Cyprus-Forum.com

[Murataga]

No one in their right mind would suggest that an armed conflict is the way out of our current predicament. On the contrary any conflict will most definitely inflict a heavy blow to our islands future and cause irreparable damage. Neither Turkey , the T/Cs or the G/Cs want anything else but a negotiated settlement . The EU will see to it that the ROC will have much to benefit from Turkey joining Europe .All of us want the best for our children and grandchildren , and none would agree that war is anything else than a total catastrophe .Those that harbour hallucinatory aspirations that a war would solve our problems are in a dream world.

Very well said miltiades, I agree.

[Nikitas]

Discussing the Cyprus higly improbable veto is kind of lame when France and Germany both say loudly and clearly that Turkey does not belong to the EU. The most they see is special relationship with the EU. Cyprus and Greece both are committed to Turkey's EU membership for good reasons, but they are counting without the objections of the others.

Roseandchan- tankers full of water are scheduled to start bringing water from Greece by mid June. Are you sure that Turkey has enough water to give to others? Last I heard they had problems with the Syrians because they restricted water volume going through to Syria.

[Paphitis]

Right, so how do you suppose they'll get past the Cypriot veto while hanging onto a sizeable chunk of Cyprus?

They would not have the guts to use it , plonker

Is that an "educated guess" or wishful thinking?

Neither . The GCs are too cowardly to take such action

We will use our veto if need be. Do not worry about that you clown.

But since so many other countries are so eager to veto Turkey's arse out of the EU, all we have to do is sit back and laugh.

[Tim Drayton]

Re: the 82:18 solution.
Sorry, I have tried hard but I still can't get my head around this. You have unilaterally and arbitrarily plucked out of the air the figure of 18 percent as the amount of territory that you feel the TCs deserve. Then you will presumably delineate the boundaries of a zone covering this amount of territory and request that all Turkish speakers on the island move here so that you can wall them in. At this point, talk of coastal property being more valuable starts to assume an ominous dimension. Do I take it that this corral within which you wish to enclose the Turkish Cypriots will be denied access to the sea? This is all starting to conjure up images of the odious Warsaw ghetto in which the Nazis deemed all Jews were to live when they occupied Poland. However, there is one crucial point: the Nazis moved the Jews here at gun point, not under their own volition. I do not understand how you plan to implement this solution without armed force. Why is the Turkish side supposed to voluntarily accept this proposal? You are just going to write a letter to the Turkish Chief of Staff, saying, "Please Mr Buyukanit, move all your troops into this area covering 18 percent of the island which we have unilaterally deemed is all that the Turkish puppet regime is entitled to occupy, then stay there while we wall you in."
I would put it all down to the lunatic rantings of a madman, but I see that this proposal is striking a chord with other people here, so I am very puzzled.

[Nikitas]

Tim,

Kifeas, I assume it is his proposal you are discussing, said that failing all other attempts at a solution then the 18-82 division sounds as a good "final solution". He is not proposing walling in the TC part with no access to the coast, but apportioning the coast line to reflect this division as far as possible.

Asking for such a division is not a matter of force but negotiations on one and only one issue, the territory. The offering in exchange is a formal ceding of the territory by the RoC and thus instant and indisuptable international recognition of the resulting new state. Something that Buyukanit is not able to achieve with all his soldiers.

The scenario is extremely hypothetical but if it comes about, it will be interesting to see not how Buyukanit will respond to the Greeks, but how he responds to the TCs who having gotten rid of the GC bogeyman who wants to "genocide them and gift the island to Greece" will no longer need his help and protection.

[Nikitas]

As to the proportion of territory which each side deserves, which is applicable to other solutions and not just outright partition, the factors that come into effect are the amount owned by each community lawfully in 1974, the population levels in 1974 before the influx of illegal settlers and the fact that in the TC side are only TCs wheras ALL the ogther communities are in the GC side.

It is not simply a matter of GC versus TC shareout. If the TCs must have their own area then so must the Armenians, Maronites, Latins and Rom. And since the TCs are not propared to accept the rights of these communities and lump them arbitrarily with the GCs the territory apportionment must take them into account.

[Kifeas]

Re: the 82:18 solution.
Sorry, I have tried hard but I still can't get my head around this. You have unilaterally and arbitrarily plucked out of the air the figure of 18 percent as the amount of territory that you feel the TCs deserve. Then you will presumably delineate the boundaries of a zone covering this amount of territory and request that all Turkish speakers on the island move here so that you can wall them in. At this point, talk of coastal property being more valuable starts to assume an ominous dimension. Do I take it that this corral within which you wish to enclose the Turkish Cypriots will be denied access to the sea? This is all starting to conjure up images of the odious Warsaw ghetto in which the Nazis deemed all Jews were to live when they occupied Poland. However, there is one crucial point: the Nazis moved the Jews here at gun point, not under their own volition. I do not understand how you plan to implement this solution without armed force. Why is the Turkish side supposed to voluntarily accept this proposal? You are just going to write a letter to the Turkish Chief of Staff, saying, "Please Mr Buyukanit, move all your troops into this area covering 18 percent of the island which we have unilaterally deemed is all that the Turkish puppet regime is entitled to occupy, then stay there while we wall you in."
I would put it all down to the lunatic rantings of a madman, but I see that this proposal is striking a chord with other people here, so I am very puzzled.

Tim, we will nether propose it, nor implement it by force! The status quo and the current isolation of the TCs will simply continue, plus the "boot" on Turkey's butt from her EU accession process; and when they will start their famous recognition campaign which Talat is “promising” us every five minutes, if we do not bow down to his illegitimate demands; we will counter propose to the international community that the only way we will ever allow recognition is if it is done on an 82:18 basis; simply because this is the only fair basis, after we show them all the historical, cultural, and the during the last 100 years demographic and property ownership facts and realities of Cyprus! And yes, since they will be able to run their own 18% Turkish republic in their corner of Cyprus, they will also have free access from sea and air! I did not say they should not have any coastline boarders, as long as they are also down to the 18% of Cyprus' coastlines!

It is not that we want to lose 18% of our 4,000 years old ancestral homeland or that we do not want them to be regarded as our compatriots in a truly united & independed Cyprus, but this solution is definitely much more appealing than the disguised “virgin birth” partition they want us to accept under the label of reunification; and in which we won't even be considered an independed and sovereign country, if we take into consideration that they want their "motherland" to maintain unilateral invasion rights over our country, under her so-called "guarantee rights!"

I hope you are happier now, after this explanation!

[Tim Drayton]

Actually, I understand everything about the above arguments except where the 18 percent comes from.
It seems to me that you can either have a settlement based on brute force, or one that is based on international law and a sense of natural justice. The latter, I would argue, involves the notion of universality. A thesis that screams Δεν Ξεχνώ (rightly, in my view) in respect of every single donum of stolen GC property cannot develop amnesia in respect of TC owned property, if it is not to fall foul of this principle. Yet, to come up with this figure of 18 percent you need to develop just such a sense of amnesia. Surely, if nothing else, there is no doubt in Cyprus as to who holds title to property under domestic and international law. The arguments used to justify this 18 percent are specious. Title to property in any jursidiction governed by the rule of law do not depend on how far back your lineage stretches within the geographical area covered by that jurisdiction. I have quite legally acquired a flat in Cyprus, but I have only lived here for three and a half years and have no Cypriot ancestry whatsoever. Does that mean that somebody can come along and say that since he can trace his lineage backto the neolithic setllement in Choirokita, he has title to my property and not me? I don't think so. If a Turkish Cypriot can demonstrate that he is of linovambaki lineage, does this strengthen his title to his property on the grounds that his lineage in Cyprus stretches back further than 500 years? No it does not. Title to property is not conditional on racial or linguistic origin or lineage. There is no legal basis under Cypriot or international law for making such claims. The TCs collectively have title to all the land registered to individual members of their community or TC foundations (mainly the Evkaf) as recorded with the Land Registry. It has nothing to do with population. To my mind, a just and lasting settlement will involve respecting all such property rights, and either returning all property to its true owners or, failing that, providing fair compensation in the form of exchange or monetary payments. I do not understand why the Turkish Cypriots should voluntarily consent to a settlemet that says "I forget" in respect of a portion of their property.

[Jerry]

The Annan Plan allowed for a negotiated reduction of TC land to 29% because some GCs would return home. If there is partition no GCs would move into the new TC stats so the 29% would be reduced. The end result would be a figure somewhere between 18% and 29%, it depends how much haggling goes on.

The fairest way to determine land ownership would surely be the figures pre 1960. I believe the British paid the TCs compensation for Evkaf land.
If you want to take the argument of who has owned the land for the longest to the extreme then go back to 1571 - the TCs would get nothing.

[observer]

Tim,

Kifeas, I assume it is his proposal you are discussing, said that failing all other attempts at a solution then the 18-82 division sounds as a good "final solution". He is not proposing walling in the TC part with no access to the coast, but apportioning the coast line to reflect this division as far as possible.

Asking for such a division is not a matter of force but negotiations on one and only one issue, the territory. The offering in exchange is a formal ceding of the territory by the RoC and thus instant and indisuptable international recognition of the resulting new state. Something that Buyukanit is not able to achieve with all his soldiers.

The scenario is extremely hypothetical but if it comes about, it will be interesting to see not how Buyukanit will respond to the Greeks, but how he responds to the TCs who having gotten rid of the GC bogeyman who wants to "genocide them and gift the island to Greece" will no longer need his help and protection.

Unfortunate choice of words considering that Tim Drayton started this change of direction by making comparisons with Nazi ghettos.