Cyprus-Forum.com

[metecyp]

People might think that Denktas and Papadopoulos are very different, but in fact quite contrary is true. They both have similar backgrounds (as TMT and EOKA members respectively) and they both support the status quo. The last statements of the two politicians about the Annan plan further proves this claim.

Denktas opposes Annan plan, and he says it's a devastating plan for TCs. He talked at a conference in Turkey (he talks a lot in Turkey nowadays, partly because nobody listens him in the north), and he almost cried at the conference when he said "I can't tell my grandchildren that Turkish army will be leaving and they're not coming back. Don't ask me to do this, I can't do it". He also says that May 1st is not the end of the world..

Yesterday, Papadopoulos said saying "Yes" to Annan plan is more devastating to GCs than saying "No". And I read in the newspaper that he almost cried at the end of the talk. I also read in somewhere that Papadopoulos said he looked at his grandchildren and reassured himself that what he was about to say was right. He also added, just liked Denktas does, that May 1st is not the end of the story.

Now, tell me, what's the difference between the two? And how are we supposed to move forward with them?

[cannedmoose]

Now, tell me, what's the difference between the two? And how are we supposed to move forward with them?[/quote]

I agree that there is no way to move forward with either Denktas or Papadopoulos in charge. Thankfully Annan 5 provides for this with new elections in June, although I'm not sure if either of the current leaders is allowed to stand, I'll need to check that with the Plan.

In the event of a TC "yes" and GC "no" (which seems the most likely scenario), both leaders will effectively be lame ducks:

- Denktas will have gone against the majority of his people, with even most of the settlers in favour given that many of them will immediately be accepted as EU citizens and thus free to go and work elsewhere in Europe (a massive boon for them).
- Papadopoulos will have voted against AKEL (assuming that Christofias promotes a "yes") his largest supporter in the coalition and could face withdrawal of their support. In the event of a vote of confidence, it is highly likely that Papadopoulos could be unseated.

In my view, I would look more to Clerides for leadership when making a decision on how to vote. Clerides is a man who has defended Cypriot rights all of his life, if the Plan was so bad, do you really think he would support a "yes" vote?

I also agree with other posters that Cyprus needs new leadership blood. For too long has it been run by septegenerians. It is therefore disappointing that the new GC state constitution includes a min-35 year age limit on the President, something I see as unnecessary.

[mehmet]

Yes, check out the bbc website, go to news,then world news, then Europe, click on Cyprus story, then you have option of seeing short video fo two old men doing their best to make sure status quo is maintained and getting emotional with it. I don't mind people getting emotional but this is really too much considering they are asking people to continue the division just because they don't understand the meaning of compromise. Denktas didn't even go to Switzerland, Papadopoulos may as well have stayed with him drinking Turkish coffee (from Cyprus where it's better than what is available from Turkey) and eating baklava and talking about what a good future they were offering Cypriots together.

[Piratis]

Since you keep repeating the same false logic I have to keep repeating too:

if me and a friend of mine come to your house beat you up and then tie you on a chair and then this friend of mine suggests to rape your mother/wife/sister. Would you agree with that? Of course you will not. But say I don't agree with him either, because I don't want to rape her but I want to kill her instead.
Does it mean that because we both disagree with my friend that we "are the same"?

There is a huge difference between the two. Denctash wants 2 totally separated countries. while Papadopoulos want a truly united Cyprus under a federal system.

Also, one thing that you keep forgetting is that Denctash was
1)elected with the votes of settlers mainly.
2)Polls show that T/C agree with the plan

Therefore Denctash 1)does not represent T/C and 2)goes against their will.

In the case of Papadopulos:
1)He was elected in democratic elections.
2)Polls show that the great majority of Greek Cypriots agree with him.

You have the right to express your opinion no matter what that is. You can disagree with Papadopoulos as much as you want.
What you can not do is to change who represents us. We choose him and we support him and we will not change this to serve your interests.

Papadopoulos = majority of Greek Cypriots. I am sure for you means nothing. Maybe you would propose to shut the mouths of the great majority of Greek Cypriots and put the small minority in charge?

[metecyp]

IF Papadopoulos represents the opionion of the great majority of Greek Cypriots, then I have nothing to say. If GCs really do not like this plan after carefully reading it, and considering its pros and cons, then let it be that way. We will never gain anything by a plan opposed by the great majority of the population.

However, I believe that most GCs did not read the plan. Most of them believe what the politicians tell them. I'm not implying anything about the intelligence of the people, but it's true that Annan plan was not widely distributed and discussed in the GC community.

In almost every TC house, you'll find a copy of some version of Annan plan. because TC newspapers distributed the plan long time ago. Last summer, almost every night, there was a show on TV discussing the Annan plan and/or Cyprus problem. I believe that TC community is more aware of Annan plan, and that's why not many TCs listen to politicians as much.

[Piratis]

So you believe that while all T/C read the plan carefully G/C just didn't bother?

In almost every TC house, you'll find a copy of some version of Annan plan. because TC newspapers distributed the plan long time ago.

Same happened here.

almost every night, there was a show on TV discussing the Annan plan and/or Cyprus problem

Same here.

We are us aware about the plan as you are.

The same way I can understand why you want the plan, if you put some effort you will see why this plan as a whole does not benefit the great majority of G/C.

We are neither stupid nor uninformed. We just know, like you do, what is better for us.

The problem is that what is better for us, will not be worst for you but you don't seem to realize it ... but anyways. No need to start that discussion again.

[metecyp]

The same way I can understand why you want the plan, if you put some effort you will see why this plan as a whole does not benefit the great majority of G/C.

You act as if the plan is perfect for TCs. Don't you realize that 1/3 of TCs will be refugees? Ok I accept that there will be gains for TCs, but TCs are not getting anything for free. 1/3 of the population is a significant number.

The problem is that what is better for us, will not be worst for you but you don't seem to realize it

What is better for you won't be worse for TCs given that the past does not repeat itself. It's that trust issue again. You ask us to trust that everything will be fine, but at the same time, you constantly say "I can't put my future in your goodwill". Somebody has to break this cycle of mistrust, that's the bottom line and the ONLY way to break the cycle is to start from somewhere, and build trust STEP by STEP. Trust does not grow overnight, that's why we need to build it in stages.

[Piratis]

What is better for you won't be worse for TCs given that the past does not repeat itself. It's that trust issue again. You ask us to trust that everything will be fine, but at the same time, you constantly say "I can't put my future in your goodwill". Somebody has to break this cycle of mistrust, that's the bottom line and the ONLY way to break the cycle is to start from somewhere, and build trust STEP by STEP. Trust does not grow overnight, that's why we need to build it in stages.

I never asked you to put your future on our goodwill. Your future will not depend on if/when we decide something (which is the case in what you are asking) but it will be secured in the constitution (which as I said can never change without T/C agreement), the laws of Cyprus and the laws of EU.

Also, I agreed already for the "step by step" as long as we agree from now (this means be included in the plan we will vote/sign) what each step will be and when it will be taken.

Annan plan is not a "step" is the final solution.

[Piratis]

You act as if the plan is perfect for TCs. Don't you realize that 1/3 of TCs will be refugees? Ok I accept that there will be gains for TCs, but TCs are not getting anything for free. 1/3 of the population is a significant number.

1)They will be refugees if what they have does not belong to them.

2) 2/3 is more than 1/3. And while I can understand the "minus" point on the scale of that 1/3, there are many benefits for all "3/3".

There is no way to have something that will satisfy the 100% of both G/C and T/C. But I am sure there is a solution that can satisfy say 70% of G/C and 70% of T/C (the pure T/C, not the settlers). This solution is not the one proposed by the Annan plan though.

[mehmet]

In representative democracy like we have it is not people rule but people choosing from those who choose to stand before people with a progeramme for Government. Sometimes people like some of what someone has to offer and make choice to vote for that person because it is the best choice that is available to them. Papadopoulos and Denktas was elected with this type of system. There's nothing wrong with it it is similar to what happens in other democracy but is it people rule? In many countries people didn't want their Governments to go to war with Iraq but still those governments made decisions and next time there is an election people will pass judgement on those actions. All this is democracy.

Before Switzerland talks there was Cyprus talks. In the middle of this there was 3 day holiday. It wasn't important if Cyprus talks fail because holidays is more important, so even though there was a published timetable the politicians took time off to have a holiday. I understand that some days when there was no holiday Papadopoulos would arrive and leave after a short time.

So no solution in Cyprus and they go off to Switzerland. Not Denktas, maybe he didn't like the weather there this time of year. So he stay in Cyprus, just to make sure he wasn't interfering with process they fix things so phone calls to him can't be made from building they were meeting in. I understand there was tensions between Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot delegations so UN invite them and the Turkish and Greek delegations who also arrive by now to have dinner together. No politics just dinner. Maybe they talk about where they are going on holiday this year, or about football or the best way to boil an egg. Maybe they have fierce disputes about whether soft or hard boiled is best. Anyway, with a published timetable politics could wait.

Finally they get to the politics but they run out of time and, as they agreed at the beginning the UN General Secretary fill in the gaps. That way we can have the Annan Plan, not the Papadopoulos-Denktas Plan or even the Erdogan-Karamanlis Plan. All this too is democracy because they agree to process. I understand Greek and Greek Cypriot delegations don't want to sign document in Switzerland, they decide to read it before deciding to support or not ot support. So whatever they were doing all this time they needed more time because Annan had to finish off what was their job in the first place. Denktas can say Annan Plan was nothing to do with him because he wasn't there, Papadopoulos can say Annan Plan is bad even though he was there.

We don't have Plan we could have had because our politicians couldn't agree and now both can say it is nothing to do with them. This is why the people of Cyprus have a referendum that neither leader supports.

Just like you might choose between John instead of Jack because you like what John says a little bit more even though you are not sure if you like everything John says people have a Plan they can say yes, no or can't be bothered to get off my bottom to do anything about to. Given how our leaders couldn't sometimes even be in the same room together when there was all this pressure on them to maybe people need to consider if they think to vote no how long it will take to come to this point again. So when you weigh up the advantages and disadvantages of the Plan bear in mind the current reality that may or may not change also.