by Nikitas » Mon Dec 03, 2007 11:38 am
Well UTU,
It goes something like this: what I want, what I am likely to get and what I think will work, and the three are not identical.
A unitary state is what I want. But things being the way they are now it sounds outlandish to expect this obviously natural solution to come about.
BBF is the proposed solution everyone is touting, and that is the most likely outcome. Like the 1960 agreements it will be a mish mash of things selected from prosposals made mostly by foreigners who do not have a clue about Cyprus but must satisfy foreign demands (UK, USA, Greece, Turkey).
What will work is a solution that :
a) will not leave a politically signifcant section of the population feeling is has been unfairly treated.
b) it will make Turkey shut its mouth and have no demands in the future
c) be in accord with EU regulations so we are not constantly dragged into the EU court and/or fined, we should remember here that a failure of one component state of a federation to apply EU rules results in a fine on the WHOLE state.
d) prevent a repeat of 63 and 74
However, a two state solution seems to be the new intention of Turkey judging by statements made by messrs Gul and Erdogan. If partition comes about will Turkey leave us the fuck alone? Judging by the reaction to probable oil discovery off RoC's its southern shore it will not. Which brings us back to the Turkish plan laid down in 1958 called the Retaking of Cyprus (KIP) and methodically carried out since then. Unless the Turkish Cypriots react to that plan and neutralize it, it will persist. Partition is the first part of that plan. It is not the end goal. That plan is what drives the situation now.
If Pap loses the election, as predicted here, we will see how Turkey will react to the more amenable new president. Christofias and Kasoulides are both saying they will seek a solution based on compromise. What bigger compromise is there than a 30-70 share and how is that not going to get people feeling cheated is the mystery.