Cyprus-Forum.com

[insan]

I`m sorry but i cannot see negotiation starting once "North Cyprus" is financially comfortable as there will no longer be a need for negotiation with RoC as you have got all you need. Which would then create a permanent parition, something which i understood was not wanted by the majority of Cypriots.

Just like how "GCs" did with arts and wiles of politics? You have the recognition, free trade with whole world, 1 out of 6 GC use TC lands and properties to produce, cultivate goods and sell whomever they want with international market prices(Is there any law that prohibits GCs to sell the goods other countries which cultivated, produced on TC lands and properties), you are in the EU. You are not aware of that you yourself cementing the partition by keep maintaining the same negative stance in full comfort.

[Saint Jimmy]

It's true we have all that, Insan, which you don't.
It's also that you have land that belongs to us, which is much more than the land we have that belongs to you.
So, this is a situation that begs for compromise.
Can you tell me what would happen if Turkey gave us back our land and then you waited till we compromise?
Or, vice versa, if the TRNC got recognition and free trade, etc., and we waited for you to compromise?

When would we ever compromise? And why would we?

[insan]

It's true we have all that, Insan, which you don't.
It's also that you have land that belongs to us, which is much more than the land we have that belongs to you.
So, this is a situation that begs for compromise.
Can you tell me what would happen if Turkey gave us back our land and then you waited till we compromise?
Or, vice versa, if the TRNC got recognition and free trade, etc., and we waited for you to compromise?

When would we ever compromise? And why would we?

Jimmy I stated my opinions about this issue so many times before. If the land captured by Turks has been %15, %18 or %21, what would have changed on both sides stance? Please answer me.

[erolz]

Sometimes i get the impression that TC's use the "poor TC" when it suits them. When the gates opened the TC's on the forum were all saying "look, we aren't poor contary to the GC Media", now you are back at saying "we won't survive without direct-contact". It seems everytime something happens that improves the TC situation something else comes along that is also required to stop starvation.

We are neither desitute or as prospecrous as we would be if there was no cyprus problem.

As an outsider i don't see that co-operating with the RoC in trade matters is being forced into submission.

Being forced into accepting the GC only run 'RoC' is totaly submission for the TC. You might not as an 'outsider' understand this but every TC and many more besides do understand it.

"Force" of varying kinds has created the situation as it exists today ... there are lots of "if's" and "but's" we could say about what happened in the past but the current situation is that the RoC are offering items for co-operation which it appears the TC's are not interested in, preferring to only want direct-trade.

So do you think if the rest of the world isolated both north and south Cyprus economicaly and equally until they both agree a settlement this would also help renuinfication or do you think that this kind of pressure should only apply to TC side?

What the TC are not interested in and have never been interested in , is having their ability to trade controlled by the "RoC" (ie the post 63 RoC that is a totaly GC run administration and in violation of the consitituion). Offer us co operation based on control by a pre 63 type of 'RoC' and you will find us most amenable I suspect.

So what "you" want is to be left to your own devices trading with the world until "you" feel financially comfortable enough to being to negotiate ? I`m sorry but i cannot see negotiation starting once "North Cyprus" is financially comfortable as there will no longer be a need for negotiation with RoC as you have got all you need. Which would then create a permanent parition, something which i understood was not wanted by the majority of Cypriots.

Clearly you want to be able to impose a solution on TC imo. You see economic restrictions on one side as good for securing a settlement but no doubt reject the idea that the same kind of sanctions on both sides equally is good or acceptable. This to me clearly indicates what you want. A solution based on one side being able to force the other side into agreement rather than them actualy accepting the agreement on it's merits.

If you believe that economic sanctions on the TRNC will help speed a settlement can you explain to me why you are not advocating the same for the 'RoC' ?

[Saint Jimmy]

If the land captured by Turks has been %15, %18 or %21, what would have changed on both sides stance? Please answer me.

I would if I understood the question. What are you asking?

If the land captured by Turks had been around the 20% mark, there probably wouldn't be a Cyprus problem today (politically). The international world would have accepted the status quo as a fair solution, unless the two communities agreed on a new one. The Greeks would probably still shout for their stolen land, but no one would listen. The sanctions on the TRNC would not have been imposed, and over the years the possiblity of its recognition would be immense. The difference, in this case, would be that only the RoC would be motivated to compromise, and partition would eventually be cemented.
Does this answer your question?

[turkcyp]

deleted by the author...

[boulio]

so if t/c get back the full political rights they had in 1960 you will give back full g/c land?

[Saint Jimmy]

The basic belief in TC society is this. GC stole our rights from RoC, and we stole their land. Tit for tat. The day they start giving our rights back from RoC is the day we will give their land back. They simply think land as a bargaining chip. The same way you are using our rights form RoC as a bargaining chip and pretending to give us something we do not have right to as a compromise in any solution. So we are doing the same, we took something that does not belong to us (just like you did) and pretending to give it back as a compromise (just like you are doing). As usual Tit for Tat.

I partly agree with this. Yes, it's a tit-for-tat situation, but are you guys after your 1960 rights? So, if the full return to 1960 agreements is tabled, you guys will accept it? I don't think so...
We agree on the essence of the issue however. That is how I more or less see the problem, too.

As I have said in another topic. This cycle will go on and on for a long time, unless we both decide and change our attitude at the same time. Two wrongs do not make one right, but asking to change only one wrong without changing the other wrong, does not solve things either. It simply mitigates joint burden to only one party.

Asking to change only one wrong without changing the other wrong does not solve things either. True. That's why I oppose direct trade, not because I want TCs to starve so I can take my sword and ride my horse and kick you all out!

[insan]

Yes jimmy. Thanks for your answer. So according to your logic, if the number of GC refugees and amount of land captured by Turks had been around half of what it had been after the Turkish intervention; almost everything would have been fixed in favour of bots sides. How stupid those Turks are? They "invaded" with the sole aim partitioning Cyprus but they didn't make a clever plan to ease their task that would lead them to a seperate state in a very short time after the "invasion".

In my opinion jimmy, if Turkey had captured %18 of the land; she would have directly been accused of partitioning the Island and creating a pure TC state on North of the Island that around %80 of the land didn't belong to TCs. To the contrary of this Turkish side agreed upon a bi-zonal, bi-communal federation; including return of certain number of GC refugees and a certain amount of land right after the following years of intervention.(Please read 1975 3rd Vienna Agreement, 1977 Summit Agreement and 1979 high level agreement).

Turkish side failed to implement these agreements because of many reasons.

1- Anarchy, terror, economic and political crisis in Turkey.(1977-80)
2- Coup D'etat and interim military administration.(1980-83)
3- Makarios' and his successor Kyprianous' negative stance.(1974-1977 and 1978-1988)
4- Exploitation of settlers issue by TC administration and Turkey.(1987-2004)
5- GC issued Ocalan passport and PKK training camps in Greece.(90s)
5- New game of Hellenic Ruling Elite. Sowing the seeds of "European solution"(1987-2005)

[boulio]

3- Makarios' and Kyprianous' negative stance.(1978-1988)

makarios died in 1977.

5- GC issued Ocalan passport and PKK training camps in Greece.(90s)
5- New game of Hellenic Ruling Elite. Sowing the seeds of "European solution"(1987-2005

insanian logic at its best.i can buy a g/c or for that matter any passport for about $500.00,and concerning the pkk training camps,i think there was one at the olympic village this year.

new game of hellenic ruling elite,is that on x-box yet or play station 2?