I read with interest the views expressed by Turkish President Turgut Ozal {op-ed, Jan. 22} on the Gulf crisis and on the issues of international aggression and the new world order.

The U.N. Security Council, the coalition and, in particular, the United States, which has led the international effort against aggression in the Gulf, are to be commended for their principled stand. This policy is of particular significance to small states, especially those that have been victims of aggression themselves. Cyprus has been since 1974 a victim of military aggression itself. Thirty-seven percent of its sovereign territory has been under occupation by Turkey's military forces since they invaded the island in the summer of 1974. This continuing aggression has been repeatedly condemned by the U.N. Security Council, whose binding decisions expressly demand the withdrawal of the occupation forces from Cyprus. Turkey has unfortunately, so far, refused to abide by those decisions.

Thirty-five thousand of Mr. Ozal's troops still occupy, illegally, part of Cyprus. There are striking parallels in the cases of Cyprus and Kuwait: Both are small independent states militarily invaded and occupied by a larger, well-armed neighboring state; in both cases there have been flagrant violations of sovereignty, human rights and international law; U.N. resolutions have been disregarded and diplomatic efforts have been undermined in both cases; there have been transfers of indigenous populations from and colonization of the occupied areas by the aggressor state; and in both cases there has been systematic destruction of cultural heritage.

We in Cyprus are hopeful that, as in the case of Kuwait, world condemnation of military aggression will be followed by a concerted effort for the liberation of the occupied territory of Cyprus as well. Iraq's aggression has awakened the world to the need of a firm, principled stand "against aggression, against those who would use force to replace the rule of law," in the words of President Bush.

Turkey must comply with the U.N. resolutions on Cyprus. That will be consistent with international law, in which, as the president of Cyprus, George Vassiliou, stated, "the people of Cyprus repose their hopes for a solution to the Cyprus problem" so that "our island will be reunited peacefully." MICHAEL E. SHERIFIS Cypriot Ambassador to the United States Washington

In the article by Turkish President Turgut Ozal I would like to suggest changing the word "Kuwait" to "northern Cyprus" and the word "Iraq" to "Turkey": "The invasion and annexation of northern Cyprus by Turkey were in direct violation of all norms of international order."

Approximately half of the people of Cyprus, including my family, were forced to leave their homes in Cyprus when the Turkish army invaded in 1974. I was 12 years old then, and to this day I cannot return.

Mr. Ozal suggests that the process of "democratization" in the Middle East "would help the region keep pace with the new world order." Democratic freedoms in Turkey have been suppressed for a long time now, a fact well documented in the annual Amnesty International reports. The cruel oppression of the large Kurdish minority in Turkey is not much different from the treatment of Kurds in Iraq.

In a new world order, concern for freedom and human dignity should not be different in Kuwait, in Palestine, in Cyprus, in El Salvador, in Latvia or in South Africa.