To amend title 38, United States Code, to include participation in clean-up operations at Eniwetok Atoll as a radiation-risk activity for purposes of laws administered by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.

I thank the gentleman for yielding and for his leadership on this and so many other important issues.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1631, a resolution calling for the protection of religious sites and artifacts in Turkish- occupied areas of northern Cyprus. I joined my Hellenic Caucus cochair and good friend and colleague, Representative Gus Bilirakis, in introducing this important resolution before us today. And I would like to particularly thank Chairman Berman for his work in bringing this resolution to the floor today for a vote.

I am honored to represent Astoria, Queens, one of the largest and most vibrant communities of Greek and Cypriot Americans in this country. This year we marked the 36th anniversary of the Turkish invasion and continuing illegal occupation of the northern part of the Republic of Cyprus. Since the 1974 invasion, many priceless symbols of Cyprus' religious and cultural heritage have been destroyed, looted, or vandalized, and even stolen, or illegally shipped for sale abroad. Very disturbing is the way the churches have been razed, converted into barns, into barracks, into beer halls with total disrespect to their religious importance. To date, Turkey has repeatedly ignored all U.N. resolutions pertaining to Cyprus and has continued to occupy the island in complete violation of international law.

As Cyprus prepares to celebrate its 50th anniversary, we in Congress have a responsibility to make our voices heard on our ultimate goal of a reunified and prosperous Cyprus where Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots can live together in peace, security, and stability. Passage of this resolution would demonstrate the United States' commitment to protecting the rights and fundamental freedoms of the Cypriot people, religious freedom on the island of Cyprus, and religious freedom for people everywhere.

In the interest of time, I would like to place in the Record this report from the Library of Congress pertaining to the destruction of cultural property and religious sites in Cyprus.

I urge all of my colleagues to vote in support of this important resolution.

[Law Library of Congress]

Cyprus--Destruction of Cultural Property in the Northern Part of Cyprus

and Violations of International Law

Executive Summary

Due to the military invasion by Turkey in July and August

1974, the Republic of Cyprus has been de facto divided into

two separate areas: the southern area under the Government of

Cyprus, which is recognized as the only legitimate

government; and the northern area, amounting to approximately

36 percent of the territory, under the non-recognized,

illegal, and unilaterally declared ``Turkish Republic of

Northern Cyprus'' (``TRNC'). As documented, the northern part

of Cyprus has experienced a vast destruction and pillage of

religious sites and objects during the armed conflict and

continuing occupation. In addition, a large number of

religious and archaeological objects have been illegally

exported and subsequently sold in art markets. The Republic

of Cyprus has asserted its ownership over its religious and

archaeological sites located in Cyprus through use of its

domestic legislation. The Cyprus government and the Church of

Cyprus claim that such religious sites constitute part of

Cyprus' cultural property and are of paramount importance to

the collective history and memory of the people of Cyprus as

a nation, as well as to humankind. In a few instances,

Cyprus, either through diplomatic channels or through legal

action, has been successful in repatriating religious and

archaeological objects.

Protection of religious sites and other cultural property

during armed conflict and occupation falls within the ambit

of international humanitarian law, otherwise known as the law

of war. The basic principle is that cultural property must be

safeguarded and protected, subject to military necessity only

when such property has been converted to a military

objective. Pursuant to the major international agreement on

this subject, the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of

Cultural Property During Armed Conflict and its Protocols, as

well as the legal regime on occupation, Turkey, as a state

party, is required to refrain from acts of hostility and

damage against cultural property located in the northern part

of Cyprus; to prohibit and prevent theft, pillage, or

misappropriation of cultural property; and to establish

criminal jurisdiction to prosecute individuals who engage in

acts of destruction, desecration, and pillage. Archaeological

excavations in the occupied northern part of Cyprus are

prohibited unless they are critical to the preservation of

cultural property; in such a case, excavations must be

carried out with the cooperation of the national competent

authorities of the occupied territory. Such violations of

conventional and customary international rules on the

protection of cultural property may give rise to legal

responsibility on the part of Turkey as the occupying power

before an international court or tribunal, provided that

other requirements are met A legal precedent for the

responsibility of Turkey for actions against cultural

property would be the judgments of the European Court of

Human Rights. The Court, based on the ``effective control''

test, used in Loizidou v. Turkey, found Turkey responsible

for deprivation of private property of Greek-Cypriots

expelled from the occupied northern part of Cyprus.

The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former

Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the Rome Statute of the International

Criminal Court (ICC) consider the destruction of cultural

property to be a war crime. The ICTY has held individuals

accountable for the destruction or damage done to

institutions dedicated to religious, artistic, scientific, or

historic monuments. Moreover, the ICTY has reaffirmed that

the rules on protection of cultural property during armed

conflict have achieved the status of customary international

law; thus, they are binding erga omnes, against all states,

even if a state is not party to an international humanitarian

law instrument.

Two international Conventions governing protection of

cultural property apply to the issue of illicit traffic and

exportation of cultural property from the northern part of

Cyprus: a) the 1970 UNESCO (United Nations Educational,

Scientific, and Cultural Organization) Convention on the

Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import,

Export and Transfer of Ownership; and b) the 1995 UNIDROIT

(International Institute for the Unification of Private Law)

Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects.

A basic objective of both Conventions is to fight the illicit

trade in art and cultural property. Under the 1970

Convention, which has been ratified by Cyprus and Turkey,

parties are required to take steps to prevent illicit traffic

through the adoption of legal and administrative measures and

the adoption of an export certificate for any cultural object

that is exported. Cyprus has complied with these

requirements. In addition, the 1970 Convention regards as

``illicit'' any export or transfer of ownership of cultural

property under compulsion that arises from the occupation of

a country by a foreign power. The 1995 UNIDROIT Convention

establishes uniform rules for restitution claims by

individuals regarding stolen cultural objects and return

claims by states regarding illicitly exported cultural

objects. While Cyprus has ratified the Convention, Turkey has

not.

The Cyprus Government stresses that the optimum way to

preserve and protect its cultural property is to find a

solution to the Cyprus issue and the end of the military

occupation of the northern part of Cyprus. Meanwhile, Cyprus

may opt, inter alia, to utilize judicial remedies to resolve

outstanding disputes pertaining to its cultural and religious

property either before foreign courts, as it has already

done, or international and regional courts, provided that

other criteria are met.

I. Introduction

Following the military invasion of Cyprus in 1974 and the

continuing occupation of the northern part of Cyprus by

Turkey, it has been documented that extensive destruction,

desecration, and pillage of religious sites and other

historic monuments, as well some disputed archaeological

excavations and illegal exportation of objects, have occurred

in the northern part of Cyprus. The Government of Cyprus

claims that the impetus behind the acts of destruction and

desecration of religious sites is the obliteration of their

cultural and religious symbols, which form part of the

cultural and spiritual heritage of Cyprus; as such they are

extremely significant not only for the Greek-Cypriots, but

also for the entire population of Cyprus and for humankind in

general. On the other hand, the unilaterally declared and

unrecognized (with the exception of Turkey) ``state'' of the

``Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus'' (``TRNC'') argues

that its competent authorities are engaged in actions

designed to preserve and protect religious sites, regardless

of their origin and, moreover, that the excavations are

taking place within the ``TRNC's'' own ``sovereign'' area.

It is against this background that this report analyses the

international legal framework governing the protection of

cultural property in the northern part of Cyprus. The report

also examines the rights and obligations of Turkey and Cyprus

arising out of international agreements and especially the

legal consequences of the destruction and pillage of Cyprus'

religious and cultural property by ``TRNC.''

The analysis focuses on the international legal norms and

standards applicable to:

(a) The protection of cultural property during armed

conflict;

(b) Occupied territory;

(c) The protection of cultural property against the illicit

trade and export of artifacts; and,

(d) Religious intolerance.

In order to draw out the issues, the report provides a

historical background, continuing to the time of the de facto

partition of the island and the ensuing military occupation.

Also included is a brief description of the reported

destruction of cultural property that occurred in the

northern part of Cyprus and an overview of Cyprus' domestic

ownership laws on cultural property. In analyzing the

international legal standards applicable to the protection of

cultural property, this report examines three key legal

issues:

(a) Whether religious sites in Cyprus (including churches,

chapels, monasteries, synagogues, and mosques used by the

Greek

Cypriot community and other minorities for religious

purposes) qualify as ``cultural property'' as defined in the

relevant law and thus warrant international protection;

(b) Whether the northern part of Cyprus meets the legal

definition of an occupied territory; and

(c) Whether the destruction of religious sites in the

northern part of Cyprus could give rise to international

responsibility on the part of the occupying Turkish military

forces in Cyprus; the sub-issue of whether ``TRNC'' bears any

degree of responsibility is briefly touched upon as well.

The report concludes with a short overview of courses of

action available to the Republic of Cyprus to pursue its

legal claims against the destruction, illicit trade, and

transfer of its cultural property.

II. Historical Background

The Republic of Cyprus is a small nation in size and

population with a very rich and ancient history and

civilization. Archeological findings indicate that Cyprus was

inhabited around 7,000 B.C. The island was exposed to

Christianity early, with the visit of Apostles Barnabas and

Peter. During the Byzantine era, Cyprus was under the

administration of Byzantine emperors for approximately 800

years (395-1191 A.D).\1\ It was during this time that a great

number of churches were built and decorated with mosaics and

frescoes of exquisite beauty.\2\ In 1571, Cyprus became part

of the Ottoman Empire and in 1878 fell under British rule.

After a long period as a British colony,\3\ the Republic of

Cyprus became an independent nation on August 16, 1960, with

the signing of the Treaty of Alliance, Treaty of Guarantee,

and the adoption of the Cyprus Constitution.\4\ Under the

Treaty of Guarantee,\5\ the three guarantor powers, Greece,

Turkey and the United Kingdom, agreed to safeguard and

respect the independence and sovereignty of Cyprus. Cyprus'

population is composed of two communities; Greek-Cypriots,

and Turkish-Cypriots. The two communities are linguistically

and religiously distinct from each other. They had long

inhabited the island in peaceful symbiosis, with some

sporadic periods of political instability and internal

strife. Prior to 1974, the Greek-Cypriot community comprised

80 percent of the population of Cyprus, the Turkish-Cypriots

totaling approximately 18 percent, with the balance being

comprised of a small percentage of Armenians, Maronites, and

Latin.\6\

Since the 1974 military invasion of Cyprus by Turkey and

the ensuing occupation of the northern 37 percent of the

island, the Republic of Cyprus has been de facto divided into

two separate areas, with the southern area under the

government of Cyprus, which is recognized as the only

legitimate government, and the northern area under the non-

recognized, illegal, and unilaterally declared ``TRNC.'' The

United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP) was

established in 1964 after the eruption of intercommunal

violence in 1963, and is in control along the so called

``green line'' to guarantee maintenance of peace and security

between the two communities.\7\ The military invasion by

Turkey was precipitated when the Greek military regime, with

the assistance of the Cypriot armed forces, planned and

executed a coup d'etat against the government of Archbishop

Makarios, the first elected President of the Republic of

Cyprus. On July 20, 1974, Turkey, using the coup d'etat as

grounds to allegedly protect the Turkish community,

intervened militarily in Cyprus in order to ``reestablish the

constitutional order.'' \8\ A series of unsuccessful peace

negotiations ensued between the two communities under the

auspices of the United Nations (UN) until August 14, 1974,

when Turkey initiated a second military attack on Cyprus and

occupied 36.02 percent of the territory of the Republic of

Cyprus.\9\

As a result of the 1974 Turkish invasion of Cyprus, almost

200,000 Greek-Cypriots fled their homes in the north and

either became refugees or were internally displaced, and

eventually settled in the southern part of Cyprus. The

Turkish-Cypriots who lived in various parts of the island

prior to 1974 moved to the north.\10\

Currently, the population of Cyprus includes approximately

660,000 Greek-Cypriots who live in the south, 89,000 Turkish-

Cypriots in the north, and a Turkish military force of

approximately 43,000. Moreover, Turkey has brought close to

160,000 Turkish settlers to the northern part of Cyprus from

mainland Turkey in an effort to alter the demographics of

Cyprus. The European Court of Human Rights of the Council of

Europe, to which Turkey and Cyprus are members, in numerous

instances has found Turkey to have violated various human

rights in the northern part of Cyprus, in particular the

rights of individuals to their property, and the right to

life, liberty, and security.

The ``TRNC'' was unilaterally proclaimed in 1983 and

adopted a Constitution. The United Nations Security Council,

in Resolutions 541 and 550, adopted in 1983 and 1984,

respectively, declared the secession invalid, null, and void.

The Security Council also urged the Cyprus: Destruction of

Cultural Property--April 2009 The Law Library of Congress

international community not to recognize the ``TRNC.'' \11\

Thus far, no country (with the exception of Turkey) has

recognized the ``TRNC'' as a separate state under

international law. The United Nations, the European Union

(EU),\12\ the Council of Europe,\13\ and others \14\ have

repeatedly reaffirmed the status of the Republic of Cyprus as

the only legitimate government. A number of national and

international courts, in adjudicating legal issues that have

incidentally raised the question of the status of the

``TRNC,'' have not recognized its legitimacy.\15\

On May 1, 2004, the Republic of Cyprus, as a single state,

joined the EU.\16\ For the time being, the entire body

(acquis communautaire) of EU law applies only to the southern

part of the * * *

Madam Speaker, I rise today to express my serious concerns with H. Res 1631. I think many of my colleagues know that I have been a vocal supporter of religious freedom and human rights around the world for many years. But, I believe the resolution before us is less about promoting religious freedom and religious tolerance than it is about poking a stick in the eye of Turkish Cypriots; who are currently working together with their Greek Cypriots neighbors to strike a comprehensive peace deal for that troubled island.

Time and time again, I have come to the floor to ask my colleagues to review the facts and stop oversimplifying this issue. Revisionist history attempts to lay all the blame for the ills of Cyprus at the doorstep of Turkish Cypriots and Turkey. H. Res. 1631 seems to repeat this pattern. I urge my colleagues to step back and ask themselves whether this resolution will truly advance the reconciliation process or merely add fuel to the fire. If we do that, the answer is obvious, H. Res. 1631 is an unnecessary and inappropriate assertion of opinion that does nothing to bring peace to a divided land.

In fact, those on both sides of the issue are already working together to come to a resolution. On March 21, 2008 the Greek Cypriot leader Mr. Christofias and the Turkish Cypriot leader Mr. Talat forged an agreement that paved the way for the establishment of the Technical Committee on Cultural Heritage. This committee has already set in order plans to protect, preserve and restore the rich cultural heritage of Cyprus and by all accounts have made great strides to date towards achieving these goals. According to a recent press statement, the Cultural Committee has expressed a commitment to ``compile the entire list of immovable cultural heritage of Cyprus [and] to create an educational interactive program that would give the opportunity to younger generation of Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots to learn about each other and the cultural heritage of the island.''

The effort is an open and honest dialogue between Greek and Turkish Cypriots regarding the preservation of their shared history. I believe, if left alone, this cooperation could well serve to open dialogue in other areas.

Rather than restating the tired talking points of yesterday which only serve to place blame for past offenses, as appears to be the case with H. Res. 1631, I would urge my colleagues to applaud and support these efforts.

Too often, the international community and many well-meaning members of this body fail to recognize the two sides of this issue. For example, the Turkish Cypriots have expressed concern over destruction and neglect of Turkish-Muslim monuments of importance in the South of Cyprus while at the same time committing to protect the heritage of the Greek Cypriots. In a letter to Mr. Hastings, the Turkish Cypriots expressed that ``The Turkish side believes that the cultural heritage of a people is its most important asset, its identity and a sense of community through time. With this understanding, we regard all the cultural heritage in North Cyprus, regardless of its origin, as part of the common heritage of both the Turkish Cypriot people and of humanity.''

Thankfully, and as I've already stated, the Committee on Cultural Heritage has agreed to work to establish a mechanism that does just this. But why if H. Res. 1631, is the fair and balanced resolution its supporters claim it to be, is it silent in terms of commending all efforts to preserve the cultural heritage of both sides.

Madam Speaker, if we can redirect our misspent energies towards the real work of reshaping Cyprus into a Cyprus that respects human rights and the fundamental freedoms for all Cypriots; by bolstering the efforts of the Greek Cypriots and the Turkish Cypriots to work together in good faith for the future of all Cypriots; then the future will be bright for Cyprus.

However, if we as the United States Congress continue only to echo the shrill cries of the ``blame Turkey'' groups here in the United States, we will only help further delay the day that peace comes to Cyprus. I urge my colleagues to reject H. Res. 1632.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 1631, a resolution calling for protection of religious sites and artifacts from and in Turkish-occupied areas of northern Cyprus, as well as for general respect for religious freedom.

First, I would like to recognize my colleagues for this incredible bipartisan effort. Thank you so much to Ranking Member Ileana Ros- Lehtinen and Chairman Berman, not only for their cosponsorship but also for assisting in fast-tracking this measure to the House floor.

Also, thanks to my Hellenic Caucus cochair, Carolyn Maloney, and all of my colleagues who are cosponsors, including the U.S. House's strongest champion of human rights, Chris Smith. This display of bipartisanship illustrates that Congress can work together in a collegial spirit when it comes to protecting religious freedom throughout the world.

As cosponsor and cochair of the Hellenic Caucus and member of the International Religious Freedom Caucus, we've introduced this measure to highlight the continued violations that are taking place on the divided island nation of Cyprus. Even as Cyprus celebrates the 50th anniversary of its independence, we are reminded that roughly one-third of Cyprus continues to be under Turkish military occupation since 1974. This resolution demands that Turkey be held responsible for the continued violations of humanitarian law with respect to the destruction of religious and cultural property in Cyprus.

The Turkish military, which continues to illegally occupy northern Cyprus, has overseen the systematic destruction of religious sites and the illegal looting of a large number of religious and archaeological objects. When northern Cyprus was invaded, churches were left open to looters and to vandals. The Turkish forces, though required to secure the religious sites by several conventions to which it is a signatory, failed to do so.

Around 500 churches, monasteries, cemeteries, and other religious sites belonging to Greek Cypriots, Armenians, and Maronites have been desecrated, pillaged, looted, and destroyed, including one Jewish cemetery. Eighty Christian churches have been converted into mosques; 28 are being used by the Turkish army as stores and barracks, and many others are used for other nonreligious purposes such as coffee shops, hotels, public baths, nightclubs, stables, theaters, and barns.

Since 2004, at least 15 churches have been leveled, such as St. Catherine's Church in the district of Famagusta, which was bulldozed in mid-2008. Additionally, the Church of the Holy Virgin in the site of Trachonas was used as a dancing studio until the Turkish occupiers built a road that destroyed part of it in March 2010. And the Church of the Templars was converted into a nightclub. These are a few examples of the destruction that has been overseen by the Turkish military, if not directly perpetrated by it.

Mr. Speaker, this resolution urges the Government of Turkey to immediately implement the United Nations Security Council resolutions relevant to Cyprus, as well as the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, by retrieving and restoring all lost artifacts and immediately halting destruction on religious sites, stopping illegal archaeological excavations, and ceasing to traffic in icons and antiquities.

Further, proper preservation and reconstruction of destroyed or altered religious sites must immediately take place, and all restrictions on freedom of religion for the enclaved Cypriots must end.

Mr. Speaker, I hope the beginning of the next 50 years of Cyprus' statehood is marked by the immediate removal of the Turkish occupation forces, followed by immediate reunification of the island nation in which respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms for all Cypriots is a reality.

I urge swift passage of this resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the author of the resolution, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis), a member of the committee.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I rise in strong support of H. Res. 1631, calling for the protection of religious sites and artifacts from and in Turkish-occupied areas of northern Cyprus and calling on the Turkish Government to respect the religious freedom of all the people living in the territory it occupies. I thank my very good friend Mr. Bilirakis for introducing this outstanding resolution and for his faithfulness and effectiveness in exposing human rights violations in Cyprus.

Madam Speaker, this resolution reminds us of the ongoing barbarism of the Turkish Government's military occupation of the northern part of the Republic of Cyprus, a sovereign State. The Turkish Government frequently prevents Greek Cypriots from holding divine liturgy, and it has pillaged their sacred churches and holy sites. The Turkish Government currently uses no less than 28 Orthodox churches as army barracks, has converted 80 churches into mosques, and permits others to be used as nightclubs, sheep stalls, and dancing schools. Under Turkish occupation, 500 churches, monasteries, cemeteries, and other religious sites have been desecrated, destroyed, or looted.

Madam Speaker, this resolution performs a great service in documenting in painstaking detail the trade in sacred objects looted from these churches, which is extensive, international, and totally illicit. It also points out the legal obligation of the Turkish Government to prevent this trade, to restore looted objects as well as churches, and to respect the human rights of those who live under its occupation.

Madam Speaker, I am profoundly disappointed that over the years, including since the passage of the International Religious Freedom Act, that our government has far too often failed to speak out and to speak out vigorously in defense of the religious freedom of Orthodox Christians. This is really shameful. The Turkish Government's persecution of Orthodoxy, whether in Cyprus or Istanbul, the home of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, in Syriac Orthodox monasteries, or of the Armenian Orthodoxy, seems to aim at extinguishing Christian Orthodoxy within its borders.

As the Secretary General's report on the United Nations operations in Cyprus stated as far back as 1996, the restrictions on basic freedoms of Christians in Turkish-occupied areas of Cyprus have the effect ``of ensuring that with the passage of time, the communities (that is, Greek Cypriots and Maronites) would cease to exist.'' So I am glad that this resolution specifically urges the President, the Secretary of State, and the State Department Office of International Religious Freedom to report and take vigorous action on the traffic of Cypriot Orthodox heritage. The executive branch should take this seriously. Hopefully with the backing of the Congress, they will.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 1631) calling for the protection of religious sites and artifacts from and in Turkish-occupied areas of northern Cyprus as well as for general respect for religious freedom.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation.

One of the most tragic aspects of Turkey's 1974 invasion of Cyprus and subsequent occupation of the northern part of that country has been the desecration and destruction of religious property, primarily Greek Orthodox, and other manifestations of contempt for freedom of worship.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney).

Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.