If you mean ignore the reality that when you pursued enosis you did not do so as a part of a unitary Cypriot people, but as a Greek community and people that happened to live in Cyprus, excluding me and my community and making us some 'other' people that also lived in Cyprus and that we had as such equal and seperate rights as a people to you, in order to make progress, then yes Ill give it a go.
No Erolz, I don't mean that and you know it. The Cypriots that wanted enosis are the same Cypriots that existed when the Turks first came to Cyprus, and the same ones that have been in Cyprus for 1000s of years before that. You can disagree with the wish of the majority and you can
believe you are right. But in democracies you have to respect the will of the majority (as long as it is not against you human/minority rights) and you can not act against it simply because you
believe you are right. If that was the case then everybody could give some excuse to act against the democratic wishes of the population as a whole, and that is definitely not democracy. Take for example what happened with the election of Gul in Turkey. Some people up to the highest level believed very strongly that they had very valid reasons to stop Gul from being elected. However in democracies you have to respect the democratic choices of the people and if you don't then the result is not democracy regardless of the excuses that you give.
You could spend another million posts trying to convince me that 'one person one vote' ONLY EVER is a more fundamental principal of democracy than 'people having an effective say in the decsion that rule their lives' but it would not convice me , because such a claim is bollocks.
Yes, I know you will not be convinced. You can keep your own theories that exist nowhere, while I will continue to accept what democracy is as it is accepted by all democratic countries of the world.
THe only absolute guarante that the TC community as a community will give up ANY desire for a partitioned Cyprus is to make a unifed one where there life as a CYpriot is better and clearly so than any partitioned senario could offer.
I don't care what desires anybody can have. They are free to have whatever desires they want. I would also like to have 100 million pounds, does this mean that unless you came and give me 110 million to make it even better for me, I will have the option to go and rob people from their money?
No. I will not do that first because I am an ethical person, secondly because people secure their belongings and it will not be easy for me to just grab 100 million, and third because there will be heavy penalties even if I attempt to do so.
The same should apply for the crime called partition, and not as you say to more or less allow it as an option to the TCs in case they decide it is better for themselves. So partition should become practically impossible to achieve and those that attempt it should face heavy penalties.
We would have to argue about who is a settler or not but we could problably , with some good will and mutual compromise agree on that. I have no problem with there being a 'great majority' requirment.
I personally as an indivdual can live without bizonlaity provided the right bicommunal protections exist. However this prob not true of most TC at least for a period of time. I would also consider other specfic measure to protect against the risk of intentful forced colapse as a route to division but I am out of time and will have to expand on these other possibilites later.
OK, I will wait for your proposals.
No list is not acceptable to me. I need a principal that can be applied fairly and consistnetly to anything that may occur in the future for I can not predict the future. Another big problem with a list is what would stop you as a GC community 'democraticaly' changing the list in the future , according to your defintion of democracy ? Give me 100 things on the list today and tomorrow 'democratically' remove then , one by one. No sorry that is all to familure for me to find it acceptable.
If you think we could remove items from the list, then we could also remove the whole principle as well. Whats the difference?
The list will exactly make sure that all issues on it are indeed communal, since this list will be agreed in advance. If this agreement does not exist then who will decide what is "communal issue", foreigners?