Cyprus-Forum.com

[Andros]

President Christofias' recent statements toward the Turksih Cypriot leader, Mehmet Ali Talat, in line with the international rule of law and the resumption of the Cyprus question based on a "Bi-Zonal" Federation is clearly being, either misunderstood, or is not in line with the Turkish Cypriot side's own outlook of a "Bi-Zonal" Federation.

According to recent Press reports: Mehmet Ali Talat has so far said that he sees a Cyprus "Federation" similarly to the former Annan Plan, where a central Cyprus government is loosly formed as part of two "Founding" Cypriot states, and not the other way around!

While, naturally, we (Greek Cypriot) view a Cyprus setttlement based on a "Canton" style (at the worst!) federation consisting of a Greek and Turkish Cypriot area under a "Solid" Federal Cyprus Government.

Am I viewing this wrongly, or does a fomidable compromise seem like it sounds a bit like the former "ANNAN PLAN"?

Some Facts:
1. The TCs say two Constituent States, we say two minor Cantons.
2. The TCs want a "Loose" Federal "Central" Government, we want a solid one.
3. The TCs say they wish to use the Annan Plan as a basis for negotiations, we say the plan is "Dead".

The Compromise almost sounds like the disastrous Ghalis Set of ideas to me!


I am just trying to picture what the compromise where will be, assuming that it's a compromise of what THEY want against what WE want.

I think the following sounds like the logical outcome, but not one that I favour in a million years:

Country: Cyprus Federal Republic
System: Two "Federated States; one being Greek Cypriot, and the other as Turkish Cypriot controlled.
Government: Split 30/70 government, with full veto rights for the Turkish Cypriot minority of 18%!

In my opinion, a compromise based on a Canton and a Constituent state is clearly a "Federated State", while a compromise on a "United Cyprus Repuiblic" and "The Republic of Cyprus" appears to be a "Cyprus Federal Republic"!

I believe that President Christofias should actually stop his remarks about forming a "Bi-Zonal" Federation and concentrate in convincing the Turkish Cypriots in JOINING the "Republic of Cyprus", by perhaps only adjusting a few "Minor" changes in our presently "Working" and successful Cyprus Constitution.

Our people need to be told the true inefficiencies of a Bi-Zonal structure before we realise that everything we've worked for since 1974 is thrown away in one stroke!

A Bi-Zonal, to me, is clearly a recipe and a curtain for a future conflict and eventual Partition - with probably us (Greek Cypriots) being allowed to retain only a fraction of what we control today - especially after Turkey becomes a FULL EU member state.

Clearly, a Cyprus Solution of this kind will path the way for Turkey's EU aspirations almost unopposed and will also PAVE THE WAY for mainland TURKISH EU SETTLERS to freely live in Cyprus.

Please think about what type of Cyprus agreement you are planning to agree to from the start! Please remember - President Christofias did initially ACCEPT the Annan Plan, but felt forced to later say "No" in order to back his original political opponent Former President Tassos Papadopoulos!


Kind regards,
Andros

[observer]

A thoughtful piece.

My initial reaction is that Talat and Christofias should stop making public announcements before they meet.

Talat knows that he can gain the support of TCs for the Annan Plan. Every step away from it will lose him some TC support.

GC political rhetoric for the last 30 years has been to use the words BBF, without really being clear about what it means, but then go on to demand all settlers removed, all troops removed, the Turkish guarantee removed, and all property restored. Every step away from that will lose him GC some support.

The two views are obviously incompatible. If Talat and Christofias are both genuine in their hopes for a final settlement (and we have to hope they are) then they are going to have to reach a compromise and sell it to their communities. Stating publicly what they want beforehand will make it more difficult for them to negotiate a compromise, and their respective communities will believe that their leader has ‘backed down’, making any agreement even more difficult to sell. Without this public posturing, if agreement is reached during this honeymoon period, it would be easier to sell any compromise along the lines of “Yes, we have not got all we want, but it is a compromise that we will all benefit from”.

[repulsewarrior]

..."virgin birth" will have to mean something completely unlike the Annan plan and the BBF. it will use components of the "UN plan(s)" to produce a style of Government which has similarities to them, but that does not offer either party their complete satisfaction, in terms of their own agendas. it is hoped that the negociations will strive to create something which is more vital and meaningful when considered as a step toward the betterment of our condition as Human Beings, and as part of a larger whole, the Family of Man.

[Nikitas]

The looser the federation then the more the apportioned assets must reflect the 18-82 population rates. There ought to be a sliding scale on these matters. The nearer you get to a partionlike arrangmenet the more it reflects the population rates, the closer you go towards true federation then you can move away from these ratios. THis is only fair as partition is in essence the power to excluse the other side from one's territory, this power must come at a cost, assuming that is what the TCs want. The other end of the sliding scale would be a full 50-50 partnership in government with the population able to move freely around the island, in other words a bicommunal setup but not bizonal. So the choice is on which factor is more important, the bicommunal or the bizonal. Bizonal assumes a split in the population anyway and it is erroneous to have both the terms in the title of the deal. If it is more bizonal then it is a confederation, if it is bicommunal it is a federation.

From what Talat has said in the past his preference goes to bizonal. If it is still is that way I expect a clear statement. This is no time for ambiguity and diplomatic language.

[zan]

How much clearer can the yes to the Annan Plan get....You take all the factors and throw them in a pot, you end up with the Annan Plan. This is why people like Andros say that a clear split is the best way because even the well thought out A plan cannot find solace in the GC mind set. You guys getting stuck and working yourselves up with this 18% rubbish is what is going to upset he apple cart. The constitute states have to have a chance of functioning and your pure mathematical split is not the answer. If that were the case then the A Plan would have been just one page and not a whole one at that.
As for the definition of any sort of BBF...I believe that Matsakis asked the question in the house and still has not got his answer!!!!!

[repulsewarrior]

zan, the ANNan Plan is less clear and more complicated than the Constitution. It depends on Goodwill to succeed, and you yourself said that this is most likely lacking. As a starting point it is good for the laws it defines, but in principal it is not suitable, it is not viable, and it is not necessarily respecting Human Rights. ie 4 votes "Greek" to 1 vote "Turkish" in the north. Are Jews and Sri Lankins Greek? in the most explicit example.

[Andros]

Zan and repulsewarrior,

Unfortunately, the idea of an "Annan Style", "Ghalis Style" or even a "Pure" BBF agreement is all about "Good Will", where we as peoples of Cyprus are seriously lacking - or would even say have never had!

Trust, is unfortunately not our Cypriot strongest point, where I admit that I do NOT trust the Turkish Cypriots due to their desperate call of Turkey in 1974 to invade the island because of Cypriot internal instability. The Treaty of Guarantee is a very bad clause in the 1960 Cyprus Constitution, where, it appears that the Turks (whether Turkish Cypriot or Turkish mainland) will obviously insist its inclusion in any BBF plan - Let's not be fooled here. That is why I believe that perhaps an agreed partition may actually be the best option - where the Turkish Cypriots can then feel free to include what ever treaty of guarantee they on their own proposed newly agreed turf, as long as it is not included in our Republic of Cyprus constitution of Today, and Tomorrow - Please all just think about the S-300 Missile scenario on how Turkey threatened force on the ROC, and how Turkey today walks freely in and out of Northern Iraq with no even a whisper of objection! Please take an inclusion of a "Treaty of Guarantee" on a new Cyprus plan very seriously as Turkey really, and clearly, never thinks about the economic or political backlash on intervention or invasion and we Greek Cypriot do. They don't mind living under embargoes or restrictions for the next 50 years if they even have to, where their 1974-1978 military restrictions imposed by America due to the Cyprus invasion really didn't mean much to them!!!! These people think very different to the way we do!!!! Do not forget that!

Also, WHY should we have to settle for a SECOND BEST PLAN? Why is it that the UN says "You can't have all of what you want". That, in my opinion is rubbish and non-democratic. In past conflict agreements, those who feel that they will not get ALL of what they want have eventually ended up agreeing to a mutual Split - Agreed Partition.

I stand by what I say, if it's not a "PURE" Bi-Communal ROC, then I would prefer an agreed Split. The Bi-Zonal idea is bad, NON-DEMOCRATIC and would even by regarded as Non-European....

Let me get this Bi-Zonal issue right:
Naturally, as a Greek Cypriot, the issue of Bi-Zonal deeply concerns me. If a Bi-Zonal agreement means two "Federated" states or "Constituent" states or even two secured "Cantons" with population limits, restrictions on freedom of movement, freedom of "PURCHASE" and etc, etc, similarly to all of the prior UN Plan ideas, then I would strong say "NO" to all of them. Never in a million years. Who ever thought a "UNIFICATION" deal means this is seriously living with a Blind-Fold on. And, if you they think that we Greek Cypriot would agree to such madness should also wake up with a strong Greek Style Mud-like coffee.

A BI-Zonal - Federation is an impossible success story, it promotes "Complete" and forced partition as opposed to a mutually agreed one (There is a Difference!), and promotes inter-communal conflict. You either mix everyone into one bowl and get them to work together at once, or agree to a split. At least with a split - or "agreed Partition" all parties will know where they stand and will not be surprised later on in their Cyprus life.

President Christofias will be better accepted and admired if he it open with his ideas from his initial meeting with Mr Talat. I will only embrace President Christofias if he makes it certain that it's a Bi-Communal Federation only he is seeking, and will not trick us into an "Annan" style Nightmare - otherwise, an agreed partition will ultimately gain him more credibility and respect as a modern thinking President of the Republic of Cyprus. Thus, if he does fall under pressure and we say "No" to an Annan Style plan, then we will, and I am sure of this answer, be confronted with a recognised Turkish Cypriot State of all of the 37%+ of land they currently occupy. While, if a Federal solution does not look favourable at some point of President Christofias' talks with Talat, they we all Greek Cypriot will expect him to revert to an "Agreed Partition" - at least we'll be able to claim back some of the land currently being occupied by the Turkish Cypriots.

Personally, I don't think President Christofias has any real choice in the matter, as the very thought of engaging in United Nations sponsored talks means that he's just entered an American-Turkish Bi-Zonal Annan Style plan for Cyprus. Sorry all - but history has proven itself too well to just ignore the plain truth of a UN process.

[zan]

zan, the ANNan Plan is less clear and more complicated than the Constitution. It depends on Goodwill to succeed, and you yourself said that this is most likely lacking. As a starting point it is good for the laws it defines, but in principal it is not suitable, it is not viable, and it is not necessarily respecting Human Rights. ie 4 votes "Greek" to 1 vote "Turkish" in the north. Are Jews and Sri Lankins Greek? in the most explicit example.

When Makarios convinced the world that the Zurich agreement was not workable then the world thought that more detail is needed to make it work so they took decades to put together a plan that took every eventuality in and came up with the Annan Plan....I hope you are not one of those childish thinkers that think the Annan Plan was put together without us because it simply was not....e were involved all the way.

The point about the vote ratio is just as childish I am afraid. It is about one community one vote and takes into account all that has happened before. You just want to ignore that and go straight into this as if it never happened. Even the property issue is not as clear cut as that and has to be thought about and it was...Compensation.

[zan]

Zan and repulsewarrior,

Unfortunately, the idea of an "Annan Style", "Ghalis Style" or even a "Pure" BBF agreement is all about "Good Will", where we as peoples of Cyprus are seriously lacking - or would even say have never had!

Trust, is unfortunately not our Cypriot strongest point, where I admit that I do NOT trust the Turkish Cypriots due to their desperate call of Turkey in 1974 to invade the island because of Cypriot internal instability. The Treaty of Guarantee is a very bad clause in the 1960 Cyprus Constitution, where, it appears that the Turks (whether Turkish Cypriot or Turkish mainland) will obviously insist its inclusion in any BBF plan - Let's not be fooled here. That is why I believe that perhaps an agreed partition may actually be the best option - where the Turkish Cypriots can then feel free to include what ever treaty of guarantee they on their own proposed newly agreed turf, as long as it is not included in our Republic of Cyprus constitution of Today, and Tomorrow - Please all just think about the S-300 Missile scenario on how Turkey threatened force on the ROC, and how Turkey today walks freely in and out of Northern Iraq with no even a whisper of objection! Please take an inclusion of a "Treaty of Guarantee" on a new Cyprus plan very seriously as Turkey really, and clearly, never thinks about the economic or political backlash on intervention or invasion and we Greek Cypriot do. They don't mind living under embargoes or restrictions for the next 50 years if they even have to, where their 1974-1978 military restrictions imposed by America due to the Cyprus invasion really didn't mean much to them!!!! These people think very different to the way we do!!!! Do not forget that!

Also, WHY should we have to settle for a SECOND BEST PLAN? Why is it that the UN says "You can't have all of what you want". That, in my opinion is rubbish and non-democratic. In past conflict agreements, those who feel that they will not get ALL of what they want have eventually ended up agreeing to a mutual Split - Agreed Partition.

I stand by what I say, if it's not a "PURE" Bi-Communal ROC, then I would prefer an agreed Split. The Bi-Zonal idea is bad, NON-DEMOCRATIC and would even by regarded as Non-European....

Let me get this Bi-Zonal issue right:
Naturally, as a Greek Cypriot, the issue of Bi-Zonal deeply concerns me. If a Bi-Zonal agreement means two "Federated" states or "Constituent" states or even two secured "Cantons" with population limits, restrictions on freedom of movement, freedom of "PURCHASE" and etc, etc, similarly to all of the prior UN Plan ideas, then I would strong say "NO" to all of them. Never in a million years. Who ever thought a "UNIFICATION" deal means this is seriously living with a Blind-Fold on. And, if you they think that we Greek Cypriot would agree to such madness should also wake up with a strong Greek Style Mud-like coffee.

A BI-Zonal - Federation is an impossible success story, it promotes "Complete" and forced partition as opposed to a mutually agreed one (There is a Difference!), and promotes inter-communal conflict. You either mix everyone into one bowl and get them to work together at once, or agree to a split. At least with a split - or "agreed Partition" all parties will know where they stand and will not be surprised later on in their Cyprus life.

President Christofias will be better accepted and admired if he it open with his ideas from his initial meeting with Mr Talat. I will only embrace President Christofias if he makes it certain that it's a Bi-Communal Federation only he is seeking, and will not trick us into an "Annan" style Nightmare - otherwise, an agreed partition will ultimately gain him more credibility and respect as a modern thinking President of the Republic of Cyprus. Thus, if he does fall under pressure and we say "No" to an Annan Style plan, then we will, and I am sure of this answer, be confronted with a recognised Turkish Cypriot State of all of the 37%+ of land they currently occupy. While, if a Federal solution does not look favourable at some point of President Christofias' talks with Talat, they we all Greek Cypriot will expect him to revert to an "Agreed Partition" - at least we'll be able to claim back some of the land currently being occupied by the Turkish Cypriots.

Personally, I don't think President Christofias has any real choice in the matter, as the very thought of engaging in United Nations sponsored talks means that he's just entered an American-Turkish Bi-Zonal Annan Style plan for Cyprus. Sorry all - but history has proven itself too well to just ignore the plain truth of a UN process.

Bravo re Andros....At least you have the guts to not only say what you want but provide a solution to the problem all in one post. We have been banging our heads against the wall for to long. GR says the same sort of thing but has not got the guts to have the clean brake except for silly offer of 18% as if that means something.