DT. wrote:Rebel.Without.A.Pause wrote:What is the point of ethnically turkish zones and greek zones when you have provisions in the consitution that the numerical minority will enjoy special majority powers for issues affecting its security and human rights. If its must be bi-zonal then start with ethnic segregation and proceed to re-name the zones to north and south (rather than greek and turkish) later on.
Why would anyone want a permanent turkish zone if they weren't trying to keep the window open for a possible split later on?
Its all very simple if you look between the lines you will see the true intentions behind both sides red lines
No one has given me a clear answer as too how 'ethnic zones' will be legit in an EU state. Being an EU citizen means you can settle freely within its borders. What is stopping someone who is refused permission to live an an 'ethnic zone' because of their ethnicity, going to the ECHR or EU courts and saying such a policy is against EU law???
if you read up on the Turkish insistence to make th agreement "Primary Law" in Cyprus you will understand how it will supercede EU law.
Is that a bit like the "loophole" / condition the UK used to hold on to the "Sovereign Bases" on Cyprus, before its EU entry ...
