Cyprus-Forum.com

[Viewpoint]

Despite the Turkish occupation of the Island and the violation of human rights via denial of access to property, freedom to choose, and denial of ones frredom of movement within ones country the relationship between Greece and Cyprus is one that has eveolved to a healthy equal status. I feel it is the right relationhip between the two countries to be had.

And could you tell us what responsibility and contribution the GCs made towards causing the current situation?

[Oracle]

Despite the Turkish occupation of the Island and the violation of human rights via denial of access to property, freedom to choose, and denial of ones frredom of movement within ones country the relationship between Greece and Cyprus is one that has eveolved to a healthy equal status. I feel it is the right relationhip between the two countries to be had.

I completely concur ....

http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.php?t=17411

[humanist]

VP if I recall am wrong therefore you are right therefore you know the response to your question .... have a nice life

[Talisker]

askimwos, thanks for your considered opinions and response to my question. So I guess you are acknowledging that there has been a shift in GC opinion in relation to ENOSIS, and this is due in large part to realising that being in control of one's own destiny, and making a success of it, builds confidence. Plus, realising that the mother can't always be trusted! I like the positive message you provide for the TCs, to make their own way without the motherland overseeing them. However, I feel that the TCs will probably argue they won't have the freedom to do this within a reunified island, as they will still be a minority within the population. I guess this is why finding a political solution is so difficult, particularly if the usual concept of democracy (one man, one vote), which I see as essential, is followed. Do the models for BBF allow for the TCs to feel masters of their own destiny, without interference from the motherland?

Talikser, I have to disagree with your argument that the TCs will not have the freedom to do this within a reunified island.

askimwos, wasn't really MY argument - I was just trying to second guess what the TCs might feel about this.

The TCs have first to realise where they are now and compare this with the potential of being an equal partner in a unified island under the umbrella of a BBF. First of all they get to keep all the services that affect their everyday life i.e. local government, health, education, policing, local justice system etc. They get to benefit from federal funds and an effective participation in the federal government - also TCs businemen will have unobstructed access to the EU and World markets plus quaranteed socioeconomic stability in a democratic country within the EU. Now compare these with the other side of the coin: living in a "country" not recognised by anyone, no direct trade, relying on Turkey for funds, with 40,000+ troops stationed in the occuppied areas and Turkey calling the shots. Even the "police" is controled by the generals for god's sake! I can understand the fear of being dominated by thr richer GC community, however, in the context of a BBF I do not think that this is the case. In a globalised world I think that it is ludicrus to think that the TCs will be dominated by the GCs which are in turn dominated by EU multinationals! In today's world there are two options: a) become part of the constantly moving global economy and survive, even if that means opening up to the multinationals or b) close the gates and starve.

I completely agree with you, and if you look at some of my posts yesterday on this thread, and the 'sister' thread about the 1950 referendum, I was trying to put forward the same points to Eric Dayi (particularly emphasising the economic benefits as well as protection and security to be gained from being a part of the EU). So we don't disagree on this. I also read the article you posted by Alkan Chaglar, and found it somewhat depressing. It may be realistic, but it indicates clearly the reliance of ALL (TCs and settler Turks) within the occupied north on the Turkish state. This could be difficult for TCs to forego, even with the temptations of the socioeconomic stability that would be available from a resolution to the problem and which you describe so clearly.

Talikser, I know that TCs understand all the above and they know very well that the options here are very specific. There cannot be independence and freedom for them to control their own destiny if they go it alone - and this is not down to the GCs or the RoC. This is plainly down to Turkey that has never recognised their identity and the difference between TC culture and turkish culture. For Turkey there can only be turkish people and turkish interests - how can they respect the TC culture when the turkish settlers in the occupied areas outnumber the TCs?

The settler majority issue is a big problem, and one for which I have no answer - except trust! And is there a lot of that going round? I think not........ Realistically the settlers need good incentives to leave, or the Turkish government needs to be coerced into making them leave as part of any agreement. Just my opinion..........