The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content


CAN GCs AND TCs BE POLITICAL EQUALS?????????

How can we solve it? (keep it civilized)

Postby Viewpoint » Fri Jun 06, 2008 11:23 pm

-mikkie2- wrote:My view is that the Tc's in a unitary state would possibly hold the balance of power. It is well known that GC's are split between left and right. It therefore would stand to reason that a politically well organised TC community could hold the balance of power and hence gain their fair share of political influence in the RoC.

The problem with the RoC as it stands is that it is a bicommunal republic! It is actually DETRIMENTAL in the sense that it makes one community feel inferior to the other from the word go.

In any mature democracy, you generally find that the minorities hold the balance of power. It would be the same in Cyprus if the people were allowed to politically mature and the TC's would play a full and active part in that and have the political and social influence that they deserve to have.

I think its true that many GC's looked down on the TC's but if you talk to many GC's now, many would agree that they themselves as a community fostered that situation and even more so after independence because of the feeling that TC's gained a disproportionate influence in the workings of government and as such fostered some resentment in the GC community. Many Gc's DO blame their community and openly admit to it.

I also think that the pursuit of Enosis also polarised the GC community and as such, in the 1960's a truly unitary state would fall apart anyway due to the polarisation of the 2 communities towards partition or Enosis.

Today, if the bicommunal nature of the constitution were eliminated I think you may find the TC's will have a more influential role in Cypriot politics. But this I think is probably a step too far for many TC's. It is the fear of the past that drives the future for many of them. On the GC side, I think the lesson has been painfully learnt and that is demostrtated by the change of leadership in February to a pro solution president.


Neither side has the political maturity to vote for the best man for the job, irrelevent of their ethin origins, due to this fact GCs will unite and vote in a GCs everytime, we will be yet again pushed to one side just like 1963, how do you expect us to expose ourselves to this sort of risk?
User avatar
Viewpoint
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 25214
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 2:48 pm
Location: Nicosia/Lefkosa

Postby Get Real! » Sat Jun 07, 2008 12:06 am

Instead of writing about the obvious differences between the two communities that currently make them politically unequal, I’ll refer to a study made by the US Department of State just prior to the 1959 London/Zurich agreements called… “Analysis of the Cyprus Agreement”, which examined the proposal in detail including its founding principles and highlighted its various inherent problems.

Both Austria and the Lebanon are used in this report as examples of ethnically divided scenarios close to the situation in Cyprus, trying to function under “political equality” of one form or another. I quote here an interesting piece from the report which makes an interesting “revelation”…

The Lebanese example demonstrates two things: (1) In the sharing of executive power between two individuals representing mutually suspicious groups of the population sharing is not usually equal. The stronger individual or the one backed by the stronger forces (internal or external) will assert leadership, either privately or openly. (2) There is a chance that a system of balance between two mutually suspicious groups of the population of a small country can survive severe strains, but only at the cost of increased bitterness and a progressive weakening of the basis of cooperation

http://www.cyprus-conflict.net/analysis_of_treaties.htm

Today, with the passage of time we have “insider” knowledge that the Cyprus agreements did indeed fail as suspected in this report because the stronger community overwhelmed the significantly weaker one, which subsequently triggered the involvement of the “guarantors” that led to total disaster.

If we allow common sense to prevail, we don’t even need a detailed report like this to predict the obvious dynamic of the numerical superiority that one community enjoys over the other. It is therefore NOT in the interests of Turkish Cypriots that they be ISOLATED in a distinct ethnic group as will happen under a non-democratic political arrangement such as a BBF that can only guarantee to repeat history, but that a modern Democracy with minority protection rights backed by the EU is the closest panacea for all the citizens of Cyprus.


Regards, GR.
User avatar
Get Real!
Forum Addict
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 48333
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:25 am
Location: Nicosia

Postby Jerry » Sat Jun 07, 2008 12:15 am

Get Real! wrote:Instead of writing about the obvious differences between the two communities that currently make them politically unequal, I’ll refer to a study made by the US Department of State just prior to the 1959 London/Zurich agreements called… “Analysis of the Cyprus Agreement”, which examined the proposal in detail including its founding principles and highlighted its various inherent problems.

Both Austria and the Lebanon are used in this report as examples of ethnically divided scenarios close to the situation in Cyprus, trying to function under “political equality” of one form or another. I quote here an interesting piece from the report which makes an interesting “revelation”…

The Lebanese example demonstrates two things: (1) In the sharing of executive power between two individuals representing mutually suspicious groups of the population sharing is not usually equal. The stronger individual or the one backed by the stronger forces (internal or external) will assert leadership, either privately or openly. (2) There is a chance that a system of balance between two mutually suspicious groups of the population of a small country can survive severe strains, but only at the cost of increased bitterness and a progressive weakening of the basis of cooperation

http://www.cyprus-conflict.net/analysis_of_treaties.htm

Today, with the passage of time we have “insider” knowledge that the Cyprus agreements did indeed fail as suspected in this report because the stronger community overwhelmed the significantly weaker one, which subsequently triggered the involvement of the “guarantors” that led to total disaster.

If we allow common sense to prevail, we don’t even need a detailed report like this to predict the obvious dynamic of the numerical superiority that one community enjoys over the other. It is therefore NOT in the interests of Turkish Cypriots that they be ISOLATED in a distinct ethnic group as will happen under a non-democratic political arrangement such as a BBF that can only guarantee to repeat history, but that a modern Democracy with minority protection rights backed by the EU is the closest panacea for all the citizens of Cyprus.


Regards, GR.


Well that makes a change GR, for once you are making sense!
Jerry
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 4730
Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 12:29 pm
Location: UK

Re: CAN GCs AND TCs BE POLITICAL EQUALS?????????

Postby unitedwestand » Sat Jun 07, 2008 1:06 am

Kikapu wrote:
unitedwestand wrote:
BirKibrisli wrote:Hasan HASTURER is a columnist with the daily trnc newspaper,KIBRIS...

From what I hear he is a very respected journalist...I came across one of his columns recently which I found interesting...I am not in agreement with everything he says neccessarily,but those who are curious about what is going on in more "liberal" TC minds at this crucial time should keep on reading...

Hasturer argues that Christofias is handicapped in the current negotiations because of a historically inherited "chronic" preconception regarding the TCs...He suggests that for hundreds of years now the GCs have considered the TCs to be inferior to themselves culturally,economically,socially and politically...

I quote selectively:


"...The GCs,who have been in Cyprus for far longer than us,have always been more motivated in influencing the fate and the future of Cyprus... This was especially evident during the British rule...Their demand was for Enosis before independence...The emerging TC leadership was never able to put forward a credible alternative....After the Lausanne agreement Cyprus became a foreign country for Turkey...Under the circumstances the TC policy became one of hanging onto the British skirts...This was far from being a principled stand...
Economically too we were unable to make our mark...we never learned to stand on our own two feet...Even during the Ottoman rule TCs had little to do with administration...Later on with Eoka, with the exception of Grivas,who was of Cypriot origins anyway,all the key positions were held by GCs...But the TMT was always run by colonels from the Turkish army...
Even in rural centres the commander was from Turkey...Over the years the TCs could never manage to become a distinct community,enough to demand political equality with the GCs...[b]Hence the preconception that they were a lower class of people only fit to make "lokma" and "shamishi".
..[/b]

What do you think???Is this the real reason why the GCs are finding it very hard to accept the TCs as their political equals????


For Turkish speakers the link is:
http://www.kibrisgazetesi.com/index.php/cat/1/col/80/art/8377/PageName/Ana_sayfa


Something every TC has known all along, with the exception of yourself and Kikapu. As for you and Kikapu, I can only guess you are easily fooled. If you 2 think you are equal to the Greeks because you happen to exchange a few messages on a forum or get to know a few on your visits to the south you are very mistaken.

To the Greeks/GCs we are nothing but bellondo Turko.


Bir, welcome back,

While you were away, GR and I uncovered the mask of who unitedwestand is, but he chooses to continue staying in the "closet". He is no other than our friend MR-from-NG. One of these days, he will come out of the "closet", but he is a little shy right now. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Another one of your signature posts above MR-from-NG. :lol: :lol:

I'm watching your every move MR-from-NG.. :wink: :wink:


What can I say? The man's obsessed with MRFromNG. Listen Kikapu, there is only one way to settle this, we have to meet. I'm in North London all year round and in Cyprus mid August.

I'm flexible and will be available at any location and at any time that suits you. Once we meet we will take pictures and post them on the forum for all to see you and see me. Let the members then decide who is who.

Let me know when you're ready.
unitedwestand
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 289
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2008 9:41 pm

Postby Kifeas » Sat Jun 07, 2008 2:50 am

Get Real! wrote:Instead of writing about the obvious differences between the two communities that currently make them politically unequal, I’ll refer to a study made by the US Department of State just prior to the 1959 London/Zurich agreements called… “Analysis of the Cyprus Agreement”, which examined the proposal in detail including its founding principles and highlighted its various inherent problems.

Both Austria and the Lebanon are used in this report as examples of ethnically divided scenarios close to the situation in Cyprus, trying to function under “political equality” of one form or another. I quote here an interesting piece from the report which makes an interesting “revelation”…

The Lebanese example demonstrates two things: (1) In the sharing of executive power between two individuals representing mutually suspicious groups of the population sharing is not usually equal. The stronger individual or the one backed by the stronger forces (internal or external) will assert leadership, either privately or openly. (2) There is a chance that a system of balance between two mutually suspicious groups of the population of a small country can survive severe strains, but only at the cost of increased bitterness and a progressive weakening of the basis of cooperation

http://www.cyprus-conflict.net/analysis_of_treaties.htm

Today, with the passage of time we have “insider” knowledge that the Cyprus agreements did indeed fail as suspected in this report because the stronger community overwhelmed the significantly weaker one, which subsequently triggered the involvement of the “guarantors” that led to total disaster.

If we allow common sense to prevail, we don’t even need a detailed report like this to predict the obvious dynamic of the numerical superiority that one community enjoys over the other. It is therefore NOT in the interests of Turkish Cypriots that they be ISOLATED in a distinct ethnic group as will happen under a non-democratic political arrangement such as a BBF that can only guarantee to repeat history, but that a modern Democracy with minority protection rights backed by the EU is the closest panacea for all the citizens of Cyprus.


Regards, GR.


So, "Get Real," if I read you correctly, you are saying that the GC side accepted a BBF with political equality between the two communities, only because, as you imply in your post, it is just another one way to safely dominate the TCs –only with “increased bitterness and a progressive weakening of cooperation;” whereas, had we insisted in them accepting “a modern Democracy with minority protection rights backed by the EU,” this domination (since anyway it is a “law of nature” to happen due to one group being numerically “superior” to the other) would have emerged more smoothly; i.e. without the frictions entailed in the first type of "certain domination," that of BBF and political equality! In other words, as you make it sound, we didn’t even do them the “favor” of insisting that we must use the good old Vaseline! Now I see why the TCs insist on “virgin-birth” and “split sovereignties” on the basis of two ethnically based "co-founding" states, and with Turkey’s unilateral intervention "rights!" They do so simply because any other arrangement will -in one way or another- only bring about their "inevitable" domination by the GCs!

Listen “Get Real,” my friend, because the above theory also happens to be the same or similar to that being promoted by Denktash and the rest of the TC nationalists; I suggest it is about time you also start considering seeing a psychiatrist, because your schizophrenia is getting worst by the day, if not by the hour!
User avatar
Kifeas
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 4927
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 10:19 am
Location: Lapithos, Kyrenia, now Pafos; Cyprus.

Re: CAN GCs AND TCs BE POLITICAL EQUALS?????????

Postby BirKibrisli » Sat Jun 07, 2008 3:12 am

karma wrote:
Kifeas wrote:
Bir, the last time I checked, it is the TCs that subscribe fervently (and they even have the kids in schools singing it, and paint it on posters, walls and mountains) to Ataturk's slogans that "one Turk equals the whole world," and "happy the one able to say he is a Turk!" :wink:

It is true that GCs have reservations to this notion of political equality, simply because the way the TCs seem to understand it is to work against the equality between each and every individual citizen (a more sacred right,) on the basis of their ethnic origin! The fact that one group is 4 times larger than the other, set aside the fact that the larger group has also a historical presence in Cyprus dating back since the beginnings of written history (or some 4,000 long,) while the other only about 400 years, is reason enough, alone and by itself, for the GCs to have reservations on this idea of political equality! If this shouldn’t have been of any concern, then why don't do the mainland Turks allow political equality of a similar nature to their Kurdish co-citizens, or the white Americans to their Afro-American co-citizens, etc? Why only the GCs to be the "unreasonable and racist odd ones out," and not every other single nation or country on this planet too, including the TC's mainland Turkish "brothers?" :wink:


U have already replied ur own question, if one Turk equals the whole world , 1 Turkish Cypriot should equal at least 4 Greek Cypriots :D


Thanks,Precious...This is the last thing we need,"logic of karma"... :wink: :lol:
User avatar
BirKibrisli
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 6162
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2005 4:28 pm
Location: Australia

Postby Get Real! » Sat Jun 07, 2008 3:39 am

Kifeas wrote:So, "Get Real," if I read you correctly, you are saying that the GC side accepted a BBF with political equality between the two communities, only because, as you imply in your post, it is just another one way to safely dominate the TCs –only with “increased bitterness and a progressive weakening of cooperation;” whereas, had we insisted in them accepting “a modern Democracy with minority protection rights backed by the EU,” this domination (since anyway it is a “law of nature” to happen due to one group being numerically “superior” to the other) would have emerged more smoothly; i.e. without the frictions entailed in the first type of "certain domination," that of BBF and political equality! In other words, as you make it sound, we didn’t even do them the “favor” of insisting that we must use the good old Vaseline! Now I see why the TCs insist on “virgin-birth” and “split sovereignties” on the basis of two ethnically based "co-founding" states, and with Turkey’s unilateral intervention "rights!" They do so simply because any other arrangement will -in one way or another- only bring about their "inevitable" domination by the GCs!

Listen “Get Real,” my friend, because the above theory also happens to be the same or similar to that being promoted by Denktash and the rest of the TC nationalists; I suggest it is about time you also start considering seeing a psychiatrist, because your schizophrenia is getting worst by the day, if not by the hour!

I’m simply saying that a BBF, which incidentally is not much different to the 1960 arrangement in conjunction with the withdrawal of TCs into enclaves, would NOT eventually work because it is a “community” arrangement doomed to fail because one group is far too small and would little by little give up and resort to unpredictable behavior as happened in the past, and in Lebanon according to the experts.

However, in a DEMOCRATIC system, whereby “communities” do NOT play any political role, the Turkish Cypriots would thrive as EQUAL CITIZENS among all the other ethnically diverse Cypriots and be happy while still being able to function as a community at the social/cultural level.
User avatar
Get Real!
Forum Addict
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 48333
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:25 am
Location: Nicosia

Re: CAN GCs AND TCs BE POLITICAL EQUALS?????????

Postby Piratis » Sat Jun 07, 2008 5:12 am

BirKibrisli wrote:Hasan HASTURER is a columnist with the daily trnc newspaper,KIBRIS...

From what I hear he is a very respected journalist...I came across one of his columns recently which I found interesting...I am not in agreement with everything he says neccessarily,but those who are curious about what is going on in more "liberal" TC minds at this crucial time should keep on reading...

Hasturer argues that Christofias is handicapped in the current negotiations because of a historically inherited "chronic" preconception regarding the TCs...He suggests that for hundreds of years now the GCs have considered the TCs to be inferior to themselves culturally,economically,socially and politically...

I quote selectively:


"...The GCs,who have been in Cyprus for far longer than us,have always been more motivated in influencing the fate and the future of Cyprus... This was especially evident during the British rule...Their demand was for Enosis before independence...The emerging TC leadership was never able to put forward a credible alternative....After the Lausanne agreement Cyprus became a foreign country for Turkey...Under the circumstances the TC policy became one of hanging onto the British skirts...This was far from being a principled stand...
Economically too we were unable to make our mark...we never learned to stand on our own two feet...Even during the Ottoman rule TCs had little to do with administration...Later on with Eoka, with the exception of Grivas,who was of Cypriot origins anyway,all the key positions were held by GCs...But the TMT was always run by colonels from the Turkish army...
Even in rural centres the commander was from Turkey...Over the years the TCs could never manage to become a distinct community,enough to demand political equality with the GCs...Hence the preconception that they were a lower class of people only fit to make "lokma" and "shamishi"...


What do you think???Is this the real reason why the GCs are finding it very hard to accept the TCs as their political equals????


For Turkish speakers the link is:
http://www.kibrisgazetesi.com/index.php/cat/1/col/80/art/8377/PageName/Ana_sayfa


Bir, I think my post here answers your questions:
http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.php?p=308177

The TCs were enticed by the British and the Turks with offers of huge gains on the loss of the rest of Cypriots. In their greedy bid to get 50% of power for their 18% minority they ended up submitting all of their power to Turkey.

What the TCs should seek is not 50% of power. This is something that does not belong to them and can be only achieved by force, and inevitably that power will be gained by the one who used the force to get it (Turkey) and not to TCs who will only act as the puppets.

What the TCs should seek is political equality as realized in all other democratic countries: Equality among citizens, which will translate to a proportional power share for the TC community, a fair power share which will truly belong to TCs and not to Turkey.
User avatar
Piratis
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 12261
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 11:08 pm

Postby Oracle » Sat Jun 07, 2008 7:11 am

Two options face us.

Option One:
Continue as communities knowing we both have "pasts" (incompatible ethnicity) which will forever be used (like religion was) to keep us chained, the chain being long enough to allow us, when fully extended, to shake outstretched hands but never to get close enough to hug.

Option Two:
Develop into Individuals adopting and practicing Human Rights and Democracy (replacing both religion and ethnicity). Only our personal chains under control from our free Will, allowed to rule how far we go.

We only managed to get half way last time. Functioning as a secular government where religion was not given any extra power (veto, disproportional strength etc) or recognition. But ethnicity/community was given this extra power and control to bring into the politics.

And that inherent communal-ethnic difference (D) in power and control was abused (by outsiders), because it is a variable and easily subject to manipulation and wielding.

The only quantifiable constant being the power and control an individual has.

BBF perpetuates Option One, allowing the existence/perpetuation of the unknown D (which can be picked up by the wrong hands anytime, to control and differentiate us).

Let's go the whole way with Option Two. Remove unknowns, variables, unquantifiable Ds. Then no outsiders can increase / decrease D (the length of the metaphorical chain) teasing us, like Tantalus to view the grapes but never manage to reach them.

Abolish both ethnicity* and religion* from entering politics. Get rid of the tool with which we were manipulated; communal ethnicity.

( * Protected for the individual free Will, within Human Rights anyway).

BTW .... Schizophrenics are more likely to choose option One, not Two! :wink:
User avatar
Oracle
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 23507
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 11:13 am
Location: Anywhere but...

Postby BirKibrisli » Sat Jun 07, 2008 7:25 am

Kifeas wrote:Bir, the last time I checked, it is the TCs that subscribe fervently (and they even have the kids in schools singing it, and paint it on posters, walls and mountains) to Ataturk's slogans that "one Turk equals the whole world," and "happy the one able to say he is a Turk!"

It is true that GCs have reservations to this notion of political equality, simply because the way the TCs seem to understand it is to work against the equality between each and every individual citizen (a more sacred right,) on the basis of their ethnic origin! The fact that one group is 4 times larger than the other, set aside the fact that the larger group has also a historical presence in Cyprus dating back since the beginnings of written history (or some 4,000 long,) while the other only about 400 years, is reason enough, alone and by itself, for the GCs to have reservations on this idea of political equality! If this shouldn’t have been of any concern, then why don't do the mainland Turks allow political equality of a similar nature to their Kurdish co-citizens, or the white Americans to their Afro-American co-citizens, etc? Why only the GCs to be the "unreasonable and racist odd ones out," and not every other single nation or country on this planet too, including the TC's mainland Turkish "brothers?"


So,dear Kifeas...How does it feel to know you will never be happy in life??? Since you will never be able to say "I am a Turk!" :wink: :)

I am trying to get my mind around the concept of "political equality" myself...It is such a vague concept...I guess the TCs mean equal political rights as a community now,because of the partnership status in the 1959 agreements...I found Hasturer's article interesting because the shoe was on the other foot for so long...for, as long as I remember it was the GCs who were inferior to the TCs,"gavours" and all that...I guess no one has the monopoly on chauvinism and bigotry....

The TCs seem to be willing Christofias on,knowing well perhaps that he is their best chance of achieving a compromise acceptable to the GCs....Yet they want to absolve him from any guilt if he fails to get over the line...We live in interesting times... :? :?
User avatar
BirKibrisli
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 6162
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2005 4:28 pm
Location: Australia

PreviousNext

Return to Cyprus Problem

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests