Cyprus-Forum.com

[Bananiot]

Lets not deviate from the title of this thread. The question we should be trying to answer is why did Papadopoulos respond in this way to Anan's comments. What game is he playing? Who is he trying to fool? "Haravgi", Akel's mouthpiece (newspaper), has been praising Papadopoulos for his absurd response for two days now. Such praise may be good internally but foreign diplomats here and everywhere must really be wondering about the agenda of our president. I mean, just ponder for a second. He asked Anan to demand changes to the plan from Erdogan! This, he said, would make Anan's call objective! Our president is clueless. Where is he taking us?

[Saint Jimmy]

why is it that Papadopoulos is trying to buy time though? i cant understand that to be in benefit of GCs. [/list]

I think his strategy is as follows.

There are something like 32 stages Turkey has to go through to reach accession to EU. At the start and ens of each of these the memebers states (including Cyrpus) can veto the entry process.
TP thinks that he can extract a concession at each of these 64 'veto points' from Turkey with regards to Cyprus - ending up with his maximal aims over time in a 'salami slice' style strategy. As such the last thing he wants then is a comprehensive agreed settlement now. That would remove his 64 chances to 'force / blackmail' turkey into consessions over Cyprus.

Do you think there are no merits in this strategy, Erol? Do you think there is no chance that it might actually work? It sounds a bit far-fetched a theory, but he doesn't strike me as the kind of guy that would risk that much...

[Bananiot]

Papadopoulos cannot blackmail the EU. Lets hope he learned his lesson in December, otherwise, we are all at his mercy.

[erolz]

Do you think there are no merits in this strategy, Erol? Do you think there is no chance that it might actually work? It sounds a bit far-fetched a theory, but he doesn't strike me as the kind of guy that would risk that much...

It depends what the objective is.

If the objective is to try and get 95-100% of GC maximal demands on Cyprus and not to build a true bi communal Cypriot nation made up of TC and GC communites living in peace and harmony then yes perhaps this startegy has some mertis - though I doubt it will actualy work. The EU will not allow the Cyprus tail to wag the EU dog. If however the objective is not to try and achievbe a senarion where GC win and TC lose but actualy one where Cypriots win then I think it is a disaterous strategy that can only take us futher from true peace and harmony in Cyprus.

[-mikkie2-]

Papadopoulos cannot blackmail the EU. Lets hope he learned his lesson in December, otherwise, we are all at his mercy.

Bananiot,

If you remember, the text that was agreed by ALL EU members, including Britain, was that Turkey must sign the Ankara protocol on the 17th of Decemeber.

Now, that does not sound like Papadopoulos blackmailing the EU. ALL EU STATES AGREED THE TEXT.

Turkey kicked up a fuss so there was a compromise which Papadopoulos accepted, and that is for Turkey to sign the protocol before the 3rd of October.

In addition, when Erdogan made his speach to the 25 he said he was pleased that he did not have to recognise the RoC. Only Jack Straw was clapping when he said this. The rest of the delegations responded with a stony silence. Now what does that tell you?

The Swedish foreign minister was asked what would happen if Turkey did not sign the protocol and he made it quite plain that this was a test for Turkey to show that she had a European outlook. He did not mince his words!

[Saint Jimmy]

If you remember, the text that was agreed by ALL EU members, including Britain, was that Turkey must sign the Ankara protocol on the 17th of Decemeber.

Now, that does not sound like Papadopoulos blackmailing the EU. ALL EU STATES AGREED THE TEXT.

Turkey kicked up a fuss so there was a compromise which Papadopoulos accepted, and that is for Turkey to sign the protocol before the 3rd of October.

Mikkie, all this is true and I agree.
Still, it is generally accepted that Turkey was legally obligated to sign the protocol sooner or later, if she were to commence accession talks. Such an obligation is not as straight-forward, however, with other issues concerning the Cyprus problem. Unless we expect the EU to eventually kick the Turkish army out, and every single settler along with it, without an agreed solution.

I don't think there will be such consensus, as with the protocol issue, in the EU, on these matters. Generally, these issues are by nature much more controversial than the protocol issue. And that's why, in my opinion, the EU is trying as hard as it possibly can, to stay out of the negotiations: because it's got itself in a loop-hole. It has accepted the RoC as a full member (representing the whole of Cyprus), only without actually consciously doing so, as they thought they were going to have a unified Cyprus acceding.

[metecyp]

If you remember, the text that was agreed by ALL EU members, including Britain, was that Turkey must sign the Ankara protocol on the 17th of Decemeber.

And if you remember, Papadopoulos had asked much more than just signing the Ankara protocol but he had to settle for just signing the protocol.