The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content


Britain aware of injustice on TC

How can we solve it? (keep it civilized)

Britain aware of injustice on TC

Postby brother » Tue Mar 15, 2005 5:29 pm

This is the link: http://www.turkishpress.com/news.asp?id=38731

What do you guys think will happen when the u.k sits on the e.u throne, imo this is going to be very interesting times, i reckon they will push for a solution and when tassos plays his silly games they will do some sort of defacto recognition or the sort.
User avatar
brother
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 4711
Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2004 5:30 pm
Location: Cyprus/U.K

Re: Britain aware of injustice on TC

Postby cannedmoose » Tue Mar 15, 2005 6:15 pm

brother wrote:This is the link: http://www.turkishpress.com/news.asp?id=38731

What do you guys think will happen when the u.k sits on the e.u throne, imo this is going to be very interesting times, i reckon they will push for a solution and when tassos plays his silly games they will do some sort of defacto recognition or the sort.


I sat through a presentation last week from a senior academic who has very good contacts in the British government (indeed he trains civil servants on matters European). According to him the 'Turkey issue' barely features as a blip on the UK radar when it comes to the European presidency. From what he was saying there isn't any apparent feverish preparation in the civil service to facilitate a big initiative. In all likelihood, the whole October 3rd deadline issue will be fudged. Someone will have a word in Erdoğan's ear in July (if they haven't signed by then) encouraging him to sign the protocol early and carry on as if nothing has happened. The only place where I can see trumpets blaring over the signing of the protocol will be in Cyprus. 99% of people I speak to about this (and they're scholars of the EU so they're not ill-informed, know little if anything and care even less about this.

I think it's been discussed in another thread that recognition of the members of a multi-lateral institution, according to some interpretations of international law, does not imply recognition of the government of that territory. I also think that Switzerland, the queen of neutrality, does not legally recognise government's at all, just the country, so whoever is the ruler is irrelevant.
User avatar
cannedmoose
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 4279
Joined: Sun Feb 29, 2004 11:06 pm
Location: England

Postby boulio » Tue Mar 15, 2005 6:26 pm

the signing of the protocol is firstly a economic agreemnet,thats all its is not de jure recognition,some may argue de facto but i guess that is the interprentation of each person or entity.
boulio
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 2575
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 6:45 am

Postby Agios Amvrosios » Wed Mar 16, 2005 8:09 am

''Britain takes into consideration problems of Turkish Cypriot people. However, the upcoming elections in Britain has made the situation difficult. Turkish Cypriot and Greek Cypriot voters constitute an important group in Britain. Therefore, Britain will wait for results of the elections to take a concrete step.''


Yeah Right.

GCs and TCs and even Turkey and Greece are just pawns.

Things are like this for a reason.
Agios Amvrosios
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 857
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 3:18 am

Postby Saint Jimmy » Wed Mar 16, 2005 8:31 am

I'm with cannedmoose on this one (too).
This perception goes well beyond the whole Protocol signature thing, imo. The whole Cyprus problem isn't but a nuisance to everyone else (even to Turkey and Greece, I dare say). I guess my analogy would be like a dog chewing on the pants of a giant walking around. It's not really a problem, it's just a piss-off. Turkey, Greece, the US, the UK, the UN, Ghana, pretty much everyone for that matter (except for poor old us, GCs, TCs, XCs), would be more than happy to just push it under the rug and pretend it's not there. This is because the status quo doesn't pose a problem to anyone, except for TCs and GCs (in that order). Only when it starts to f**k up important stuff (like Turkey's candidature) will people who matter take it seriously. Until then, we'll just be at the mercy (?) of T-Pap, Christofias, Talat, Serdar and their slick tactical games.
User avatar
Saint Jimmy
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1067
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2004 1:29 pm
Location: Leeds, U.K.

Postby -mikkie2- » Wed Mar 16, 2005 1:26 pm

Well, I would partly disagree. The EU and US want Cyprus to participate in NATO. Whenever there is a meeting between EU and NATO, Cyprus must withdraw from these meetings. This is becoming an impossible situation because of Cyprus is now an EU member. Also, the eastern Mediterranena region is vital to westen interests and Cyprus needs to paticipate. Turkey is in fact being pressured to allow Cyprus to participate in NATO. This is not widely reported but it is happening.
-mikkie2-
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1298
Joined: Tue Sep 21, 2004 12:11 am

Postby insan » Wed Mar 16, 2005 1:36 pm

Turkey is in fact being pressured to allow Cyprus to participate in NATO. This is not widely reported but it is happening.


It's not NATO. Trans Atlantic Pact. Turkey does not want Cyprus to participate in Trans Atlantic Pact because she does not want being around the same table with an administration she does not recognize. That's all. A NATO member RoC but not "RoC" would be in the interests of Turkey. And it is widely and clearly reported.


http://www.newdefenceagenda.org/index.h ... e=yes~main
User avatar
insan
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 9044
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 11:33 pm
Location: Somewhere in ur network. ;]

Postby -mikkie2- » Wed Mar 16, 2005 3:15 pm

If Turkey continues blocking Cyprus and Malta from joining the Partnership for Peace, it might force some EU countries to speed work on a defense and security policy independent of NATO. As a result, Turkey - not yet an EU member - would lose influence.


Turkey really has turned shooting yourself in the foot into an artform!

It emerged that there was a difference between the EU’s documents and NATO’s text. NATO’s version said that Cyprus and Malta wouldn’t participate in military meetings and strategic cooperation meetings between NATO and the EU. However, Europe’s said that they only couldn’t participate in military meetings. Of course, you can control the results on a platform on which you exist. If you’re not there, you can’t control them. For this reason, now Europe thinks all its members can participate in strategic talks. However, Turkey opposes this. Meanwhile, the US and Britain are saying to Turkey, ‘It’s in line with your interests to talk about such issues as terrorism in our strategic cooperation with Europe. Don’t resist.’ What will happen if Turkey resists? They say if Turkey resists, relations would develop with Turkey ignored.


http://www.anatolia.com/h.asp?i=37764
-mikkie2-
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1298
Joined: Tue Sep 21, 2004 12:11 am

Postby brother » Wed Mar 16, 2005 5:53 pm

Unfortunately with turkey trying to become an E.U member they have effectively become oblidged to conform and as such they can no longer resist certain aspects hence in my opinion their only solution is to tell the E.U to go fuck itself and do a partnership with Russia, which in the long term will be much more financially better for them as the west can only get majority of its fossil fuel from russia via turkey and i believe that china would want to be part of this relationship.
User avatar
brother
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 4711
Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2004 5:30 pm
Location: Cyprus/U.K

Postby insan » Wed Mar 16, 2005 5:57 pm

Demilitarization of Cyprus. Pohh! Palavros! Recolonization of cyprus. You name it!
User avatar
insan
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 9044
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 11:33 pm
Location: Somewhere in ur network. ;]

Next

Return to Cyprus Problem

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests