Cyprus-Forum.com

[Andros]

utu,

I agree with you wholeheartedly, but do you honestly believe that this is now possible after what's happened since that time. My idea in terms of methodology, would be to perhaps ask the EU to give a helping hand in all this - Why? Because we have Turkey and the Turkish army to deal with. Therefore, I believe that perhaps the EU is truly the one entity in being able to influence Turkey in line with their (Turkey's) wish in winning full EU membership.

Unless you have any other ideas of forcing Turkey to budge?

[Nikitas]

Partition into two independent internationally recognises states sounds like a simple process, a clean break etc.

If Turkey went to the trouble to invade and then to the expense to hold onto 37 per cent of the islnd for 33 years, maintaining three army divisions there, then obviously it does not want to risk its military dominance of the island.

True and infettered independence means that the south, which judging from the military point of view, is more strategic than the north, will be totally free to do as it wishes. So the south will be able to conclude treaties with other powers and that would threten this hegemony that Turkey has built in the eastern Mediterranean. THis much has been expressly stated by Bulent Ecevit. Read the statements of Turkish official carefully and you will see that they refer to separate, not independent states on Cyprus.

Greece has also made it plain that in case the situation heads towards partition it will not accept the territorial share as it is now, 37-63, but will insist on a more equitable share of the surface which probably means no less than 25-75 and ideally 18-82.

If partition does come about the question that arises is whether the north will be a member of the EU by virtue of the current membership or whether it will have to re-apply from zero. The other consideration is whether the northern state can survive as independent without close ties to the south. It is easy to theorise about international trade etc, but the most direct and vital market for local business is the one that is closest, and that market in Cyprus is the 82 per cent of the population which will be behind a tariff wall, unless there are special trade agreements and/or EU membership.

In the event of partition it is interesting to ponder, based on the practice we have seen in the last 33 years, the attitudes of the two "motherlands". Greece has proven that it keeps interference in the RoC affairs to a minimum. Turkey has shown the exact opposite, it keeps the TRNC under its thumb to the extent that all security forces etc are under the direct command of the Turkish army commander. This shows that any future state in the north will be something less than independent.

On final consideration is the environmental completeness of each area. The south has the Troodos range and part of the Mesaoria plain which together provide a unified self sustaining habitat. In the north the Pendadaktylos range does not collect enough water to irrigate the land. Water will be a problem.

So things are not as "clean" with partition as some people imagine.

[zan]

Partition into two independent internationally recognises states sounds like a simple process, a clean break etc.

If Turkey went to the trouble to invade and then to the expense to hold onto 37 per cent of the islnd for 33 years, maintaining three army divisions there, then obviously it does not want to risk its military dominance of the island.

True and infettered independence means that the south, which judging from the military point of view, is more strategic than the north, will be totally free to do as it wishes. So the south will be able to conclude treaties with other powers and that would threten this hegemony that Turkey has built in the eastern Mediterranean. THis much has been expressly stated by Bulent Ecevit. Read the statements of Turkish official carefully and you will see that they refer to separate, not independent states on Cyprus.

Greece has also made it plain that in case the situation heads towards partition it will not accept the territorial share as it is now, 37-63, but will insist on a more equitable share of the surface which probably means no less than 25-75 and ideally 18-82.

If partition does come about the question that arises is whether the north will be a member of the EU by virtue of the current membership or whether it will have to re-apply from zero. The other consideration is whether the northern state can survive as independent without close ties to the south. It is easy to theorise about international trade etc, but the most direct and vital market for local business is the one that is closest, and that market in Cyprus is the 82 per cent of the population which will be behind a tariff wall, unless there are special trade agreements and/or EU membership.

In the event of partition it is interesting to ponder, based on the practice we have seen in the last 33 years, the attitudes of the two "motherlands". Greece has proven that it keeps interference in the RoC affairs to a minimum. Turkey has shown the exact opposite, it keeps the TRNC under its thumb to the extent that all security forces etc are under the direct command of the Turkish army commander. This shows that any future state in the north will be something less than independent.

On final consideration is the environmental completeness of each area. The south has the Troodos range and part of the Mesaoria plain which together provide a unified self sustaining habitat. In the north the Pendadaktylos range does not collect enough water to irrigate the land. Water will be a problem.

So things are not as "clean" with partition as some people imagine.

I can't make up my mind whether you actually believe what you are writing or are just stirring things up.......A common defence policy...Banks merging......and many many more under the counter dealings not to mention the same national anthem and that is minimal to you



Also....All your scenarios above are based on a hostile break....What if it was a friendly one...A complete one that was sanctioned by the EU and the UN......Still planning to hold on to that siege mentality eh!!!!

[free_cyprus]

The solution to the problem may have to be having to go back to square one. The 1960 Constitution and the Zurich agreement that made it possible were flawed. Coupling this is the strategic position that the island of Cyprus is in. Ouside influences and impositions caused this problem, and they have to be removed if the status quo is to change.

perfect answer to a problem that persist as a direct result of the fecking 1960 zurich agreement. writen by turkey greece and britain, to devide cyprus

[Nikitas]

Zan,

The biggest bank merger in Greek banking history was the purchase of a Turkish bank by the National Bank of Greece, another one is in the planning stages now. Merging of businesses is NOT union, if it was the FYROM would be a Greek colony by now! The same national anthem is not indicative of influence. Greece does NOT have Cyprus under its thumb.

To put you at ease, I believe what I write and if I intend to stir things up then the purpose is stated at the beginning of the post.

A break, whether friendly or hostile would be a break, into two separate and totally independent states, each going their own way, or else it would be a federal solution of some kind. Independent states cannot be bound in any way that compromises their independence. Siege etc has no place in the relations between two independent states. What I was referring to is the exploitation for its own benefit, of the strategic situation of each state. It is quite likely that the south will want to offer this strategic advantage to some power in exchange for money, to put it crudely, and there goes the hegemony of Turkey in the eastern Med. And that explains the insistence by Turkey on the "separate" and not on the "independent" adjective.

You assume that I refer to offering bases to Greece, not so. I see more likely a scenario where the bases are offered to France or Russia and then what happens?

Statements made by Turkish officials over the years show that a truly independent, totally Greek state in south Cyprus is a nightmare for Turkey. If there are statements by anyone in power, that is government official or high ranking military man, showing that they favor a two state solution I would love to see it.

What I was expressing in the post are questions not answers. I do not favor a two state solution because I do not believe there is enough room for two states. In other posts I have stressed the need to take into account the perceived fears of each side and take those into account in a solution, and also provide for adaptation as the fears are diminished in time. Your posts and those of VP and others show that those perceived fears are strong and ever present in your approach. Unlike others I do not dismiss the suspicion and fear, they must be taken into account in a solution otherwise things will be stuck where they are for a long time.

[Viewpoint]

Nikitas you are making excuses for the sake of it, strip away your comments about the north and what do you have a feasable plan to resolve this oustanding problem via a clean break. Those excuses you put forward are problems that will be faced by TCs which we are prepared and willing to do so for the sake of finally bringing this to closure, why are you so concerned?

[zan]

Zan,

The biggest bank merger in Greek banking history was the purchase of a Turkish bank by the National Bank of Greece, another one is in the planning stages now. Merging of businesses is NOT union, if it was the FYROM would be a Greek colony by now! The same national anthem is not indicative of influence. Greece does NOT have Cyprus under its thumb.

To put you at ease, I believe what I write and if I intend to stir things up then the purpose is stated at the beginning of the post.

A break, whether friendly or hostile would be a break, into two separate and totally independent states, each going their own way, or else it would be a federal solution of some kind. Independent states cannot be bound in any way that compromises their independence. Siege etc has no place in the relations between two independent states. What I was referring to is the exploitation for its own benefit, of the strategic situation of each state. It is quite likely that the south will want to offer this strategic advantage to some power in exchange for money, to put it crudely, and there goes the hegemony of Turkey in the eastern Med. And that explains the insistence by Turkey on the "separate" and not on the "independent" adjective.

You assume that I refer to offering bases to Greece, not so. I see more likely a scenario where the bases are offered to France or Russia and then what happens?

Statements made by Turkish officials over the years show that a truly independent, totally Greek state in south Cyprus is a nightmare for Turkey. If there are statements by anyone in power, that is government official or high ranking military man, showing that they favor a two state solution I would love to see it.

What I was expressing in the post are questions not answers. I do not favor a two state solution because I do not believe there is enough room for two states. In other posts I have stressed the need to take into account the perceived fears of each side and take those into account in a solution, and also provide for adaptation as the fears are diminished in time. Your posts and those of VP and others show that those perceived fears are strong and ever present in your approach. Unlike others I do not dismiss the suspicion and fear, they must be taken into account in a solution otherwise things will be stuck where they are for a long time.

Healthy competition...Isn't that the way of the world these days...If any deals can be done together then they will find a way...


For the record...I no more believe that the "RoC" is not run by the Orthodox Church than I think it is by Greece.

[cymart]

This is a very good description of the problem which cover the internal and external aspects!The trouble is will all of them ever be co-ordinated at the same time with a mutual desire to solve it???

[Nikitas]

VP, and Zan,

In case of partition what concerns me is if the south will be left alone. If we have to live forever more with threats from a Turkish army permanently stationed in the north then it does not sound like much of an independence. And neither you nor any one else on this forum is going to be around to offer compensation for that.

But like I said there is not much chance of that happening. Turkey wants separation without independence otherwise they would have said as much and they would not have interfered in the oil issue.

[cymart]

The biggest number of foreign tourists in Turkey come from......Greece!Even Greek-Cypriots can now visit Turkey and a large number do,even though they usually fly via Greece which makes the trip expensive.(a few even go via Ercan and park their cars there!)
So isn't this big bogey about a Greek state in the south of Cyprus threatening Turkey etc. just load of propaganda from nationalists who don't really want peace at all???