ON THE first of this month, Education Minister Andreas Demetriou, like his predecessors, distributed a circular to all state schools before the start of the new academic year. In it, he outlined two principle aims: the development of innovation and creativity in schools, and “the cultivation of a culture of peaceful coexistence, mutual respect and co-operation between Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots”.
The minister explained that the latter objective was aimed at facilitating an end to occupation and “the reunification of our country and our people”.
Despite the seemingly innocuous aim of peaceful coexistence, the circular triggered a small earthquake, with teachers, politicians and the Archbishop scrambling to accuse the minister of savaging the nation’s Hellenic identity.
As school children began the new academic year and the leaders of the two communities launched a new round of direct talks, emotions ran riot over the new circular, particularly among those with access to a microphone.
The Sunday Mail read the circular, noted the comments and talked to the experts to see what all the fuss was about.
What teachers, politicians and the Church had to say about the controversial circular:
The circular came out on a Monday. By Wednesday, President of the Cyprus Secondary Teachers’ Union (OELMEK), Eleni Semelidou, expressed concerns that some aspects of the circular needed clarifications. Semelidou wondered, for example, what a school should do if it was invited to attend a conference in the north and teachers or pupils refused to go? Another danger was that the execution of the circular could end up imbuing pupils with pangs of guilt regarding the Cyprus problem when, in fact, they are the victims of invasion and occupation, she added.
Smelling the threat to “national ideals”, ruffled politicians grabbed the baton. A number were particularly outraged that the history books were being rewritten, despite the fact no such revision has begun yet. The circular’s aims were tantamount to the “self-castration of our Hellenic heritage”, thundered one DISY deputy, reminding the minister that he was not the Education Minister of the occupied areas or of rapprochement. The reforms are suggesting that our education system until now was chauvinistic, added one alarmed DIKO deputy.
At this point, Archbishop Chrysostomos II waded in, warning the government, on a Sunday no less, that if “they don’t take their hands off education” and abandon their intentions, the Church would “react vigorously”.
“Why do we want to create new programmes of study, and so on?” questioned Chrysostomos. “We were pupils once and we were also taught history. Does this mean that the history we were taught was false?” he asked.
The Church leader stressed that children should grow up as Greeks, before lamenting the Church’s loss of influence over education, which has gone downhill as of late.
What the minister had to say:
The minister reminded that history school books had remained virtually unchanged for decades, despite new, modern history teaching practices being implemented in the rest of Europe. Displaying the patience and calm of a koala bear, the minister explained that the history books, like all school books, would be revised by a committee of experts that had yet to be created, based on historical truth and accuracy.
“My personal commitment, firstly as a scientist and then as a minister, is that there is nothing like the truth,” he told Parliament.
In the only hint of slight exasperation, Demetriou wondered why no one reacted when the circular’s aims were submitted to the Education Council, a first in ministry practices, two months ago.
What the circular actually says:
The circular calls on schools to cultivate a culture of peaceful coexistence, mutual respect and co-operation between Greek and Turkish Cypriots. It notes the peculiar duality of education in Cyprus, with each ethnic group focusing on its own history and characteristics. This will remain post-solution, but “at the same time, education in Cyprus must cultivate those things that unite us and that characterise us as a people”.
Educators are asked to focus more on the history, traditions and culture of Cyprus where all communities participated (common struggles, sacrifices, common language elements, customs, traditions, architecture, art, literature, music and theatre), and the memories of peaceful coexistence.
Reference is made to arranging common training programmes for Greek and Turkish Cypriot teachers, as well as organising pupils’ conferences, which could either take place at schools or at contact points on the buffer zone like Ledra Palace or Pyla village.
What the experts say:
President of the Association for Historical Dialogue and Research, Chara Makriyianni, welcomed the minister’s circular, noting that finally, someone had mentioned the words “mutual respect”, “co-operation” and “Turkish Cypriots” in the same paragraph.
“It shouldn’t have reached this stage, but at least, it’s finally being done,” she said.
The Association, made up of educators and academics, has been conducting joint training seminars for teachers from both sides of the divide since 2003.
Makriyianni argues history books are just tools that are used by teachers. A much more sweeping educational reform is needed for the system to meet today’s challenges.
“There are new approaches to teaching and learning history. Multiperspectivity and critical thinking should be part of what school children are taught,” she said.
“But that’s not it. We are undergoing complete educational reform now. There will be changes at all levels, from evaluation to teacher training and mentoring. It’s all in the manifesto.”
Regarding teachers’ reactions to the hotly debated circular, Makriyianni noted, as with all circulars, there are those who will be inspired to act and those who will ignore them.
However, this one is special in that it’s the first to deal specifically with the prospect of a comprehensive solution and reunification of the island.
“This one is more sensitive,” noted Makriyianni.
So, will implementation of this polemical circular be possible?
“It is possible to promote co-operation. The travel restrictions have been lifted. The buffer zone exists for those who don’t want to cross. There are many examples of intercommunal activity out there,” said Makriyianni.
“The NGOs need to be brave and stop being low key. Teachers have to be courageous too. You can’t just rely on changing a text book. But now is a good time, given also the change of textbooks in the north. I’m optimistic that if steps are taken at all levels, people will be able to see the tremendous and positive effects of co-operation, and choose for themselves what’s best for Cyprus.”
In a published article, Makriyianni and Charis Psaltis commented on the school system’s approach to teaching history, noting that Greek Cypriot schools were more inclined to use the ‘heritage’ approach to teaching history.
The difference being that in the ‘heritage’ approach, bits of the past are left out, while ethnocentric pride is cultivated in one specific group. Teaching history, however, implies that no specific ethnic group has exclusivity over the truth. It tries to overcome bias, encourages open dialogue and critical thought by studying multiple sources.
Another academic who writes on discrimination and ethnic conflict says the education system has reached a crucial turning point. “We have reached the crux of the matter. Education reform will either stand or fall. I’m glad to see we have a minister who is determined, scientific and wants to see business done,” said Nicos Trimikliniotis from the University of Nicosia.
“The circular is self-evident. The policy since 1974 has been that we want reconciliation but no one had the guts to implement it before. We are merely implementing what is long overdue. The alternative is hatred and war,” he said.
“Education reform will continue because we have no choice. It’s a historical necessity. There have been so many reports showing the dire need for educational reform. You can’t keep elements of education which are racist, ethnocentric,” noted Trimikliniotis.
The sociologist argued that children graduating in 10 years would simply not have the tools to face the challenges of the new era without reform.
“I see consensus on this despite some marginal voices still stuck in the past,” he said, adding: “They are a very noisy group with good access to the media but I don’t think there’s mass opposition to what is self-evident.
“Those who react in this way are transferring their frustration and opposition to direct negotiations on to education. But there is a paradigm shift now in the way we understand who we are and where we’re going. A reunited Cyprus requires that we understand national identity and ethnic community in a positive way,” he added.
Trimikliniotis maintained that each community identified itself in relation to the other: “But how we define ourselves as Greek Cypriots vis-à-vis the other, the Turkish Cypriots, doesn’t have to be in oppositional terms. We can do it positively in co-ordination with the other.
“And then there’s the third dimension, that we are all defined as Cypriots. Some don’t accept either approach.”
The social observer noted that Cyprus was finally growing up and moving towards an era of rationalism.
“Former ministers used to talk about the greatness of our ‘race’. No one in Europe uses language like that post-Second World War. Those who do sound like pensioners stuck in the past.”
What the history books say:
A Council of Europe recommendation on the teaching of history was signed by its members, including Cyprus, in 2001. It seeks to avoid the misuse of history in democratic European countries. Some of the definitions of “misuse” being “fixation on one event to justify or conceal another”, “distortion of the past for the purposes of propaganda” and “an excessively nationalistic version of the past which creates the ‘us’ and ‘them’ dichotomy”.
Any observer could note that the Turkish Cypriots’ fixation on the 1960s seeks to justify what happened in 1974, while the Greek Cypriots’ focus on 1974 tries to conceal what came before.
Makriyianni notes that the way history is taught in schools doesn’t even allow for much reflection on the past in Cyprus. The books, some from 1978, start from the Neolithic period and continue to modern history. Given that most exams are based on the teaching of mainland Greek history, most teachers leave out or briefly skim over Cyprus’ modern history.
“Teachers don’t feel confident covering this issue. And anyway, pupils will not be asked about the invasion in an exam,” she said.
Trimikliniotis highlights the clear inaccuracies in school history books that need correction.
“The gymnasium book on the History of Cyprus talks about the Archbishop welcoming the British when they arrived, saying this would lead to ‘enosis’ (union) with Greece. But it has been clearly proven that he never said that. Yet, it’s still in the books.
“The book never mentions the word ‘community’ in relation to the Turkish Cypriots either. It refers to the troubles in 1963 as the ‘Turkish mutiny’. But this is the language of the Cold War, not of reconciliation,” he said.
The academic further argued that there is no mention of Turkish Cypriots being killed anywhere while there is plenty of content on the raping and killings of Greek Cypriots.
“Even the number of the missing. Many studies show that it is not 1,619. Still, they put it in the text books. And why don’t they mention the Turkish Cypriots missing too? They are digging up mass graves now and our pupils don’t know where they came from,” he added.
“This is not history. It’s an ideologically loaded construction of the past used currently to invent political ideas about the future and it’s in urgent need of change. It’s embarrassing.”
One social anthropologist recently published a study, comparing the schoolbooks from both communities on the “History of Cyprus”.
In the article, Yiannis Papadakis argued that both sides propagated a narrative that focused on the suffering of “a nation” to further certain political goals, while silencing the suffering of the other and questioning their historical existence.
“Despite their different political goals, the two nationalisms that emerged in Cyprus shared the same form, namely, ethnic nationalism stressing common history, descent, language, culture and religion with the people of the ‘motherlands’, Turkey and Greece.”
So, on the cover of a major Greek Cypriot primary schoolbook, it says: “Cyprus is and has been Greek and nothing but Greek”.
According to the article, the 2004 Report of the Committee for Educational Reform concluded that the whole Greek Cypriot educational system was “Helleno-ethnocentric and religious in character” and “culturally monolithic”.
Papadakis notes that Turkish Cypriot history textbooks followed the same logic of ethnic nationalism, depicting Turkish Cypriots as Turks and Greek Cypriots as subjects of the Ottoman empire. That is, until recently when they were updated in 2004. They still have pictures of Ataturk on the front and flags of Turkey and the ‘TRNC’ on the inside cover, but: “History is no longer presented as a monolithic story of conflict; instead, conscious emphasis is placed on examples of coexistence and co-operation, and there is a shift from political and diplomatic history towards social, cultural and economic history.”
“Many examples are presented from the Ottoman period to the present when co-operation was an aspect of daily life, from common workers’ struggles to music, football and trade. Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots are shown as having suffered together, for example from the heavy taxation imposed by the British, and as having died together when they served in the joint Cypriot contingent of the British army during World War II,” he notes.
The new Turkish Cypriot history books propose a new identity of “Turkish Cypriots” and/or “Cypriots”.
“This means that the future is no longer presented as historically determined, but is left open as a political choice,” concludes Papadakis.
