Cyprus-Forum.com

[Nikitas]

Humanist,

The violence of the past was possible because we were not a state that took itself seriously. Since the tragedy of 1974 we have grown up a lot! The tragedy forced us to take a good look at ourselves y as a state because we had to, there was no one there to help us. Greece has more or less washed her hands of Cyprus and the attitude has been "Cyprus decides, Greece stands in solidarity". It is not the choking embrace that Turkey applied to Turkish Cypriots. You will have noticed how quickly moves by hotheads to start a guerilla movement etc were squashed in the 70s. A state that takes itself seriously has no time for unofficial armies like those of the 60s.

Entry into the EU reinforces this political maturity in the south. And while the north became more and more exclusionary of others the south has become more and more inclusionary and cosmopolitan, accepting thousands of foreign workers. In view of these changes and developments I think it is impossible to see any reversion to the idiocies of the 60s.

But a full return to the 1960 constitution while the north remains occupied will strain everyone's patience and goodwill. It really is interesting to see how the European Court of Human Rights will treat the Erel demand to do just that. Taken in combination with the property cases the same court is hearing the situation is developing into a farce. Turkish Cypriots will be given full participation in the south while Greek Cypriots will be formally expropriated in the north! Reminds me of the Nasrudin Hoja story where he is a judge and everyone is judged to be right, including the guy who says "Hoja, they cant both be right" and Hoja says "you are right too".

[Viewpoint]

Nikitas

At first I thought it was me, not being able to put ideas across clearly, but then I noticed the "broken record syndrome", the same fixed positions and "wooden" phraseology repeated over and over. It seems that no one has worked out in their minds, for their own benefit, the details of what they propose. And frankly I am shocked at the callous attitude towards anyone not Turkish and not strong enough to assert a claim, such as the smaller communities of the island.

The broken record or wooden phraseology can also be referred to as a consistent argument which does not deviate from the reality of the situation. Why are you so shocked and where did we say that the small minorities will not have individual rights just like anyone else living in a united Cyprus? What I am saying is they are exactly that minorities with minority rights, that is the position GCs want to reduce us to but this is no longer possible as we are partners as 2 communities and have been given rights according to the 1960 agreements. In those agreements these small ethnic groups were clubbed together with your community so they are not really in the overall picture as a community but as a minority. The last referendum is clear indication of the world deals with the Cyprus issue where there are 2 sides, the minorities voted in your referendum not ours.

In conclusion it seems that the details of a plan, a totally Turkish Cypriot inspired one, are not forthcoming because no one has worked out what it will mean on a day to day basis and how it will affect peoples' lives. I gather from my little experiment that there are some slogans repeated ad infinitum and that is where things stop.

You asked for points that are paramount in any solution and I put them forward, instead of addressing these you have used sweeping statements to dismiss and say we have no vision or plan, may I refer you back to the last comprehensive solution plan which we said yes to, this was acceptable to us but not for you so you can easily see the chasm that exists between our 2 communities. We are committed to a BBF solution but this is not the case for your leadership although they pay lip service to it in order to get your support.

I note that there has been no comment on the settlers, on the encouragement of diaspora Cypriots to return to the island, on the individual liberties and other details that any reasonable guy wanting to get to grips with a solution would want to know about.

We can agree on many of these issues and I had no objection to the points you put forward in principle but you did not comment on the points I raised and therefore we are unable to try and clarify what it is you are trying to understand. We are not as rigid as GCs on many issues and if you took the time to ask questions you may be surprised as to who is the real problem maker in this whole Cyprus issue.

The other thing I notice is the overplay of past hurts- violence- injustices, often from people who are obviously not old enough to have lived them. It is the cornerstone of every response. I was disturbed when Viewpoint mentioned burying alive, a totally uncalled for response to a genuine invitation to describe her/his vision of a settlement.

I tried to explain in my earlier post why I used such terminology yet you appear to have ignored it, in order to bring home the severity of how strongly we feel about certain issues these comments allow you the opportunity to hear what it feels like from our side of the border.

Pity, because I really wanted to know the other side's vision of how they see a solution working in practice. Well I live and learn

Ask questions and keep an open mind, the bottom line for us is we do not want to be a minority in our own country and we want to administer our own area, this does not mean that GCs should be excluded from the North.

[zan]

Humanist,

The violence of the past was possible because we were not a state that took itself seriously. Since the tragedy of 1974 we have grown up a lot! The tragedy forced us to take a good look at ourselves y as a state because we had to, there was no one there to help us. Greece has more or less washed her hands of Cyprus and the attitude has been "Cyprus decides, Greece stands in solidarity". It is not the choking embrace that Turkey applied to Turkish Cypriots. You will have noticed how quickly moves by hotheads to start a guerilla movement etc were squashed in the 70s. A state that takes itself seriously has no time for unofficial armies like those of the 60s.

Entry into the EU reinforces this political maturity in the south. And while the north became more and more exclusionary of others the south has become more and more inclusionary and cosmopolitan, accepting thousands of foreign workers. In view of these changes and developments I think it is impossible to see any reversion to the idiocies of the 60s.

But a full return to the 1960 constitution while the north remains occupied will strain everyone's patience and goodwill. It really is interesting to see how the European Court of Human Rights will treat the Erel demand to do just that. Taken in combination with the property cases the same court is hearing the situation is developing into a farce. Turkish Cypriots will be given full participation in the south while Greek Cypriots will be formally expropriated in the north! Reminds me of the Nasrudin Hoja story where he is a judge and everyone is judged to be right, including the guy who says "Hoja, they cant both be right" and Hoja says "you are right too".

I really can't make up my mind if you are just gullible or you say these things withn intent???

Of course the face that tthe "RoC" and Greece feed the world is just the same as the one behind closed doors, that you and others that come out with rubbish about Greece having no intersest in Cyprus, just walk straight into.


You seem to be getting very confused about what the TCs are asking as well.....Asking as in going for all their rights in the "RoC" whilst not giving anything in the TRNC/KKTC. They are trying to show those of a pig headed and devious nature that the situation in which the "RoC" is telling the world that it not only represents us but also we have rights in the "RoC" does not really exist. There is no way that the "RoC" is going to honour any such thing and that is the point of the exercise. How can there be something there one minute and not the next... We have two states now and they are the two people that should be talking to one another if there is any great will for a fair solution. We cannot be ignored in all of this and if we are part of the "RoC' then give us our rights...What goes on in the so called "Illegal" state of the TRNC/KKTC does not make any difference to that problem....Rights are rights and then they can start to vote as one on what is to be done in the North of the island....Perhaps then there can be a fair solution and not a one sided Greek affair A double edged sword........According to you guys the "TRNC/KKTC is illegal so why are we denied our rights in the "Legal" state of the "RoC".........WHY!!!

[Nikitas]

Viewpoint,

I did ask and gave specific examples, like the hairdresser in the north who wants to expand her business to the south.

The issues of minorities disturbs. I wonder how a Cyprus, member of the EU and council of Europe, can have in its constitution (as per the Annan plan) provisions that discriminate against minorities. It is debatable how the European Court of Human Rights would treat a demand by one of the smaller communities, let us say the Rom, to have equality with the two main communities of the island and a demand that their members, as part of their individual rights, can get elected to the any electedt post. Some would say there is a good chance they would win and the constitution on that point would be reversed.

The assertion that the small comunities were never owners or conquerors so have no rights, or that they are lumped arbitrarily with the Greek Cypriots is not valid in the 21st century. It can be taken as a desire to exclude everyone from the proposed Turkish federal state, and that can lead to all kinds of thoughts of ethnic purity etc.

Most of all I wanted a description of how people perceive daily life under a settlement that they propose. Things like how business is established, how and where people live and work. What are their minimum acceptable conditions and how far they are willing to empathize with the "red lines" that would be unacceptable to the other communities.

[Nikitas]

Zan,

Greece is holding general elections on Sunday. Cyprus has not been mentioned once by any of the five parties contesting the elections. The joint military exercises of the past are defunct. The mainland Greek interference of the past in matters such as education etc is gone. Greece used to have a direct say in the matter of Cypriot universities and for years it was against the creation of Cypriot universities, now there are several universities in the south, public an private. Your suspicion that somehow Greece has ambtions in Cyprus is rather outdated.

Now as to the rights of Turkish Cypriots in the RoC. It is probable that the ECHR will accept the Erel conention and demand that the Roc goes back to full implementation of the 1960 constitution. Where does that leave the TRNC? IT will be a test case and it can backfire on the testers.

Your answer to this is to prejudge that the RoC will not obey the court, because of some devious and camouflaged Greek master plan, therefore there is no point talking about the eventuality. What if the RoC obeys the court because as a member state of the EU has no other choice? Then what? Those were my questions.

[Viewpoint]

Nikitas

I did ask and gave specific examples, like the hairdresser in the north who wants to expand her business to the south.

Where did you give examples of what you are asking ı must have missed it could you please quote this post for me.

The issues of minorities disturbs. I wonder how a Cyprus, member of the EU and council of Europe, can have in its constitution (as per the Annan plan) provisions that discriminate against minorities. It is debatable how the European Court of Human Rights would treat a demand by one of the smaller communities, let us say the Rom, to have equality with the two main communities of the island and a demand that their members, as part of their individual rights, can get elected to the any electedt post. Some would say there is a good chance they would win and the constitution on that point would be reversed.

The AP got the EU green light and were heavily involved in the process, these smaller communities/minorities would have been no different from those in the UK and would have all the same rights.

The assertion that the small comunities were never owners or conquerors so have no rights, or that they are lumped arbitrarily with the Greek Cypriots is not valid in the 21st century. It can be taken as a desire to exclude everyone from the proposed Turkish federal state, and that can lead to all kinds of thoughts of ethnic purity etc

So what you are saying is that these smaller ethnic groups should have gained community rights in the 1960 agreements? but they choose to side with GCs so that chance has been lost and I personally would allow them representation in a new united Cyprus but them with 10.000 Brits in the North and god knows how many in the south do we also allow them the same fixed rights or are they regarded as minorities?

Most of all I wanted a description of how people perceive daily life under a settlement that they propose. Things like how business is established, how and where people live and work. What are their minimum acceptable conditions and how far they are willing to empathize with the "red lines" that would be unacceptable to the other communities.

Your request is pretty vague but as far as I can understand people in the north want life to continue as is but with the opportunities the south have we want a level playing field and the same rights the south have, we are not against GCs returning to their peoperties or moving freely over the island but we want to to have a say in our own future and not be forced to do anything against our will so the proposal concerning power sharing put forward by Kifeas is acceptable in my book, which basically was where the decision/law making mechanism has to include TC votes to be valid, the numbers required can be adjuested to allow functionality but decisions which effect my community more negatively than the GCs shoudl contain more TC weight.

[Nikitas]

Viewpoint

Now we are getting somewhere.

So in your vision of Cyprus a Turkish Cypriot would be able to move around freely and establish a business anywhere on the island, and likewise for a Greek Cypriot. Which is pretty much what I envision in a solution. You see I could not see a situation where each community is artificially kept caged in its own area, it would be too much hardship especially for the smaller community who need the market provided by the bigger community.

As for the foreigners, Brits etc, they cannot be compared to the smaller minorities, because they have a nationality and homeland. The situation is different. Let me keep my doubts about the future possibilities on that.

One thing that bothers me, and from what I read in the forum only me, is the incentive for Cypriots to return to the island either to live or to invest here. Something more serious than a set of investment laws etc, something embodied in the settlement itself. It is ironic that Annan found time for settlers but not one word for Cypriots of the diaspora. Given the proportion that left after 1974 such a scheme would have benefited the Turkish Cypriot community much more than the Greek side. It was one of the main reasons that I personally opposed the plan.

NOw to talk about red lines. The major obstacle to accepting a bizonal bicommunal settlement is not the nature of the settlement (the territorial division etc) but who will be on the other side of the fence and how that will affect individual rights. As long as the people on the other side are CYPRIOTS and the rights of movement, property etc are as per European norms, the objections diminish. When non Cypriots are introduced in the mix then the situation takes on the character of foreign conquest and objections rise. Understanding this detail would go a longway towards making some things palatable.

[Viewpoint]

Nikitas

So in your vision of Cyprus a Turkish Cypriot would be able to move around freely and establish a business anywhere on the island, and likewise for a Greek Cypriot. Which is pretty much what I envision in a solution. You see I could not see a situation where each community is artificially kept caged in its own area, it would be too much hardship especially for the smaller community who need the market provided by the bigger community.

Try asking questions directly and you will get net answers.

One thing that bothers me, and from what I read in the forum only me, is the incentive for Cypriots to return to the island either to live or to invest here. Something more serious than a set of investment laws etc, something embodied in the settlement itself. It is ironic that Annan found time for settlers but not one word for Cypriots of the diaspora. Given the proportion that left after 1974 such a scheme would have benefited the Turkish Cypriot community much more than the Greek side. It was one of the main reasons that I personally opposed the plan

I also rerurned from diaspora and have settled and adjusted into a great life without the incentives you are looking for, I am not aginst these incentives but they should not deter Cypriots from returning and investing here for a better future.

NOw to talk about red lines. The major obstacle to accepting a bizonal bicommunal settlement is not the nature of the settlement (the territorial division etc) but who will be on the other side of the fence and how that will affect individual rights. As long as the people on the other side are CYPRIOTS and the rights of movement, property etc are as per European norms, the objections diminish. When non Cypriots are introduced in the mix then the situation takes on the character of foreign conquest and objections rise. Understanding this detail would go a longway towards making some things palatable.

The main obstacle for Gcs is sharing and allowing the Tcs to run the north and have political equality at the federal level, they either do not want to accept us as equals or feel that we are just another minority when in fact we are partners whos point of view counts just as much as theirs.

[humanist]

Listen here Zan you can think what ever you like of me, I really don't care. One thing I oblect is you trying to label me something that I am not. I strongly reject anyones insistamnce for me to be Greek or identifyu as Greek. I am A cypriot a proud one at that I just happened to speak Greek and English.

Now if you want to kiss Turkish arse go right ahead. Don't expect me to kiss Greek Arse. Unlike you I am proud to have been born in Cyprus in one that co exist Greek speaking and Turkish speaking Cypriots who are equal. Now you want to give your country away to Turkey that is your notion of proudness, I opose to both Turkey and Greece having any part of my country. Unlike you I have moved beyond the dark ages and thank fully my sopirituality is elevate to a level that allows me to see all people as one human race all in one the same and equal that I really don't give a rats arse what colour you have, what language you speak or what religion you believe in. I am never in my life time sell my country to either Greece nor Turkey because I have an inferiority complex. How dare you take half my country and call it your you are an arogant person and your insistance that I be Greek is pissing me off., Good night to you sir.

[Nikitas]

Humanist,

Like others here, Zan is too young to know the difference between mainland Greeks and Cypriots. He is stuck in this groove that limits his vision. He is convinced that there is a Pan Hellenic conspiracy to take over Cyprus etc. Sometimes he sounds like a Greek mainlander talking about Cypriots!