Cyprus-Forum.com

[Kifeas]

What will it change? Can you take back Maraş with EU resolutions? dont oyu have to get us to agree as well?

VP, live the slogans and the rest of the crap aside, and tell us what the Turkish and TC positions on the solution of the Cyprus issue are, because we can't figure them out. Are they (Turkish positions) those claimed by your Turkish elected leaders in the EU and other international fora, namely that they support a solution on the basis of the UN resolutions and within the UN framework, which call for “one State of Cyprus with a single sovereignty and international personality and a single citizenship;” or those claimed in Turkey and in the occupied north, among the Turkish and the TC societies, namely that the solution must be one based on "two sovereignties, two peoples, two democracies, two religions, and a shared overarching state based on two separate states?" Do you know, so that we also get to know, or you don’t?

Our elected leader talks for us, so you better listen to what he has to say, the UN calls for a BBF with political equality of the 2 sides.

Of course, with “two sides,” the UN means the two communities, and I already explained what this "political equality" means, or as the UN defined it. However, the UN says that this political equality of the two communities (sides) must be within the framework of ONE nation-state, ONE sovereignty, ONE citizenship and ONE international personality, in the form of a FEDERAL nation state with two zones on the territorial design, and two politically equal communities in the constitutional design! That is a hell different from what you (your side) strives for, despite what it misleadingly claims to the outside world, to be in support of a solution within the UN framework.

The core of what constitutes the UN "framework," is all the UN resolutions on Cyprus since 1974, and the UN Charter, and you better learn what exactly do they say or contain! When you do so, you will also discover what we discovered already, namely that the Annan plan had fallen short of been within the letter and the spirit of these UN resolutions, and this is also the reason why Kofi Annan had chosen not to summit his report on the outcome his failed plan, to be formally adopted by the UN SC, for it would have prompted the RoC to open a debate within the SC on the fact that his proposed plan was short and outside the very resolutions on Cyprus and the UN Charter as a whole, to which Kofi Annan, as the UN SG, was supposed to the prime guardian! Such a move by Kofi Annan would have given the RoC the chance to expose kofi Annan for the way his drafted his plan, something which would not have been a very good thing at all to his reputation, impartiality and commitment to the resolutions of the organisation of which he was the head.

[Oracle]

Does the EU not have precedence to sort its territorial affairs above and before the power of the UN can be relied upon for support.

In other words shouldn't the hierarchy of decision making for a satisfactory solution rest in this order:

Cyprus first .... EU second ... UN third.

[Viewpoint]

What will it change? Can you take back Maraş with EU resolutions? dont oyu have to get us to agree as well?

VP, live the slogans and the rest of the crap aside, and tell us what the Turkish and TC positions on the solution of the Cyprus issue are, because we can't figure them out. Are they (Turkish positions) those claimed by your Turkish elected leaders in the EU and other international fora, namely that they support a solution on the basis of the UN resolutions and within the UN framework, which call for “one State of Cyprus with a single sovereignty and international personality and a single citizenship;” or those claimed in Turkey and in the occupied north, among the Turkish and the TC societies, namely that the solution must be one based on "two sovereignties, two peoples, two democracies, two religions, and a shared overarching state based on two separate states?" Do you know, so that we also get to know, or you don’t?

Our elected leader talks for us, so you better listen to what he has to say, the UN calls for a BBF with political equality of the 2 sides.

Of course, with “two sides,” the UN means the two communities, and I already explained what this "political equality" means, or as the UN defined it. However, the UN says that this political equality of the two communities (sides) must be within the framework of ONE nation-state, ONE sovereignty, ONE citizenship and ONE international personality, in the form of a FEDERAL nation state with two zones on the territorial design, and two politically equal communities in the constitutional design! That is a hell different from what you (your side) strives for, despite what it misleadingly claims to the outside world, to be in support of a solution within the UN framework.

The core of what constitutes the UN "framework," is all the UN resolutions on Cyprus since 1974, and the UN Charter, and you better learn what exactly do they say or contain! When you do so, you will also discover what we discovered already, namely that the Annan plan had fallen short of been within the letter and the spirit of these UN resolutions, and this is also the reason why Kofi Annan had chosen not to summit his report on the outcome his failed plan, to be formally adopted by the UN SC, for it would have prompted the RoC to open a debate within the SC on the fact that his proposed plan was short and outside the very resolutions on Cyprus and the UN Charter as a whole, to which Kofi Annan, as the UN SG, was supposed to the prime guardian! Such a move by Kofi Annan would have given the RoC the chance to expose kofi Annan for the way his drafted his plan, something which would not have been a very good thing at all to his reputation, impartiality and commitment to the resolutions of the organisation of which he was the head.

As long as we have our own side to administer where TCs will always be the majority and safeguards to ensure you stick to the signed agreements and political equality allowing us to say no as put forward by yourself then the rest are details.

[Kifeas]

Does the EU not have precedence to sort its territorial affairs above and before the power of the UN can be relied upon for support.

In other words shouldn't the hierarchy of decision making for a satisfactory solution rest in this order:

Cyprus first .... EU second ... UN third.

Strictly speaking, it (the EU) does have a role and the legal right to do so, after 2004; however, because the Turks claim that the EU cannot be an impartial platform due to the fact that the RoC is now a full member and they are not, we have no objection using the UN platform to solve the issue, since they also say they accept this framework. Of course, the EU must and is watching the positions and claims of the two sides, and at some stage it will finally be left with no choice than to also demand to play its legally founded role, as soon as they become fully convinced of what the Turks are all about in their aims in and with Cyprus. Right now, they (EU) choose to allow themselves to be "mislead" by the Turkish rhetoric, only because they are afraid of the "hustle" involved with a more direct involvement.

[Oracle]

Does the EU not have precedence to sort its territorial affairs above and before the power of the UN can be relied upon for support.

In other words shouldn't the hierarchy of decision making for a satisfactory solution rest in this order:

Cyprus first .... EU second ... UN third.

Strictly speaking, it (the EU) does have a role and the legal right to do so, after 2004; however, because the Turks claim that the EU cannot be an impartial platform due to the fact that the RoC is now a full member and they are not, we have no objection using the UN platform to solve the issue, since they also say they accept this framework. Of course, the EU must and is watching the positions and claims of the two sides, and at some stage it will finally be left with no choice than to also demand to play its legally founded role, as soon as they become fully convinced of what the Turks are all about in their aims in and with Cyprus. Right now, they (EU) choose to allow themselves to be "mislead" by the Turkish rhetoric, only because they are afraid of the "hustle" involved with a more direct involvement.

Kifeas thank you for the clarification ... but I do not buy the argument that Turkey considers the EU non-impartial and that is a reason to by-pass it.

Nor that we should accept EU doing anything less than its duty. We are worth fighting for.

EU is an integral (component /constituent ) part of Cyprus now, like it or not ... indeed the two are as one in this capacity. If Cyprus had a dispute with Egypt will Egypt be allowed to say it does not want to deal with the EU to hear support of Cyprus because it too is not an EU member ... what nonsense!

And whilst Turkey is a country of some 80M against a country of otherwise 800,000 ... then Cyprus-EU is the only fair way to negotiate to minimize the "might is right" in favour currently of Turkey.

The UN can preside over Cyprus-EU and Turkey, as an arbitrator, by all means, but no more.

But I do not think Turkey should be allowed to continue its divide and rule policies to the Nth degree, and practice them here once again by splitting and isolating its victim Cyprus, from its rightful integral constituent component whole ... the EU.

[Viewpoint]

Does the EU not have precedence to sort its territorial affairs above and before the power of the UN can be relied upon for support.

In other words shouldn't the hierarchy of decision making for a satisfactory solution rest in this order:

Cyprus first .... EU second ... UN third.

Strictly speaking, it (the EU) does have a role and the legal right to do so, after 2004; however, because the Turks claim that the EU cannot be an impartial platform due to the fact that the RoC is now a full member and they are not, we have no objection using the UN platform to solve the issue, since they also say they accept this framework. Of course, the EU must and is watching the positions and claims of the two sides, and at some stage it will finally be left with no choice than to also demand to play its legally founded role, as soon as they become fully convinced of what the Turks are all about in their aims in and with Cyprus. Right now, they (EU) choose to allow themselves to be "mislead" by the Turkish rhetoric, only because they are afraid of the "hustle" involved with a more direct involvement.

Kifeas thank you for the clarification ... but I do not buy the argument that Turkey considers the EU non-impartial and that is a reason to by-pass it.

Nor that we should accept EU doing anything less than its duty. We are worth fighting for.

EU is an integral (component /constituent ) part of Cyprus now, like it or not ... indeed the two are as one in this capacity. If Cyprus had a dispute with Egypt will Egypt be allowed to say it does not want to deal with the EU to hear support of Cyprus because it too is not an EU member ... what nonsense!

And whilst Turkey is a country of some 80M against a country of otherwise 800,000 ... then Cyprus-EU is the only fair way to negotiate to minimize the "might is right" in favour currently of Turkey.

The UN can preside over Cyprus-EU and Turkey, as an arbitrator, by all means, but no more.

But I do not think Turkey should be allowed to continue its divide and rule policies to the Nth degree, and practice them here once again by splitting and isolating its victim Cyprus, from its rightful integral constituent component whole ... the EU.

No one seems to care enough to run to your aid, its been 34 years and an EU membership and still nothing, surely you must realize that unless you agree a solution with us you will get nowhere.

[RichardB]

Does the EU not have precedence to sort its territorial affairs above and before the power of the UN can be relied upon for support.

In other words shouldn't the hierarchy of decision making for a satisfactory solution rest in this order:

Cyprus first .... EU second ... UN third.

The below is from the ABHABER website (the mouthpiece of Turkey at the EU)

UNSC Resolutions have also indicated. The United Nations is looking towards the European Union for a more active diplomatic effort backed up by its economic strength. A Bi-zonal, Bi-communal Federation with freedom of movement and respect for the acquis communautaire is still possible, and this will allow for Famagusta and Varosha to be developed, and it is wanted by the majority according to all opinion polls. There is nevertheless a danger that time is running out. This is because of the fact that that on both sides of the island, people are forgetting how to live together and speak each other's language. Generations are growing up and many of those who remember Cyprus before 1974 have already passed away. Therefore the situation is urgent and it is critical. (Draft) Recommendations: • UNSC Resolution 550(1984) must be respected, and implemented without further delay by all parties and, with regard to the petitioners' concerns, the institutions of the European Union must actively support and promote a solution which leads to the full restoration of property to its legitimate owners in Varosha. • Turkey must withdraw its occupation military forces from the Republic of Cyprus, an EU territory, starting with the return of the Famagusta sealed-off section to its lawful inhabitants in compliance with the above resolution. • The Slovenian and the French Presidencies of the EU must give their support so that this issue is resolved by the end of 2008, and the European Parliament is urged in this context to give full backing to this objective. • If there are no visible results by the end of the year, the PETI Committee could re-examine the current state of play and reflect on further actions I.E. possibility of bringing the issue of the Famagusta petitioners to plenary. YASAL UYARI:KAYNAK GÖSTERİLMEDEN YAYIMLANAMAZ

Which would appear to confirm both Kifeas and Oracles view on the hierarchy and that both the EU and UN are insisting on this What gives with Turkey that it thinks the whole world is wrong and they are right

[RichardB]

vp

No one seems to care enough to run to your aid, its been 34 years and an EU membership and still nothing, surely you must realize that unless you agree a solution with us you will get nowhere.

But people are now running and voices are being heard all over the world in civilized societies and the time for the Turks is running too-Running out

[Viewpoint]

vp

No one seems to care enough to run to your aid, its been 34 years and an EU membership and still nothing, surely you must realize that unless you agree a solution with us you will get nowhere.

But people are now running and voices are being heard all over the world in civilized societies and the time for the Turks is running too-Running out

Where? when? what has it gotten you?

[pantheman]

No one seems to care enough to run to your aid, its been 34 years and an EU membership and still nothing, surely you must realize that unless you agree a solution with us you will get nowhere.

Yes VP, just keep believing this rubbish, the tide has surely turned in favour of cyprus now. It just a matter of time and you will get whats coming.

In the same source as the clip I posted above, even your champions the UK government, the select committee have finally conceeded that with a divided cyprus Turkeys chances of joining the EU are zero.

We are gathering strength day by day, you think that armies are all that counts, I think money and economy will do just the job on you. I can't wait, it has been a long time coming.

Yes epople do care enough now, it just that it takes time to put things into motion, cyprus WILL be free from foreign troops and scumbags like you very soon, the EU will see to that, after all whats the point of joining