless impact of the Asia Minor Catastrophe at Greek-Turkish relations were reported by Parliament Speaker Konstantinos Tassoulasspeaking during the presentation of the book by Angelos Syrigos and Evanthis Hadjivassiliou “Asia Minor Catastrophe, 50 questions and answers”which took place in the hall of the association “Parnassos”.
«If one saw the curtain of tragedy, saw the dark screen of the final catastrophe, one would see in it a delusional seduction woven around the nation, which ultimately led the nation to a deadly circumstance which it could not avoid. The deceptive seduction was at the beginning of the adventure. It was the defeat of Bulgaria, the end of tsarist Russia and the Ottoman Empire, and the culmination of the loot in May 1919, was the landing of Greek troops in Smyrna and the occupation by order of the allies of an area 120 km around Smyrna. . This was the inevitable deceptive seduction“, Stressed Mr. Tassoulas and continued:
«In 1958 the Cyprus issue was in its most critical phase. The McMillan plan was announced which led to the division of Cyprus, Greece had to avoid it and it finally avoided it and we had an agreement on the independence of Cyprus in February 1959. At the UN General Assembly in November 1958 and while Makarios had moved to the position of independence from the union’s position, Turkish Foreign Minister Fatin Zorlou, who was later executed after the coup that overthrew Menderes, said that while Greek Minister Evangelos Averoff presented Greece as peaceful and harmless, “nevertheless Greece its troops a thousand miles deep inside our country and Turkey had to fight to survive.Greece is an imperialist country so it claims Cyprus».
The Greek response to the accusation that it is an imperialist power by invoking the Asia Minor campaign, through Minister Evangelos Averoff was that “the great idea of modern Greece was to live in freedom to develop the capabilities of its people and no other kind of great idea” “Underlined the Speaker of Parliament.
George Katrougalos: To avoid new divisions
The professor’s public law and former minister, George Katrougalos, referred to the consequences of the division that followed the catastrophe and the nature of the war.
«Our compatriots who came from Ionia and Pontus were often treated as “Turkish seeds”. The two sides did not disagree on the nature of the war. They thought it was a war to be fought and they differed on how to make it more effective. The Left was the one that objected to the very conduct of the war, calling it “imperialist”“, Said Mr. Katrougalos and continued:
«If we study the nature of the war only from the Greek side, we will agree with the authors that its purpose was liberating and liberating. But the Greek intervention in Asia Minor was part of a larger plan to divide the Ottoman Empire that had very clear imperialist characteristics.
The question is whether the war could be won. The authors express the view that Pontian Hellenism could not, but even if it could be won, what would happen? We did not have the ability to protect him.
The main lesson is that at all costs we must avoid new divisions and we must strive to have a foreign policy that we can serve with the greatest possible convergence and a foreign policy that we will support in harmony with our international obligations.“, Concluded Mr. Katrougalos.
Evangelos Venizelos: Maximalism and bidding lead to disaster
«The Asia Minor Catastrophe is the clash of integrations. The Asia Minor campaign and catastrophe are the example of the synthesis of domestic and foreign policy. The question is always and today the following. Will we make a decision that has internal political costs or will it lead to a national catastrophe?Stressed the professor of AUTh and former vice president Evangelos Venizelos.
«“If one is to choose between these two – the assumption of political party and personal costs or leaving the country in the air, in the time of history, with the ultimate end of catastrophe – what will one choose?” he wondered and continued: “Of those who made the choice of national catastrophe, only the six who were executed regretted it. There is no other example that some have regretted, most notably the betrayal of Cyprus. The most typical example of political and personal costs is the Zurich-London syndrome, where the best possible agreement was reached and Konstantinos Karamanlis and Evangelos Averoff were registered as traitors. This agreement does not exist now. We will be very happy if we return to the 1960 Constitution.
1922 is the melting point of the great idea and the national division together. Maximalism and bidding lead to where the Asia Minor Campaign led. The book is a laboratory of self-knowledge that leads to political decision-making, especially in terms of the intersection of domestic and foreign policy.Concluded Mr. Venizelos.
The “present” at the presentation were given by ministers, MPs, local government and military officials: The Minister of Labor, Kostis Hatzidakis, the Minister of Education Niki Kerameos, the Deputy Minister of Social Affairs, Panagiotis Tsakloglou, the Mayor of Athens, V Kaklamanis, the head of the General Staff Lieutenant General Charalambos Lalousis, the deputies of ND Olga Kefalogianni, Evripidis Stylianidis, Thanasis Davakis, Zeta Makri, the deputy of SYRIZA, Giannis Amanatidis, former deputy ministers Alofas and Dimos.
Follow Skai.gr on Google News
and be the first to know all the news
