Cyprus-Forum.com

[CopperLine]

This thread puzzles me insofar as the title - 'we have to consider partition' - suggests consideration of a future possiblity whereas partition is a description of a long established reality.

There is an elephant in the room and no one can bring themselves to mention it, albeit their reluctance is for different reasons. Some say the elephant is an illegality, some say the elephant is a friend, some say the elephant is an enemy, but all deny that there is an elephant in the room, at worst it is still wandering around outside.

To admit that there is an elephant in the room does not entail approval or disapproval of its presence, but it is mighty odd to seek to discount its 33 year residency. And how many more years will the elephant live with us before we acknowledge - not approve, but acknowledge - its real and lasting effect ?

[Eliko]

This thread puzzles me insofar as the title - 'we have to consider partition' - suggests consideration of a future possiblity whereas partition is a description of a long established reality.

There is an elephant in the room and no one can bring themselves to mention it, albeit their reluctance is for different reasons. Some say the elephant is an illegality, some say the elephant is a friend, some say the elephant is an enemy, but all deny that there is an elephant in the room, at worst it is still wandering around outside.

To admit that there is an elephant in the room does not entail approval or disapproval of its presence, but it is mighty odd to seek to discount its 33 year residency. And how many more years will the elephant live with us before we acknowledge - not approve, but acknowledge - its real and lasting effect ?

This Elephant, do you think it would be helpful if it would 'Pack it's Trunk' and leave ?.

[phoenix]

This thread puzzles me insofar as the title - 'we have to consider partition' - suggests consideration of a future possiblity whereas partition is a description of a long established reality.

There is an elephant in the room and no one can bring themselves to mention it, albeit their reluctance is for different reasons. Some say the elephant is an illegality, some say the elephant is a friend, some say the elephant is an enemy, but all deny that there is an elephant in the room, at worst it is still wandering around outside.

To admit that there is an elephant in the room does not entail approval or disapproval of its presence, but it is mighty odd to seek to discount its 33 year residency. And how many more years will the elephant live with us before we acknowledge - not approve, but acknowledge - its real and lasting effect ?

Is Dumbo the elephant equivalent to the (40,000) Turkish Army?

[Eliko]

phoenix, I wonder if 'Hannibal' has got his foot in the door ?.

[Piratis]

This thread puzzles me insofar as the title - 'we have to consider partition' - suggests consideration of a future possiblity whereas partition is a description of a long established reality.

There is an elephant in the room and no one can bring themselves to mention it, albeit their reluctance is for different reasons. Some say the elephant is an illegality, some say the elephant is a friend, some say the elephant is an enemy, but all deny that there is an elephant in the room, at worst it is still wandering around outside.

To admit that there is an elephant in the room does not entail approval or disapproval of its presence, but it is mighty odd to seek to discount its 33 year residency. And how many more years will the elephant live with us before we acknowledge - not approve, but acknowledge - its real and lasting effect ?

This "elephant" as out of his natural habitat and it is causing problems. If that was not the case then we wouldn't be talking about a Cyprus Problem that needs to be solved.

[CopperLine]

Phoenix, Eliko
Thanks for demonstrating the point

[Eric dayi]

VP, the following article in todays Cyprus Mail also echoes the sentiments above where questions are being asked on the efforts made by the RoC to find a solution ............

So what exactly would make a good solution for our leaders?
By Nick Pittas

THERE is a widely held view in the Greek Cypriot community that no solution to the Cyprus problem is preferable to a bad solution.

To those who hold this view, the Annan plan in all its five iterations was bad, all the various UN sponsored plans that were tabled between 1978 and 1999 were bad, the tentative agreement reached between interlocutors Glafcos Clerides and Rauf Denktash in 1973 and rejected by Makarios was bad, the 1964 Acheson plan was bad, the Zurich and London Agreements that established the Republic in their time were considered bad (but not so bad now with the benefit of hindsight according to President Papadopoulos who advised Makarios not to sign at the London conference in 1959). All the various proposals made by the British colonial government in the 1940s and 1950s to address the self-determination claims of Greek Cypriots and the fears of the minority Turkish Cypriots were bad, and on and on.
What we are never told by the rejectionists is what would make a settlement plan good, or at least acceptable to the Greek Cypriot community.

We know that in principle we are prepared to accept a solution for a federal, bi-communal and bi-zonal Cyprus, based on the political equality of the two main communities, provided the solution is ‘workable’ and capable of being ‘long lasting’. What exactly would satisfy those conditions we are never told. All we know is that every UN initiative since 1977 did not reach the mark.
The strategy it seems, is to create a Dunkirk spirit within the Greek Cypriot community, whereby our current President is all that stands between us and those unnamed but nefarious forces within the international community that day and night are working to undermine the Republic and to serve it up to satisfy the voracious appetite of their friends in Turkey.

The wonder is that the people of Cyprus can still be sold this jejune bill of goods after all these years.
The candidates for the presidency should have their feet put to the fire and be required to tell the voters exactly what sort of a federal, bi-communal and bi-zonal plan they envision could realistically form the basis for a comprehensive settlement. This does not mean they have to produce a draft constitution and map, or the other terms of a settlement to address the various aspects of the problem. What the people have a right to insist on is for each candidate to come forward with their vision in concrete terms of what would satisfy the requirement for a ‘workable’ and ‘lasting’ solution that could be accepted by both sides.
The time for vague generalities has long passed. The public can only make an informed and constructive choice among the candidates if they know what each one submits as the principles and the essential conditions that would render a plan acceptable to the two main Cypriot communities. If they want to talk about a ‘European settlement’, they will have to tell us what that means, as the EU is a cultural and political mosaic with many different forms of government resulting from political compromises and historic rapprochements. Let us not forget that at the time the Annan plan was considered quite European by the EU.

For a candidate to say only what he rejects – arbitration, tight time frames, every existing plan tabled to date – is simply not good enough. Sure, the next round of talks has to be carefully prepared, but the best prepared talks will not go anywhere if there is not the willingness to advance reasonable positions and engage in some give and take.

Eventually, we will have to sit down at the table and stop talking about process and negotiate the terms of settlement based on the principles already agreed to.
Our leader did not negotiate effectively at Burgenstock, and having accepted arbitration by the UN Secretary-general he got the plan that we rejected massively in 2004.
The world, however, does not stand still and we cannot develop a forward looking policy if we fixate on the past and all the plans we have rejected.

I suspect the international community and the EU is prepared to give us another chance to put Humpty Dumpty together again in 2008 and 2009. If there is another effort that fails, the party or parties that the international community decides is responsible will have to wear it. If that party is us, as it was in 2004, it will mean almost certainly the legitimisation of the so-called TRNC, and effectively put an end to any efforts by the international community to sponsor a settlement. The world, to the extent that it thinks about Cyprus at all, will be happy to allow Turkey to police the area, and accept the so-called TRNC as the de facto administration in northern Cyprus.

With one exception, over 60 years we have rejected every plan and initiative put forward to solve the Cyprus problem on terms acceptable to both sides. Even the exception, which established the independence of Cyprus, was widely attacked at the time as ‘unworkable’ and a ‘sell-out’ of Greek Cypriot ideals. We undermined the bi-communal nature of the Cyprus Republic between 1963 and 1974, and by our fanaticism and civil divisions we opened the doors to the Turkish invasion of 1974.
During this sad period of history every plan that was undermined or rejected by our side resulted in changed circumstances to the detriment of Cyprus and the Greek Cypriot community. Each rejected plan is succeeded by another that is worse.

One of these days, we have to wake up and realise that we are largely the authors of our own woes and misfortunes. Until and unless we face our problems honestly, and with a willingness to negotiate an honorable compromise with our Turkish Cypriot brothers and sisters, we will continue our dreary march to a permanent partition.

Copyright © Cyprus Mail 2007

What a huge pile of Rubbish!

When Turks/TCs write something it's "propaganda" according to Keifeas but when GCs write something it is also "a huge pile of Rubbish" also according to Kiefeas.

I suppose for someone like Kiefeas who goes to the gym to train for war everything is "rubbish" but war.

[phoenix]

phoenix, I wonder if 'Hannibal' has got his foot in the door ?.

Great minds think alike . . . you're just a bit faster

[Pyrpolizer]

This thread puzzles me insofar as the title - 'we have to consider partition' - suggests consideration of a future possiblity whereas partition is a description of a long established reality.

There is an elephant in the room and no one can bring themselves to mention it, albeit their reluctance is for different reasons. Some say the elephant is an illegality, some say the elephant is a friend, some say the elephant is an enemy, but all deny that there is an elephant in the room, at worst it is still wandering around outside.

To admit that there is an elephant in the room does not entail approval or disapproval of its presence, but it is mighty odd to seek to discount its 33 year residency. And how many more years will the elephant live with us before we acknowledge - not approve, but acknowledge - its real and lasting effect ?

For a moment I thought I got a clue about you dear CopperLine but then again hmm... it could mean something else. Very true what you said about the elephant.

[Viewpoint]

This thread puzzles me insofar as the title - 'we have to consider partition' - suggests consideration of a future possiblity whereas partition is a description of a long established reality.

There is an elephant in the room and no one can bring themselves to mention it, albeit their reluctance is for different reasons. Some say the elephant is an illegality, some say the elephant is a friend, some say the elephant is an enemy, but all deny that there is an elephant in the room, at worst it is still wandering around outside.

To admit that there is an elephant in the room does not entail approval or disapproval of its presence, but it is mighty odd to seek to discount its 33 year residency. And how many more years will the elephant live with us before we acknowledge - not approve, but acknowledge - its real and lasting effect ?

Very well put CopperLine, takes intelligence to understand what you are saying but a blind man will always be blind no matter how precise you are, only a miracle can make him see.