Cyprus-Forum.com

[metecyp]

Here's an interesting article published today in Cyprus Mail. I wonder what people think about author's claims.

***********************************************************

Editorial - Think of the refugees before saying no

PRESIDENT Papadopoulos will, in the next few days, reportedly make his eagerly-awaited address to the people about the settlement plan they will have to vote on April 24. In his speech, he will presumably explain what he had tried to achieve during the negotiations, the positive and negative points of the final version of the Annan plan and the consequences (negative and positive) of voting for or against the plan.

Nobody knows whether he will take a clear stand on the plan and advise us how to vote in the referendum or whether he will confine himself to presenting the plus and minus points and leaving the decision to the people. If he does take a stand, it is highly unlikely it would be in support of the plan – he has been so negatively predisposed towards it that it would be extremely difficult for him to say anything other than ‘no’. Of course, he could give a ‘no’ message by putting a negative spin on his speech, while telling people to vote as they thought best.

This would be a great shame, as the president secured very significant improvements to the Annan plan and returned from Switzerland with a much better proposal. The fifth version is drastically better than the third, even if an additional 11 proposals by Turkey were included, as Papadopoulos complained on his arrival. The fifth version of the plan has the president’s his personal stamp – there are no permanent derogations, his suggestions for viability are included, the transitional period has been drastically shortened, the finances of a settlement have been markedly improved, the number of Turkish soldiers that will remain are at a minimum, and UNFICYP will be involved in the procedure for the handover of territory.

Most importantly, an even large number of refugees will be allowed to return to their homes than was envisaged in the third plan, while all property-owners will be entitled to have a third of their property in the Turkish constituent state returned. And after 19 years all restrictions of movement and settlement will be lifted. These are very significant improvements, which Papadopoulos should be boasting about rather than focusing on what he perceives as the negative aspects of the plan.

In making his decision, the president should set aside his reservations about unsatisfactory constitutional provisions and think first and foremost about the refugees, the main victims of the 30-year occupation. Here we have a settlement plan that will allow the overwhelming majority of them to return to their homes if they so wish, while those who cannot will be compensated for the loss of their property. Can he honestly advise these people to vote ‘no’, not to seize this opportunity to return to their properties after 30 years as refugees, because there might be a marginally better settlement plan offered in 20, 30 or 50 years’ time?

If he asks himself this question before he drafts his address to the people, we are certain he will be unable to tell people to vote ‘no’ on April 24, irrespective of how many weaknesses he had identified in the settlement plan.

[michalis5354]

This is exacxtly what I said in my own topic about him. I do not trust his action in general .

[cannedmoose]

This is exacxtly what I said in my own topic about him. I do not trust his action in general .

Amen