Cyprus-Forum.com

[boulio]

kifeas with the reduction of territory to the t/c and the movment of 50,000 g/c to the tccs what would be the percentage of refuges being able to return?

[Kifeas]

You trying to convince me about the good sides of T.Pap is like me trying to convince you about the good sides of Denktas. And trust me in my eyes Denktas is 10 times better than T.Pap in terms of being humanistic and in terms of being full of hatred against the other side.

This message was address to babanitot, Turkcyp, not to you.
I am asking bananidot what purpose he is serving and he is defaming or accusing T.Pap all the time. I do not try to convince you about anything regarding Papadopoullos. You didn’t accuse him for things that he didn’t do as bananitos does most of the time.

So what is your objective in this forum Kifeas,

Trying to convince us that T.Pap is actually a good leader for the whole Cypriots.

I hope this is not the only thing you have gathered by reading my postings in this forum. I almost wrote about anything else except Papadopoullos. The subject of Papadopoullos came up only after bananitos made all these unfounded allegations against him. I still wander what is his purpose of doing this. Do you have any idea?

If you ask me, I have only one reason being in this forum.
LEARNING.....

Trying to learn more about the way other side sees the problem so that I can employ more empathy, and try to figure out if cooperation is possible between two sides, and trying to understand if there really can be a solution on the island as a joint goverment.

Well, I second your above assumption. More or less the same reasons exist for me too.

[Kifeas]

kifeas with the reduction of territory to the t/c and the movment of 50,000 g/c to the tccs what would be the percentage of refuges being able to return?

Hypothetically this 25% area would have probably being an area in which 90-95,000 of GCs used to live before 1974. Frankly speaking, Greek Cypriots will have a hart time finding even these 50,000 of GCs that will be willing or able to return within the TCCS, after 31 years.

[turkcyp]

Let me clarify once more what I am talking about, because I still get the feeling that it was not sufficiently understood.

We have 2 Constituent States.

One, the GCCS, will number about 620,000 people, out of which perhaps 99.5% will be GCs and 0.5% will be TCs. All of them will be treated as equal citizens of this CS (one-man-one-vote.)

The other, the TCCS, will number about 200,000 people, out of which 75% will be TC and settlers (150,000) and 25% will be GCs (50,000). Similarly to the above, all of them will be treated as equal citizens of this CS (one-man-one-vote.)

The total population of Cypriot citizens will be approximately 820,000. The TCCS will have a population of 200,000 (including the GCs,) will form the 24.4% of the total Cyprus population and will control the 25% of the territory of Cyprus (excluding the British bases.)

I do not know where you get your estimates, but TRNC currently has around 220k citizens among which 140k of TC, and the rest is settler. SO you are either assuming all settlers will go or assuming your own production propaganda figures about TC/settler ratio (in which TCs are claimed to be minority in north) is right.

This is not the important point anyway. It is just numbers and when the time comes we will know who is right and who is wrong about those fugures. It is a secondary importance to subject at hand.

Note here that the percentage of GCs holding TCCS internal citizenship (i.e. GCs hailing from the GCCS) will never exit the 25% of the total TCCS population. (permanent derogation on internal TCCS citizenship.)

How are you going to restrict this level to 25% again. Are we just going to hope that the GCs will not settle in north where there is not restrictions on settlement, or are we going to write down laws restricting that. The first one is just a wishful thinking and I do not know any TC that would accept it, the second one is, if permanent restrictions, against acquis, (not human rights by the way, because they will be compensated for the property they have lost, so no violation of human rights)

The Federal legislating body will have only one house, the Fed Senate, (instead of two as it was in the A-Plan.) This single house will be composed of 24 senators from the GC state and 24 senators from the TC state.

The 24 senators of each one of the CSs, will be elected from all the internal citizenship holders of each constituent state.

In other words, the 200,000 citizens of the TCCS (including this 25% of GCs) will elect the 24 senators of this state, in a unified voting list and in a one-man-one-vote system. The same applies to the way the senators of the GCCS will be elected.

I have understood this so far, in your last post. And as I have said it is not that different than 1960 agreements. I do not like the way election system works, but that is another topic.

In the Federal Senate, each bill or law will require a separate majority of Senators from each CS, in order to get passed. In other words, at least 13 senators from each CS out of the 24 will be needed.

Aha. That is how you think, now I see. You do not want separate majorities of TC senators abut separate majorities of state senators, in the TC state bith GCs and TCs combined. So in reality we may have situations where you can pass a law where majority of TCs do not approve.

Sorry maid. Not acceptable. We do not sell molohiya here, bullez may be but not molohiya.

In the highly unlike (impossible) scenario that all the GCs of internal TCCS citizenship (25% of population) will form a separate party within the TCCS, the maximum number of Fed parliament senators that they can possibly elect, will not exit the number of six (6) out of the 24 total. Therefore they cannot from a separate majority by themselves because they will still require an additional 7 from the remaining TCCS senators.

As I have said let’s say that everything worked out the way you have said, and we were able to keep GCs in TC state to a level of 25% legally (which is an impossibility I think), and as you have said they have chose 6 senators of 24 TC state. Then all you basically need is 6 out of 18 TC senators, in other words only 1/3 of TC senators to vote so that something becomes law. As I have said you can pass a bill where majority of TCs object.

And you call this equality, and you really expect us to accept this scenario.

The reason this proposal will be more favourable by Greek Cypriots is because this formula counterbalances their concerns arising from the fact that a) Being the substantially largest community they are conceding a substantially high proportion of political power (50% of the Fed Senate) to the substantially smaller community, and b) The smallest community that will enjoy this concession will be composed by a substantially high number (45%) of foreign (former Turkish) nationals.

By placing a 25% of GCs within this equation, the Greek Cypriots will feel that the TC community will always be taking into consideration the needs of the Greek Cypriot community and will refrain from abusing the excessive, compared to it’s actual size, political power at the expense of the largest community.

You have explained how this makes GC community happy. Now let me explain how this makes TC community furious.

“It actively puts us in a political minority situation much worse than 1960 agreements” so will never be accepted.

On the other hand, this formula should make the Turkish Cypriot community equally more comfortable because the Greek Cypriot community will have a counter incentive to potentially abuse them (TCs) due to the fact that this will immediately also affect equally the GC population that will be residing within the TCCS. It is a system that will make each one of the two communities in need of sticking together and support the smooth running of the Fed State.

Please spare me at least your explanation about how it should makes us happy. We are not stupid, we can read, and we can decide if things makes us happy or not. And trust me this does not make us happy. I guess the proportion of TCs accepting this will be around 1%. Good luck…..

Why the A-plan5 formula was not satisfactory to GCs? Because it required only the Greek Cypriot community (being the largest one) to be in a constant need of the other community, making it a tempting possibility for the TC community to abuse this dominating position. In other words the largest community was much more vulnerable to blackmailing than the smallest community. Besides, who can guarantee to the GCs that the settlers will not be more loyal to their Turkish motherland identity, that to their Cypriot one.

Oh c’mon, at least spare me this minority privileges talk. IF we are equal yes you should need our approval the same way we need your approval when we want something to be done. It is as simple as that. Anything that violates this principle is completely not acceptable to TCs.

Dominating position for TCs. Biggest BS I have heard for a while. Classical old stupid and plainly wrong minority privileges talk. What dominating position we have over you. Whatever rights we have you have the same rights. This is not called dominating but is called equal where I come from. But because you seem to somehow think that because we are in numerical minority we should have less rights than GCs you seem to think that equality means more power to TCs. (as community, lets not get into the whole one man one vote discussion because I am really full for that entree.)

Before I continue further, I would like to see if what I say here makes sense to you or whether you have any counter objections to it.

Please do not continue any further. As I have said before you are not giving us what we want. We want equality and undiluted self-determination rights. (before you jump any further please know that self-determination rights are completely different than right of secession from an existing country. I have explained so many times in this forum what is self-determination means and I am not going to explain one more time. We had self-determination rights in 1960 we had self-determination rights last April, and now you are trying to dilute this right, and give us less of it. )

Let’s start talking about which parts of north you want for legal partition or let’s start talking about how we are going to implement turning back to 1960 agreements. (I am more than happy choosing 30% MPs and choosing a VP who has veto power. )

It is your choice.

Have a good day and take care,

[Piratis]

As I have said before you are not giving us what we want.

It is not a matter what you want. Your wants can be unlimited. It is a matter of what you have the right to.

If what you want is 1960 agreements, then you don't even have to ask our permission. What you have to do is to convince your side to accept them.

Also, if you accept an 18%-82% partition, again the ones you have to convince is your side, since the majority of GCs will accept this as well.

Do you think that the majority of TCs are willing to accept either 1960 agreements or 18%-82% partition? (with recognition coming after they returned the land). I am really interested to know this, since one thing is if you express your own position, and another thing is what the majority of TCs are willing to accept (even if its just an educated guess)

[Kifeas]

Let’s start talking about which parts of north you want for legal partition or let’s start talking about how we are going to implement turning back to 1960 agreements. (I am more than happy choosing 30% MPs and choosing a VP who has veto power. )

Ok TurkCyp,

For the partition solution I already expressed the parameters. I repeat them again.

I live the choice of this 18% of the territory to you. Just make sure the border between the two countries is not going to be too long so that we do not spent too much money in building this 6-meter wall along it. Also the coastline should not be more than 20% (I give you 2% more.) Other than that, you choose which area you want.

Any TC wishing to remain within the RoCy territory, they can do so but without separate political rights, just one-man-one-vote. Depending on the percentage of TCs that will choose to stay in the RoCy territory, the percentage of the Turkish Partition State (TPS) will be decreased accordingly. For example if 20% of TCs to remain citizens of the RoCy then the Turkish partition state will be reduced from 18% down to 14.4% and also the coast line accordingly.

Other than that, I am looking forward to see your map.


For the return to the 1960 constitution, it is even less complicated.
-Denouncing and dissolution of TRNC by TC leadership.
-Withdrawal of all settlers, except those married with TCs and their descendants.
-Any Compensation to Turkish settlers to be payable by Turkey or anybody else, except GCs and TCs.
-Compensation by Turkey to GCs for any distraction of properties in the north.
-Compensation by RoCy to any Turkish Cypriot property that was destroyed due to it’s negligence or has been estranged for public benefit use.
-Compensation by Turkey to foreigners that builted illegally in GC land.
-Withdrawal of Turkish troops immediately down to the 1960 numbers (650 soldiers.) It goes for mainland Greek troops as well.
-Return of all GCs to their former villages and first priority of choice to their houses and properties.
-Formation of a joined Bi-communal military force as per 1960 constitution.
-Acceptance of all the laws already passed by the RoCy including the accession to the E.U., except those affecting exclusively and directly the TC community.
-All the relevant rights that the 1960 constitution provides to the TC community.

[turkcyp]

It is not a matter what you want. Your wants can be unlimited. It is a matter of what you have the right to.

I am not asking something which is not my right. Anything worse than 1960 agreements I assume is my right, and anything over than 1960 agreements should be accepted by both sides.

If what you want is 1960 agreements, then you don't even have to ask our permission. What you have to do is to convince your side to accept them.

I am not asking your permission. I am asking for you to accept them. Personally, I was happy with 1960 agreements.

Also, if you accept an 18%-82% partition, again the ones you have to convince is your side, since the majority of GCs will accept this as well.

As I have said so many times. This is the second best I am willing to accept, if the first best of having a joint government together can not be achieved.

Do you think that the majority of TCs are willing to accept either 1960 agreements or 18%-82% partition? (with recognition coming after they returned the land). I am really interested to know this, since one thing is if you express your own position, and another thing is what the majority of TCs are willing to accept (even if its just an educated guess)

Hey everybody here expresses their own position. When you and Kifeas say that majority of GCs would accepts these you are simply expressing your opinion about how GCs would act. Nobody can sure for a fact how GC or TCs decide before a referendum.

You are asking my opinion. My opinion tells me that majority of TCs are willing to go back to 1960 constitutional agreements. On condition that it is 1960 not after 1964, and also everything you have done during our absence since 1964 should be corrected in compliance with that 1960 agreements.

and again majority of TCs would accept a legal partition on whatever their fair share of land is in Cyprus. Fair share of land is very simple, all TC land + all Efkaf land + our share of government land, whatever this total is I am ready to accept not less not more. You claim that it is 18%, I am not claiming anything, I just want a calculation of what that is. If it is less than %18 percent I am willing to accept that figure even it is less than %18.

And this land has to be appropriated on terms of economic value. IF we had x% of urban in 1960 I want x% of urban area in 2005, if this is y% of farmable land than in 1960 I want y% of farmable land in 2005, etc. etc. you got my point I hope. Or we can even make it easier if you so desire, we can estimate the economic value of TC share in 1960 currency and get the same share in 2005 currency.

Do not tell me after this that I am not being fair. And you never know, may be you are right, and I am wrong actually TCs has less than 18% of the Cyprus may 15% or may be 12%, then in those cases I am ready to accept those figures, as I have said.

Have a good day sir,

[Kifeas]

On condition that it is 1960 not after 1964, and also everything you have done during our absence since 1964 should be corrected in compliance with that 1960 agreements.

You mean to cancell (rent invalid) all the laws that were enacted from 1964 until now, and all the international treaties, including E.U. accession treaty, etc.

[turkcyp]

Ok TurkCyp,

For the partition solution I already expressed the parameters. I repeat them again.

I live the choice of this 18% of the territory to you. Just make sure the border between the two countries is not going to be too long so that we do not spent too much money in building this 6-meter wall along it. Also the coastline should not be more than 20% (I give you 2% more.) Other than that, you choose which area you want.

Any TC wishing to remain within the RoCy territory, they can do so but without separate political rights, just one-man-one-vote. Depending on the percentage of TCs that will choose to stay in the RoCy territory, the percentage of the Turkish Partition State (TPS) will be decreased accordingly. For example if 20% of TCs to remain citizens of the RoCy then the Turkish partition state will be reduced from 18% down to 14.4% and also the coast line accordingly.

Other than that, I am looking forward to see your map.

See my answer to Piratis in previous post. I do not want anything which is not fair. If I end up having less than %18 then so be it.

About your proposal of turning back to 1960 agreements,

Unlike you I think this is much more complicated than partition (not necessarily can not be done though), but let’s give it a shot.

For the return to the 1960 constitution, it is even less complicated.
-Denouncing and dissolution of TRNC by TC leadership.

See point a.

-Withdrawal of all settlers, except those married with TCs and their descendants.

Accepted.

-Any Compensation to Turkish settlers to be payable by Turkey or anybody else, except GCs and TCs.

Accepted.

-Compensation by Turkey to GCs for any distraction of properties in the north.

See point b.

-Compensation by RoCy to any Turkish Cypriot property that was destroyed due to it’s negligence or has been estranged for public benefit use.

See point b, about compensation of loss of our constitutional rights for the period at least between 63-74 if not for the whole 40 years.

-Compensation by Turkey to foreigners that builted illegally in GC land. .

See point c.

-Withdrawal of Turkish troops immediately down to the 1960 numbers (650 soldiers.) It goes for mainland Greek troops as well. .

Agreed.

-Return of all GCs to their former villages and first priority of choice to their houses and properties. .

See point d.

-Formation of a joined Bi-communal military force as per 1960 constitution. .

See point e.

-Acceptance of all the laws already passed by the RoCy including the accession to the E.U., except those affecting exclusively and directly the TC community.***

See point a.

-All the relevant rights that the 1960 constitution provides to the TC community.

See point b, about compensation of loss of our constitutional rights for the period at least between 63-74 if not for the whole 40 years.

Point a) You are asking me to abolish TRNC and everything we have done in the last 30 years but at the same time you are asking me to accept everything you have done in the last 30 years as legal. That is why you either withdraw this first point from the list and accept the new start under old constitution, abolishing all the existing two countries at once, and starting fresh. Or you remove the *** from your list. I really doubt the way you have your accessed to EU, is going to be desirable to any TCs.

Point b) What do you mean by this? Loss of use I guess since they will be getting their property back. If that is the case who will pay for loss of use for TCs in the last 30 years and loss of use of TCs between 1963-70s when they were refugees. And again who will pay for loss of use of RoC constitutional benefits at least for the period between 1963-74, assuming that this RoC is the continuation of 1960 RoC.

Point c) So let me get this straight. If a GC left and empty land and subsequently a villa is built on that land by a foreigner, and after this proposal the GC gets his land back plus the villa on it, free while Turkey is paying for the foreigner the amount of investment made to the empty land. And this GC who suddenly happens to gain a villa on his land pays nothing. :confused:

Point d). If I had substantially improved the GC property in the last 30 years, he/she is paying me back my investment I assume right.

Point e) All the treaty agreements including treaty of guarantee, will be still legal and enforceable and accepted right?

*********

You mean to cancell (rent invalid) all the laws that were enacted from 1964 until now, and all the international treaties, including E.U. accession treaty, etc.

I did not say cancell it, I have said "should be corrected in compliance with that 1960 agreements". I have said if it is in compliance with the constituion decided by the Supreme Court composed of one GC, one TC, and a foreign judge, and if it is also accepted by TCs then they can stay.

But you need to get the constitutuionality and approval of TCs for the laws that you have enacted in the last 40 years. IF TCs agree that the laws are OK, including the EU accesion, (which actually required TC VP) approval then they can stay.

[Kifeas]

*See point b, about compensation of loss of our constitutional rights for the period at least between 63-74 if not for the whole 40 years.

I am sorry but this is an absurd claim. Any compensation has to have value justification. How do you quantify this? Who will get this compensation? How it will be estimated? The GCs should be equally entitled to compensation for the denial to their freedom of movement in their country for 30 years, denial of enjoyment of their properties and enjoyment of their cultural heritage, mental distress for their deportation from their villages and destruction of their social, community and family structure, etc, etc, etc, It is an Absurd claim and a never ending loop. I think we should just both forget about such an issue.

*Point a) You are asking me to abolish TRNC and everything we have done in the last 30 years but at the same time you are asking me to accept everything you have done in the last 30 years as legal. That is why you either withdraw this first point from the list and accepts the new start under old constitution, abolishing all the existing two countries at once. Or you remove the *** from your list.
I really doubt the way you have your accessed to EU, is going to be desirable to any TCs.

I am sorry my friend but I will disagree with you again. The RoCy has been functioning legally, according to U.N., E.U., ECHR, council of Europe and all the international community norms and it can in no way be compared with the TRNC which has always been an illegal entity. You mean TCs should be allowed to returned to the RoCy formally; with all their Constitutional rights regained and still have the TRNC in place? How will the two states function in the same country??? The territory under the control of the RoCy will be the entire area of Cyprus. Which one will be TRNC’s territory? You mean that we should return back to ground zero and re-pass new laws from zero again, even though many laws affect decisions, international treaties and transactions? You mean we should withdraw from the E.U. and re-apply again, and re-negotiate again the accession terms and eventually join the E.U. again, after perhaps 10-15 years???? Any legal (except laws and transactions affecting the rights of GC refugees and their properties) transactions that occurred between TCs as physical and legal entities (companies, institutions, etc) during these 30 years under the TRNC, and subsequent laws affecting them, will simply be accommodated and legalised by the RoCy, but TRNC as an entity and any related international TRNC treaties, should be dissolved and abandoned. There is no other logical way.

*Point b) What do you mean by this? Loss of use I guess since they will be getting their property back. If that is the case who will pay for loss of use for TCs in the last 30 years and loss of use of TCs between 1963-70s when they were refugees. And again who will pay for loss of use of RoC constitutional benefits at least for the period between 1963-74, assuming that this RoC is the continuation of 1960 RoC.

No, I mean destruction to properties for military purposes, destruction of cultural heritage sites and monuments, compensation to foreigners in order to evacuate GC properties etc.

Similar claims by TCs will be covered by the RoCy, whose wealth and reserves were generated by GCs during these 40 years. Any wealth (public reserves) and property that have been generated by TCs and remain in the ownership of the TRNC will be transferred to the RoCy, but will not be used for compensation towards TCs.

*Point c) So let me get this straight. If a GC left and empty land and subsequently a villa is built on that land by a foreigner, and after this proposal the GC gets his land back plus the villa on it, free while Turkey is paying for the foreigner the amount of investment made to the empty land. And this GC who suddenly happens to gain a villa on his land pays nothing. :confused:

If the GC owner wishes to use the addition into his property for his own sake then he has to compensate the TC or agree to get compensated or exchange it with the TC’s property in the south. If the GC doesn’t wish to keep this addition to his property because he wants to use his land for other reasons, the TC will be compensated by Turkey or an international fund. In my case I have 10 donums of land on the seacoast. I want to use this property to build a hotel. The TC, who initially got my property from Denktash, divided it in 3 pieces and sold the best piece (3 donums) to a developer who in his turn is contracting 3 villas inside. I do not want the villas and I will demolish them because I want to use the land to build a hotel. Why should I compensate anyone by myself.

Exemptions to this golden rule can be made for institutions of public benefit, such as schools, universities, roads, hospitals etc.

*Point d). If I had substantially improved the GC property in the last 30 years, he/she is paying me back my investment I assume right.

See my answer above.

*Point e) All the treaty agreements including treaty of guarantee, will be still legal and enforceable and accepted right?

Yes they can remain, but they should also be reviewed under the E.U. framework. Perhaps the unilateral intervention right that Turkey claims to have, should be re-examine under this scope and reframed.