Compatriot Insan,
I do not ignore the facts that caused the separation of the two communities. I simply suggest a new start based on logic and universally well tested modern practices. The arrangement we had in the past (1960 constitution) and the new arrangement we are offered now (Anan plan 5) are without any worldwide precedent. The past, as I said before, should serve as the bad example to be avoided and not the vehicle to drive us to the future.
Compatriot Kifeas,
All of the nation sates, multi-ethnic federations on planet earth has its own peculiar state structure built upon each of these countries' own peculiar circumstances, demographics, historical background and retrospection of its people. Their states have been built upon these elements. These elements that determine the structure of a state are very different in Cyprus. Therefore, we should build our common state on the basis of our own elements. In the end there may be structural similarities with the other states but this does not mean that we copied some parts of other countries's state structure. Noone can know our historical background, disputes, difficulties, religious, lingual, strategical, prejudicial, psychological problems better than us. We say "political equality" of two communities in legislative matters is a must. We hear most of the GCs say "this is unfair." With a flat logic they argue that "we demand four times more legislative power on every matter." So now I'm asking to you Kifeas, if TC community doesn't have "political equality" on legislative matters, how can we effectively participate on decision making mechanisms of our common state. In case of any unjust decision attempt of GC senators particularly against the any type of interests of TC community; how can we stop them taking any decision that discriminates TC community? You imply that let's asume we are all Cypriots like West Germans vs East Germans or N koreans vs East Koreans; can we erase the ethnic division existed between two communities for more than 400 years? Assumptions don't lead us anywhere.
We have almost completely two different version of history regarding our so-called common historical background. We have significant lingual difficulties that stop us deepen and strengthen our relationships. We have religious difficulties, mainly arise from conservatist mentality and prejudices and significantly prevent inter-marriage and mixing the families of two communities.
However, we still hear from most of the GCs "Let's assume there aren't such difficulties in front of us." or "We can overcome all of these difficulties in a very short time. First you surrender to GC rule, don't worry about the rest. We know how to make you obbey the things we believe."
.
Insan, it is evident that in the absence of any strong arguments, the TC side retrieves into what I call an attempt to victimise the other side, hoping that this will weaken the other side’s arguments.
Ok my friend. We GCs admit guilty. We (GC) committed all the mistakes of the past. We are 100% guilty. The TC side is the complete innocent and the absolute victim of GCs. TCs never co-operated with the British in arresting and torturing GC EOKA members in the 50's, thus provoking the sentiments of the GC community, which rightfully or wrongfully (wrongfully in my opinion,) had chosen to support an armed liberation struggle against the British. TC did not commit the first-ever massive attack and massacre against members of the other community, nearby Yerolakkos village in 1958. Kutchuck never proclaimed the 59 -60 agreements a victory for the TC community’s cause and the foundation of the next step, which was Taksim. TC never attempted, to the slightest extent, to abuse the overwhelming political power they gained in 1960 constitution and thus provoking Makarios to propose amendments. TCs never initiated or provoked attacks against themselves, in order to justify the need for a Turkish intervention, which would facilitate their cause.
Only evil GCs (all of them) did all the wrong doings in this country. No CIA funding via the "motherlands" ever occurred for Yiorkagis, Sampson and Denktash's TMT teams. It was all done because the GCs were the bad guys. Does this make you any happier? Do you still believe that we are the same people? Ah..yes, I forgot this never ending Hellenic “national cause,” scenario! Another victimising cliché.
Kifeas, I'm not trying to victimise GC community or weaken your arguments. Several times I emphasized that you have struggled for the things you believed. The problem was/is, we have never believed the things you believed and struggled for were also the things that would be in favour of us. Therefore we reacted and retaliated your ideas and actions with our ideas, beliefs and actions. The criminals, responsibles, faults, rights and wrongs should be examined in this concept, imo.
Insan, I am not asking that we should forget the past. Each side must admit it’s own mistakes. So far I hear more from the GC side admitting some of its mistakes, on the highest possible level. Papadopoullos is perhaps one of the few remaining exemptions. Makarios did, Clerides did, Vasilliou did and many others. Kassoulides, ex-foreign minister, even made it publicly on TV, apologising to the TCs. I do apologise, as an ordinary GC –although I was not even born then. However, I am sad to say that similar initiatives were not taken on behalf of the TC leadership, yet. Only some Journalists from the TC community slowly –slowly begin to write about them. In fact one of them was murdered a few years back for just doing this.
Most of those sad, hurting situations, sufferings arised from "majority rule" insistence of Hellenic ruling Elite. Apparently most of the Hellenes still insist on "majority rule."
Never the less, I believe it is always counter productive to refer to the past, in a victimising to the other side manner, in order to defend possible weaknesses of one’s case for a future, new start.
This depends on your intention of what purposes you talk about our past. Frankly speaking I have never talked about it for victimising the other side. I talk about the past to show other side how deep trauma, damage, fears and prejudices our past has been created in hearts, souls and brains of Cypriots.
Unfortunately what you are saying is not possible as Annan plan 5 was drafted. Under previous versions of Annan plan, yes it was possible. On the issue of who elects and who may become elected in the senate, it was purely on ethnic grounds, irrespective of area of residency and internal CS citizenship. Even if a British origin, Cypriot citizen, was granted the internal CS citizenship of lets say the TCCS, he could still not vote for the senators of the TC community. A Turkish Cypriot, who would decide to lets say live in Pafos and choose to obtain the GCCS internal citizenship status, cannot vote for the GC community’s Senators but only for the TC senators. Even if his wish is to vote for the GC senators, since he is living in the GCCS and has the internal GCCS’s citizenship, this cannot be possible. If a British with a GCCS internal citizenship status is allowed to vote for the GC senators or to become a Senator himself, the Turkish Cypriot with GCCS status could easily dispute this to any local or a European Union court, for being discriminated against, visa vie the British who is also a GCCS citizen, on the basis of ethnic origin. Taking this into consideration, just think what all Greek Cypriots who will move within the TCCS and obtain it’s internal citizenship status will do, once the TCCS allows anyone of the so many British, to be TCCS citizens, to vote for the TCCS senators, while they will not be allowed because their ethnic origin was branded to be Greek and not British or any other.
So you say in such a small Island Cyprus, let's don't ask any derogations for the interests of its indigenous people and for the sake of freedom of movement allow 800-900 thousands Europeans to settle down in Cyprus, give them the full political rights that its indigenous people have and eventually after 20 years watch the European Senators who are not indigenous people of Cyprus ruling us in our own Senate. Is this your patriotic love for your own country and its indigenous people? It's not rational ain't it? There should be derogations to protect the indigenous people of such small and bi-communal countries.
They are against permanent derogations however.
EU principles are based upon pragmatism and rationalism. The constitution and laws of EU are not static. They are naturally in progress. Any valid and/or rational demand of any EU country is welcomed by EU.
So your suggestion is that only the senate should be composed of a 50:50 ratio, like it is in the Annan plan. Why it has to be on a 50:50 ratio (numerical equality.) Political equality is not achieved if the composition is proportional to the population, but each community has the right to vote separately on certain or all issues? What difference will it make if let’s say the ratio is 75:25, when in order to pass or change a law, separate majorities will be required. The right for separate majorities is the essence of political equality. The number of senators each side will have is purely symbolic. You want to gain both the essence and the symbolism. Leave at least the symbolic, (not the essential,) to be enjoyed by the more numerical side that makes the essential concession for separate majorities.
The essentials of "political equality" lai within its working mechanisms including the presidential council and supreme court; plus House of representatives. Please see the thread "On which matters GCs want majority rule" and tell me your opinions please.
After all Insan, how many politicians you wish to produce within the TC community and who will keep paying them? Can you afford it? The GC side is highly afraid that these arrangements will be highly costly, although it has more potential to sustain them. Are you aware what salaries these people are going to get paid, just to be seating there once a week or so?
I believe the gain of the unification under a bi-zonal, bi-communal federation that two major communities of Cyprus are "politically equal" will utterly be more than what we'll pay for its sustainment. Every Cypriot and each community will pay its own share don't worry about it. TC community knows how to struggle against difficulties even under the harshest circumstances.
My argument however remains the same. That there should be one parliament at the federal level and not two, for economising reasons. The citizens of each CS should elect this one chamber, separately, irrespective of ethnicity but on the basis of internal CS citizenship. And Yes, I accept political equality in the way I described it above. I.e. separate majorities but not necessarily, numerical levelling. This concept of a bi-communal chamber based on ethnic origins, is an Anachronism of the past, purely non-European and without any other universal precedent. Just find me one example?
And if you think Belgium or Switzerland, I say to you before hand that you are making a mistake.
With what you suggesting we will end up with a Senate that TCs will have estimately 1/4 of the seats. One-man-one-vote will be applied. Everything TCs have had legal objections will most probably rejected by majority(naturally by GC senators) and we will be shown the direction of supreme court or ECHR to go and ask for justice. We will rot our lives at the doors of Supreme Court and ECHR by waiting the justice to prevail. Most of the TCs will feel frustrated and feed up. They will sell whatever they own and flee other countries.
Happy end for all of us.
Not at all, my friend!
You see! This is another victimising cliché so often used. Whenever a GC proposes something different than what TCs perceive or consider being the ideal for them, this cliché pops up. “All the Greek Cypriots want is to dominate the TCs and turn them into a minority within them and themselves remaining the ruling majority.” Even De Sotto bought into it the other day.
If what you are suggesting is not a GC state with a TC minority what is it then?
Any way my friend, I am sure I made you tired by now. I have more to discuss but later.
Ok. my friend. I'm looking forward to hear more from you as soon as possible.
