Cyprus-Forum.com

[Get Real!]

"Can anyone seriously think the RoC will give its consent on such flights?"

But Boomerang the point is, following the example, that if Syria started flights to TRNC it wouldn't matter if RoC gave consent or not. RoC's consent would be irrelevant.

If Syria is a member of the ICAO then she has to abide by its rules!

First, if Syria was recognising TRNC then it would merely be extending ICAO provisions to another state.

This is where you've run out of gas and have started to talk nonsense... The "TRNC" is not a state and certainly not listed in ICAO's lists as one, or even a member so how is it that Syria can "extend" ICAO provisions there?

Second, the earlier discussion was precisely about what incentives to abide or sanctions to deter Syria (or any other state) from recognising TRNC.

One would have to read the ICAO's policy in detail to answer your question.

[phoenix]

My dearest sweet, reasonable Phoenix of sound and balanced mind, whilst no doubt you've got reliable evidence that people in north Cyprus are "Attracted only by cheapness, and they have no morals or scruples" for myself I'm attracted by the flora and fauna. Just thought you should know. Obviously you can't carry both morals and scruples AND a camera - just too heavy isn't it. Tell you what, why don't you carry my morals while I take photos. As I said, north Cyprus is quite lovely, I should say beautiful : try it some time.

I have every intention of trying it sometime, after all it is mine .
And it is just a matter of time Copperline, before it is returned to its rightful owners . . . the Cypriots.

Good idea, take lots of photos of the flora and fauna, then you can have something to remind you of what you had briefly expropriated.

[Get Real!]

How could Syria extend ICAO provisions when article 1 and 2 prohibit her from doing so?

Why blame a man for trying to find a loophole?

[CopperLine]

How could Syria extend ICAO provisions when article 1 and 2 prohibit her from doing so?

Boomerang,
"extending the provisions" means that Syria as an ICAO (Chicago Convention) party would simply be applying the substantive provisions of the agreement, which are primarily about safety, to 'TRNC airspace'. There is an obligation in international law to extend legal norms and provisions into those areas which are currently void or empty of such provisions.

Look, the point is that ICAO is NOT GOING TO REJECT or REFUSE ANY STATE'S EFFORTS TO FLY SAFELY AND REGULATE AIRSPACE. Currently ICAO does not and I can safely say, will never, censure 'TRNC' or any other state, legal or otherwise, for fulfilling airspace safety.


Aaaaach ... I'm bored and tired.

[phoenix]

I wonder who and how these flights are insured...

I'm sure they have any number of dodgy "insurance agents" in the dodgy "TRNC" . . .

[CopperLine]

after all it is mine

Phoenix, which bit exactly ?

it is just a matter of time

Phoenix, as a francophile you may know the film 'La Haine'. The opening scene, if I remember correctly, is a man falling from the top of a tower block and as he falls he says to himself "so far so good". Strange, your

it is just a matter of time

reminded me of that.

[phoenix]

after all it is mine

Phoenix, which bit exactly ?

No "bit" . . . . but ALL !

it is just a matter of time

Phoenix, as a francophile you may know the film 'La Haine'. The opening scene, if I remember correctly, is a man falling from the top of a tower block and as he falls he says to himself "so far so good". Strange, your

it is just a matter of time

reminded me of that.

I don't live in a fantasy world of films, Copperline . . . I live in the REAL world.

[boomerang]

How could Syria extend ICAO provisions when article 1 and 2 prohibit her from doing so?

Boomerang,
"extending the provisions" means that Syria as an ICAO (Chicago Convention) party would simply be applying the substantive provisions of the agreement, which are primarily about safety, to 'TRNC airspace'. There is an obligation in international law to extend legal norms and provisions into those areas which are currently void or empty of such provisions.

Look, the point is that ICAO is NOT GOING TO REJECT or REFUSE ANY STATE'S EFFORTS TO FLY SAFELY AND REGULATE AIRSPACE. Currently ICAO does not and I can safely say, will never, censure 'TRNC' or any other state, legal or otherwise, for fulfilling airspace safety.


Aaaaach ... I'm bored and tired.

Copperline, its simple...read article 1 and 2...Syria only recognizes 1 state...There is no other airspace

ICAO talks about states and its very specific about this...It expects all co signatories to abide by the regulations put forward...No ifs no buts...

There is only one airspace and it belongs to the RoC...

So in your argument what will happen if Syria did broke the agreement...Plenty...no finance will ever touch them...no insurance will ever touch them...Kicked out of ICAO...Condemned in the UN...

You think Syria will risk all this? to appease who and get what for breaking rules...

Just think if the UK couldn't do it what makes you think Syria could?..and between you, me and the goal post, the british employed minds with greater understanding of ICAO rules and they couldn't do it...What makes you think you have a chance in hell in even debating it?...just accept that will never happen...

ok people nothing to see here...move along

[zan]

Copperline
Don't despair mate...They know what you are talking about.......They just don't want to say........They are arguing chalk with cheese....And as you will appreciate...The chalk is leaving a nasty taste in their mouths

[Andros]

The following, from the Cyprus Mail is interesting and highlights the Stealth "Partition" theory going around: Any Comments? But, please read the article below. Thanks!

From CYPRUS MAIL:

Dwelling on the past is no way to run an election

ANYONE who has been following the election campaign exchanges of the last month will know that the main issue is the Annan plan. Any rational person will ask how a settlement plan that was rejected in a referendum three-and-a-half years ago could be top of the presidential election agenda.

It should not be an issue, as the three main candidates all agree it was a bad plan that Greek Cypriots were perfectly justified in rejecting. As for the Papadopoulos government, it had repeatedly stated, in no uncertain terms, that the plan was dead: “in the mortuary” to use a government spokesman’s words.

This should have been the end of the story. However, President Papadopoulos’ communications advisers believe there are votes to be won by resurrecting it and putting it at the centre of their campaign. His call on the people to reject the plan in 2004 was considered his finest hour and many of his supporters claimed that his defiant stand had saved the Cyprus Republic, a boast repeatedly made by the president and his spokesmen in the last few months.

A dead plan does not suit his campaign strategy, so it has been resurrected by his political lieutenants who are warning us that foreigners will bring it back if Papadopoulos lost the February elections. His re-election would be a safeguard against the dead plan.
Fully aware that the president would exploit his stand in the referendum to the full, rival candidates have been trying to limit his possible electoral gains by questioning his tactics and decisions before the 2004 vote – his acceptance of UN arbitration, the secret meetings with Serdar Denktash, his refusal to negotiate with Talat while in Switzerland, his reluctance to give our side’s red lines etc.

While they may have a point, they are essentially playing the game according to the rules set by the Papadopoulos campaign team, which benefits only one candidate.
The campaign teams of Demetris Christofias and Ioannis Kasoulides should forget the past and start talking about the future. What are the options that the Greek Cypriots have as regards the Cyprus problem?

The alternative to any settlement, which would be very similar in philosophy and spirit to that outlined by the Annan plan, would be partition along the existing dividing line. This is the choice and it should be clearly communicated to the voters. Candidates who believe there is another option could inform people what it is, but also explain in practical terms how they would achieve it.

It is high time the candidates left the past alone and started talking about the future. Nobody will solve the Cyprus problem or avert the partition that is on the cards by discussing the Annan plan every day.



Copyright © Cyprus Mail 2007