Cyprus-Forum.com

[DT.]

The main problems with proposals to 'withdraw troops' are that (i) there is great reluctance to be first mover, (ii) it doesn't necessarily lead to feeling more secure, and (iii) it has the obvious flipside of troop build-up or return.

What might be considered instead is demilitarisation. This has the prospect instead, it seems to me, of (a) enhancing security for all parties, (b) diminish tensions, (c) build mutual confidence and (d) save a lot of money and resources. Furthermore demilitarisation of the island could be done without prejudice to nor dependent on broader a broader political settlement. Additionally demilitarisation of the island would address the outrage which is the British sovereign bases.

What might demilitarisation entail ? Maybe the disbandment of RoC and TRNC armed forces and their complete substitution with civil and unarmed police forces. Perhaps the commitment to rescind basing rights to foreign militaries (whose current justifications for continued deployment is the military threat/insecuirty posed by the other side); so in removing the threat you remove the justification for foreign military presence and assistance. Perhaps the creation of trans-Green Line 'peace parks' could be the first step. In a 'peace park', which is usually a common ecological zone bisected by a border, the norm is to exclude ALL military activities, personnel and materials. There are of course avenues to pursue other than these quick suggestions.

What could be the objections to such a proposal ? (I have a number in mind, but I wonder what Forum members might think).

I disagree with the TC demilitarization and here is why:

Firstly, you are asking the side outnumbered 1 to 4 in this conflict to disarm as if their vulnerability would be the same with the other in a demilitarized environment in Cyprus; historical and present facts of Cyprus suggests otherwise. Secondly, your proposal is based on the assumption that the military presence of both sides is equivalently a nuisance to the both sides hence demilitarisation is an equivalent favor to both sides - no. I couldn`t care less about the National Guard now, but I know the vice versa isn`t true. The rights they have taken away from me is a matter still on the table for discussion only and only because I have my military to keep it on the table. Unfortunately, military might is the language these people will understand and this proposal takes that away from me without returning+guaranteeing me my rights.

Consequently, I find your proposal unbalanced and given the past and current agenda/actions of the GC leadership quite unfair to the TC side. I do not see the demilitarization of the two sides as a compromise to the GC side at all – to the contrary it is music to their ears because unfortunately our military might seems to be the only thing that stands between their complete rein over Cyprus and the current status. This proposal is the final golden trophy to the GC side for their criminal policies/actions over the TCs for almost half a century - unsuprisingly two GC members immediately expressed to be in favor of the proposal. I strongly believe that demilitarization can be considered fair and reasonable only and only under the circumstances where both sides have full recognition.

once a nation gets used to doing things with the sword its difficult to turn back. Seems to be part and parcel of a nations character i'm afraid. Murataga has managed to prove in his very honest manner how naked Turkey feels in a quarrel without being armed to the teeth.

One can imagine if Turkey ever joined the EU, sitting around the table and discussing the Common Agriculture Policy trying to figure out how they can defent their quotas without threatening war.

[Kifeas]

The main problems with proposals to 'withdraw troops' are that (i) there is great reluctance to be first mover, (ii) it doesn't necessarily lead to feeling more secure, and (iii) it has the obvious flipside of troop build-up or return.

What might be considered instead is demilitarisation. This has the prospect instead, it seems to me, of (a) enhancing security for all parties, (b) diminish tensions, (c) build mutual confidence and (d) save a lot of money and resources. Furthermore demilitarisation of the island could be done without prejudice to nor dependent on broader a broader political settlement. Additionally demilitarisation of the island would address the outrage which is the British sovereign bases.

What might demilitarisation entail ? Maybe the disbandment of RoC and TRNC armed forces and their complete substitution with civil and unarmed police forces. Perhaps the commitment to rescind basing rights to foreign militaries (whose current justifications for continued deployment is the military threat/insecuirty posed by the other side); so in removing the threat you remove the justification for foreign military presence and assistance. Perhaps the creation of trans-Green Line 'peace parks' could be the first step. In a 'peace park', which is usually a common ecological zone bisected by a border, the norm is to exclude ALL military activities, personnel and materials. There are of course avenues to pursue other than these quick suggestions.

What could be the objections to such a proposal ? (I have a number in mind, but I wonder what Forum members might think).

I disagree with the TC demilitarization and here is why:

Firstly, you are asking the side outnumbered 1 to 4 in this conflict to disarm as if their vulnerability would be the same with the other in a demilitarized environment in Cyprus; historical and present facts of Cyprus suggests otherwise. Secondly, your proposal is based on the assumption that the military presence of both sides is equivalently a nuisance to the both sides hence demilitarisation is an equivalent favor to both sides - no. I couldn`t care less about the National Guard now, but I know the vice versa isn`t true. The rights they have taken away from me is a matter still on the table for discussion only and only because I have my military to keep it on the table. Unfortunately, military might is the language these people will understand and this proposal takes that away from me without returning+guaranteeing me my rights.

Consequently, I find your proposal unbalanced and given the past and current agenda/actions of the GC leadership quite unfair to the TC side. I do not see the demilitarization of the two sides as a compromise to the GC side at all – to the contrary it is music to their ears because unfortunately our military might seems to be the only thing that stands between their complete rein over Cyprus and the current status. This proposal is the final golden trophy to the GC side for their criminal policies/actions over the TCs for almost half a century - unsuprisingly two GC members immediately expressed to be in favor of the proposal. I strongly believe that demilitarization may perhaps be considered fair and reasonable only and only under the circumstances where both sides have full recognition.

No problem Murataga Kemaloglou! Take your 18% of land and we agree to recognise you!

This is how the 18% will look like, with a generous offer of a more than 30% of the coastline:



PS: And we do not even care if you want to demilitarise the 18% or not! In any case, we won’t be demilitarising the RoC!

[Murataga]

The main problems with proposals to 'withdraw troops' are that (i) there is great reluctance to be first mover, (ii) it doesn't necessarily lead to feeling more secure, and (iii) it has the obvious flipside of troop build-up or return.

What might be considered instead is demilitarisation. This has the prospect instead, it seems to me, of (a) enhancing security for all parties, (b) diminish tensions, (c) build mutual confidence and (d) save a lot of money and resources. Furthermore demilitarisation of the island could be done without prejudice to nor dependent on broader a broader political settlement. Additionally demilitarisation of the island would address the outrage which is the British sovereign bases.

What might demilitarisation entail ? Maybe the disbandment of RoC and TRNC armed forces and their complete substitution with civil and unarmed police forces. Perhaps the commitment to rescind basing rights to foreign militaries (whose current justifications for continued deployment is the military threat/insecuirty posed by the other side); so in removing the threat you remove the justification for foreign military presence and assistance. Perhaps the creation of trans-Green Line 'peace parks' could be the first step. In a 'peace park', which is usually a common ecological zone bisected by a border, the norm is to exclude ALL military activities, personnel and materials. There are of course avenues to pursue other than these quick suggestions.

What could be the objections to such a proposal ? (I have a number in mind, but I wonder what Forum members might think).

I disagree with the TC demilitarization and here is why:

Firstly, you are asking the side outnumbered 1 to 4 in this conflict to disarm as if their vulnerability would be the same with the other in a demilitarized environment in Cyprus; historical and present facts of Cyprus suggests otherwise. Secondly, your proposal is based on the assumption that the military presence of both sides is equivalently a nuisance to the both sides hence demilitarisation is an equivalent favor to both sides - no. I couldn`t care less about the National Guard now, but I know the vice versa isn`t true. The rights they have taken away from me is a matter still on the table for discussion only and only because I have my military to keep it on the table. Unfortunately, military might is the language these people will understand and this proposal takes that away from me without returning+guaranteeing me my rights.

Consequently, I find your proposal unbalanced and given the past and current agenda/actions of the GC leadership quite unfair to the TC side. I do not see the demilitarization of the two sides as a compromise to the GC side at all – to the contrary it is music to their ears because unfortunately our military might seems to be the only thing that stands between their complete rein over Cyprus and the current status. This proposal is the final golden trophy to the GC side for their criminal policies/actions over the TCs for almost half a century - unsuprisingly two GC members immediately expressed to be in favor of the proposal. I strongly believe that demilitarization can be considered fair and reasonable only and only under the circumstances where both sides have full recognition.

once a nation gets used to doing things with the sword its difficult to turn back. Seems to be part and parcel of a nations character i'm afraid. Murataga has managed to prove in his very honest manner how naked Turkey feels in a quarrel without being armed to the teeth.

One can imagine if Turkey ever joined the EU, sitting around the table and discussing the Common Agriculture Policy trying to figure out how they can defent their quotas without threatening war.

A "quarrel" ? The one where a community outnumbered 1 to 4 gets ousted from the government, murdered, enclaved and ambargoed for not letting go of Cyprus to Greece + being refused their rights, security and representation for 44 years - a "quarrel"?

If you did these to the people of a member EU country with fair weight in a similar position Turkey is to TCs make no mistake about it: we would be reading about you in history books today.

[Kifeas]

A "quarrel" ? The one where a community outnumbered 1 to 4 gets ousted from the government, murdered, enclaved and ambargoed for not letting go of Cyprus to Greece + being refused their rights, security and representation for 44 years - a "quarrel"?

If you did these to the people of a member EU country with fair weight in a similar position Turkey is to TCs make no mistake about it: we would be reading about you in history books today.

I suppose you have in mind the way your motherland treated and still treats its Kurdish citizens, Mr Kemaloglou, but you imagine instead that this has happened in Cyprus and not in Turkey!

[DT.]

The main problems with proposals to 'withdraw troops' are that (i) there is great reluctance to be first mover, (ii) it doesn't necessarily lead to feeling more secure, and (iii) it has the obvious flipside of troop build-up or return.

What might be considered instead is demilitarisation. This has the prospect instead, it seems to me, of (a) enhancing security for all parties, (b) diminish tensions, (c) build mutual confidence and (d) save a lot of money and resources. Furthermore demilitarisation of the island could be done without prejudice to nor dependent on broader a broader political settlement. Additionally demilitarisation of the island would address the outrage which is the British sovereign bases.

What might demilitarisation entail ? Maybe the disbandment of RoC and TRNC armed forces and their complete substitution with civil and unarmed police forces. Perhaps the commitment to rescind basing rights to foreign militaries (whose current justifications for continued deployment is the military threat/insecuirty posed by the other side); so in removing the threat you remove the justification for foreign military presence and assistance. Perhaps the creation of trans-Green Line 'peace parks' could be the first step. In a 'peace park', which is usually a common ecological zone bisected by a border, the norm is to exclude ALL military activities, personnel and materials. There are of course avenues to pursue other than these quick suggestions.

What could be the objections to such a proposal ? (I have a number in mind, but I wonder what Forum members might think).

I disagree with the TC demilitarization and here is why:

Firstly, you are asking the side outnumbered 1 to 4 in this conflict to disarm as if their vulnerability would be the same with the other in a demilitarized environment in Cyprus; historical and present facts of Cyprus suggests otherwise. Secondly, your proposal is based on the assumption that the military presence of both sides is equivalently a nuisance to the both sides hence demilitarisation is an equivalent favor to both sides - no. I couldn`t care less about the National Guard now, but I know the vice versa isn`t true. The rights they have taken away from me is a matter still on the table for discussion only and only because I have my military to keep it on the table. Unfortunately, military might is the language these people will understand and this proposal takes that away from me without returning+guaranteeing me my rights.

Consequently, I find your proposal unbalanced and given the past and current agenda/actions of the GC leadership quite unfair to the TC side. I do not see the demilitarization of the two sides as a compromise to the GC side at all – to the contrary it is music to their ears because unfortunately our military might seems to be the only thing that stands between their complete rein over Cyprus and the current status. This proposal is the final golden trophy to the GC side for their criminal policies/actions over the TCs for almost half a century - unsuprisingly two GC members immediately expressed to be in favor of the proposal. I strongly believe that demilitarization can be considered fair and reasonable only and only under the circumstances where both sides have full recognition.

once a nation gets used to doing things with the sword its difficult to turn back. Seems to be part and parcel of a nations character i'm afraid. Murataga has managed to prove in his very honest manner how naked Turkey feels in a quarrel without being armed to the teeth.

One can imagine if Turkey ever joined the EU, sitting around the table and discussing the Common Agriculture Policy trying to figure out how they can defent their quotas without threatening war.

A "quarrel" ? The one where a community outnumbered 1 to 4 gets ousted from the government, murdered, enclaved and ambargoed for not letting go of Cyprus to Greece + being refused their rights, security and representation for 44 years - a "quarrel"?

If you did these to the people of a member EU country with fair weight in a similar position Turkey is to TCs make no mistake about it: we would be reading about you in history books today.

and before and after those tragic coupld of 100 deaths from both communities in the 60's I expect you did nothing wrong?

[Murataga]

The main problems with proposals to 'withdraw troops' are that (i) there is great reluctance to be first mover, (ii) it doesn't necessarily lead to feeling more secure, and (iii) it has the obvious flipside of troop build-up or return.

What might be considered instead is demilitarisation. This has the prospect instead, it seems to me, of (a) enhancing security for all parties, (b) diminish tensions, (c) build mutual confidence and (d) save a lot of money and resources. Furthermore demilitarisation of the island could be done without prejudice to nor dependent on broader a broader political settlement. Additionally demilitarisation of the island would address the outrage which is the British sovereign bases.

What might demilitarisation entail ? Maybe the disbandment of RoC and TRNC armed forces and their complete substitution with civil and unarmed police forces. Perhaps the commitment to rescind basing rights to foreign militaries (whose current justifications for continued deployment is the military threat/insecuirty posed by the other side); so in removing the threat you remove the justification for foreign military presence and assistance. Perhaps the creation of trans-Green Line 'peace parks' could be the first step. In a 'peace park', which is usually a common ecological zone bisected by a border, the norm is to exclude ALL military activities, personnel and materials. There are of course avenues to pursue other than these quick suggestions.

What could be the objections to such a proposal ? (I have a number in mind, but I wonder what Forum members might think).

I disagree with the TC demilitarization and here is why:

Firstly, you are asking the side outnumbered 1 to 4 in this conflict to disarm as if their vulnerability would be the same with the other in a demilitarized environment in Cyprus; historical and present facts of Cyprus suggests otherwise. Secondly, your proposal is based on the assumption that the military presence of both sides is equivalently a nuisance to the both sides hence demilitarisation is an equivalent favor to both sides - no. I couldn`t care less about the National Guard now, but I know the vice versa isn`t true. The rights they have taken away from me is a matter still on the table for discussion only and only because I have my military to keep it on the table. Unfortunately, military might is the language these people will understand and this proposal takes that away from me without returning+guaranteeing me my rights.

Consequently, I find your proposal unbalanced and given the past and current agenda/actions of the GC leadership quite unfair to the TC side. I do not see the demilitarization of the two sides as a compromise to the GC side at all – to the contrary it is music to their ears because unfortunately our military might seems to be the only thing that stands between their complete rein over Cyprus and the current status. This proposal is the final golden trophy to the GC side for their criminal policies/actions over the TCs for almost half a century - unsuprisingly two GC members immediately expressed to be in favor of the proposal. I strongly believe that demilitarization can be considered fair and reasonable only and only under the circumstances where both sides have full recognition.

once a nation gets used to doing things with the sword its difficult to turn back. Seems to be part and parcel of a nations character i'm afraid. Murataga has managed to prove in his very honest manner how naked Turkey feels in a quarrel without being armed to the teeth.

One can imagine if Turkey ever joined the EU, sitting around the table and discussing the Common Agriculture Policy trying to figure out how they can defent their quotas without threatening war.

A "quarrel" ? The one where a community outnumbered 1 to 4 gets ousted from the government, murdered, enclaved and ambargoed for not letting go of Cyprus to Greece + being refused their rights, security and representation for 44 years - a "quarrel"?

If you did these to the people of a member EU country with fair weight in a similar position Turkey is to TCs make no mistake about it: we would be reading about you in history books today.

and before and after those tragic coupld of 100 deaths from both communities in the 60's I expect you did nothing wrong?

oh, no need to remind of my wrong... I hold the worst punishable thing one can carry on his shoulders in Cyprus: born and proud to be a Turkish Cypriot.

[Nikitas]

Demilitarisation looks like a pipe dream. Not only because of the situation of the island and precedent of invasion and occupation, but because of a new element that has appeared in the last year- offshore resources. You cannot protect offshore resources without a navy and airforce.

It is my opinion that the Cyprus problem has its roots in the lack of seriousness with which both communities faced their new nation status in the 60s. Both sides regarded the new Republic as a stepping stone on the road to their nationalist aspirations.

The way out must be a new and strong nation state and serious nations take their defence seriously. Cyprus not only should have a armed forces, but those armed forces must be powerful enough to project power in all areas where Cyprus has sovereignty. In fact it would be wise to have the ability that the British have in collecting electronic information and then treat that information as a commodity for sale.

It may sound cynical but it is better to be a free cynic than a naive slave. The value of Cyprus' position in the age of electronic spying is its position. Apparently from Cyprus you can eavesdrop all over central Asia. Good- then we Cypriots can do the eavesdropping and sell the info to whoever pays for it. This would be the act of a self respecting nation state. Letting others have a base is submission to the other in the sense that you tacitly agree that you are inferior technologically and militarily. Should anyone need abase in Cyprus then we must apply the principle of mutuality and demand corresponding percentage of their country as a base for Cypriot forces. Sounds laughable but it is one way to prevent demands for base areas in the future.

[Kifeas]

oh, no need to remind of my wrong... I hold the worst punishable thing one can carry on his shoulders in Cyprus: born and proud to be a Turkish Cypriot.

Okay Murataga, I heard your pleads! That is why I offered you 18% of my country, for you and the rest of your community to go and leave there, completely separately from us GCs that have such feelings against your TC “ethnicity,” and I even promised you to built a 12 meter wall separating the two areas, so that there is no chance for contact with each other or any GC intrusions into the north for the purpose of annihilating your “people!” What else do you want? I even said you can keep all your troops there to protect you! What are you waiting for? Why are you wasting your time?

[utu]

Kifeas, Are you actually supporting partition?

[zan]

oh, no need to remind of my wrong... I hold the worst punishable thing one can carry on his shoulders in Cyprus: born and proud to be a Turkish Cypriot.

Okay Murataga, I heard your pleads! That is why I offered you 18% of my country, for you and the rest of your community to go and leave there, completely separately from us GCs that have such feelings against your TC “ethnicity,” and I even promised you to built a 12 meter wall separating the two areas, so that there is no chance for contact with each other or any GC intrusions into the north for the purpose of annihilating your “people!” What else do you want? I even said you can keep all your troops there to protect you! What are you waiting for? Why are you wasting your time?

The whole point is that you are using the Turkish army as the rod with which to beat us with. They are there, as Murataga has said until a settlement is reached and then we either have our own army or the one according to the Zurich agreement all be it on new terms AFTER negotiations. The withdrawal of the Turkish army is not the be all and end all of the problem and the chances of it helping the "RoC" to start proper discussions is nil so lets cut the crap. They are no threat to you but are protectors to us. The price we have to pay for that more than outweighs the good they do in my country.

As I have mentioned before, the chance of war increases without their overwhelming presence. The deterrent is there and it has kept you at bay for over 40 years. They are going nowhere. They have no relevance on how and when discussions should take place. If they do then it is just the same old lame excuse you have been using over and over again and the world has stopped listening to that old rubbish. In the same way Greece is pulling the strings in the "RoC" they can have their influence whether they are on the island or not so the argument is defunct even before it is started.