Cyprus-Forum.com

[Nikitas]

Copperline,

Obviously one must enter into negotiations with sincerity, but not without thinking of worst case scenarios. It would be naive to be falsely positive. My point is that good fences make good neighbors. What we have now in the situation between Greece and Turkey is one neighbor doubting the fences. To prevent that from happening in Cyprus we must define the fences very well from the start. The place is too small for that kind of game.

BBF is a form of partition. I have no doubts about that. So let us be realistic about it and minimise the possibilities of future fence doubting.

[Piratis]

Nikitas
I understand the concern with the 'what if' scenario (or the 'what stops the constituent state doing X' in the future). But isn't the basic problem that afflicts us is that we can't even get to an agreed first step, never mind what may happen so many steps down the road.

It is our duty to plan about the future. Those that can just look at the next step are shortsighted and are not able to plan a correct strategy.

What we have today is an illegal occupation which means:
1) Greek Cypriots have not signed away any of their rights in the occupied north.
2) Republic of Cyprus is the one and only recognized state in Cyprus.
3) Turkey and TCs suffer consequences from the illegality of occupation

The strategy of the the Turks is to legalize their occupation of north Cyprus and therefore suffer no consequences from it, while at the same time remove from Cypriots any power they have (e.g. their EU veto and the international representation)

The Turks want to achieve the above either directly with a partition "solution" (e.g. Annan plan), or indirectly with some other "solution" that they will be able to use as a stepping stone for partition in the near future.

Therefore the solution should be such that:
1) It doesn't give to the Turks the administration of any more than 18% of land
2) It is a true federation continuation of the RoC where the central goverment is above the component states and it is elected directly by Cypriots as a whole. Therefore the TCs will know that if they leave from this goverment (like the left in 1963) they will not get any kind of recognition or representation and they will back to square 1 but with less land than they illegally occupy today.

If it is anything worst than this, then it means it is not any better than what we have today and it also has a high risk of becoming way worst. Therefore our side should reject it.

[humanist]

Piratis I like the way you think

that is a very good point you have made above.

[alekcen]

The lack of reasonable arguments lead u to this way of thinking piratis. I think is time for u to grow up a bit. U should choose ur words more carefully, it shows a lot of immaturity from u, all this teenage talking.

Also i ask u something, do u live in Cyprus now????


Also read history, and dont be clueless!!!! U say that the lasT thing that was agreed was 1960s treaty!!! As i can see u write ur own history, and ur good at this propaganda. Learn about the 1977 agreements and the series of negotiations that followed. Who is the lier now???

Also political equality of community, that what i said before, but u keep closing ur eyes. U talk about 76% that said NO, but those people said no to a specific solution( that most of them had even read) and never said no to solution orm to BBF.

What exactly is going to stop the 'northern constituent state' from breaking away to form their own 'country' six months down the line? "

This is what the proponents of the Annan plan are not prepared to discuss. But more important is that we are not thinking of the consequences of such a development

U should know my friend nikitas that in the case that any of the constituent state tries to break up, then it looses its legitimacy and the other constituent state continues as the rightful and legal state that will represent the whole country.

The first thing that happens is that without the safety net of the RoC which gives us international legal personality we are fucked. Plain and simple.

Second thing is that the breakaway stetelet can then lay claim to anything it wants, like being the legtimate successor of the state in international bodies etc.

No, none of the above is true!!! Any state that will break away will automatically be consider ILLEGAL!!!!!!!! and the international community will recognise only the other state that didnt break the treaty.

[Nikitas]

Alek said:

"U should know my friend nikitas that in the case that any of the constituent state tries to break up, then it looses its legitimacy and the other constituent state continues as the rightful and legal state that will represent the whole country. "

Refer to the dissolution of the Serbia Montenegro federation. The crucial point is how OTHER nations treat the breaking away, and what recognition they grant. Once you officially accept BBF and each statelet has defined teritory, population and limited legal personality the rest is easy. I left out Kossovo becaue the situation was different. Montenegro is closer to what we are discussing.

In my opinion, provisions must be made for the possibility of such an event, so as to avoid an armed conflict and excuses to created tension. In any case, it might not be the TC statelet that decides it wants to break loose first , so let us not be too quick to judge! We are always talking hypothetically, naturally!

[boomerang]

U should know my friend nikitas that in the case that any of the constituent state tries to break up, then it looses its legitimacy and the other constituent state continues as the rightful and legal state that will represent the whole country.

You mean like what we got now, right?...the tcs care, but I don't think the turks give a shit...

[Piratis]

alekcen I respond to you in the same kind of tone you are talking to me.

What I say is all based on facts. The last thing that was agreed for Cyprus was the 1960 agreements. Any negotiations after 1974 entailed nothing that our side would be obligated to accept. "BBF" is a vague term and can mean whatever you want it to mean and there was never an agreement of what exactly means and the land distribution.

For the 1960 to change the Cypriot people should aprove the change in a referendum and we are not obligated to accept anything that we do not like. Until somehting that we like and therefore we accept is proposed and accepted, the agreements of 1960 remain the one and only legal thing for Cyprus.

No, none of the above is true!!! Any state that will break away will automatically be consider ILLEGAL!!!!!!!! and the international community will recognise only the other state that didnt break the treaty.

The constidution of Czechoslovakia also explicitly stated that it is illegal for the country to split. But it did. I am sure the same thing was written on the constidution of Yugoslavia and USSR. They broke up as well.

When you sign off your own lands so they are becoming officially Turkish, then what you have is already partition. Beyond that whether the Turks will want to stay in some loose association with us, or brake off completely it will be totally up to them and they will do what suits them the most.

I am guessing that they will initially stay in this loose association until they manage to milk us as much as possible and Turkey enters the EU. After that they will force the fragile system to collapse by refusing to cooperate and demanding too much for themselves.

However I can guarantee you that just a few years after a disguised partition is implemented, then Greek Cypriots will realize that such disguised partition is even worst than a "clean" partition, and we would be begging for it (since there would be no way to get back to where we are today). But of course at that point a "clean" partition would not suit the Turks and they wouldn't accept.

[Magnus]

Firstly, thank you to Nikitas for answering my question and bringing it to the fore of this debate.

I feel that Nikitas is absolutly correct in his assessment of what can occur if the 'northern constituent state' should break away. This is exactly what I had envisaged in my own mind, be it paranoid, nationalistic or whatever other label can be thrown at me.

I am sure we all agree that we want what is best not just for the Cyprus of today but for the Cyprus of the future. A temporary solution that is fine for now but creates greater problems in the near or far future is simply not acceptable, particularly if it will leave us in a worse situation than we are now.

As Piratis quite rightly states, we need to account for all eventualities. After all, we are the ones who have the most to lose. It would be most naive of us to think that we can concentrate on the smaller issues and let the rest sort itself out, and I feel that there are some very key facts we need to acknowledge:

Firstly, there is no guarantee that any breakaway state will be considered illegal by the international community, regardless of whatever contract clauses are in place. In a world where human rights are paramount, all it takes is the correct 'spin' and the breakaway state becomes 'an oppressed people seeking freedom'.

Add to this the fact that as soon as the northern state becomes legal, there will be an influx of foreign investment as firms seek to enter a new market. With these economic factors in place, other countries will be reluctant to withdraw their support in the event of a breakaway. We must all realise that the breakaway northern state will not be the same as the economically-limited 'TRNC' of today.

Secondly, it is surely clear to all of us that there are forces at work in the north that are determined not only to undermine any solution and maintain the status quo but also seek a union/alliance of sorts with Turkey. Let us be absolutely clear that these elements will never stop in their activities and that the people of the 'TRNC' are hardly averse or immune to their influence. For as long as these Turkish extremists exist, there will always be a threat to any system in the BBF mold which is simply too weak and open to exploitation, and the people whom we would expect to deal with them are the same ones who are under their control now. The lapdog is not going to turn on it's master for us.

Finally, it is a clear fact that our 'goodwill' has gotten us to the point where our enemies are making a mockery of us. The more we allow these people to take, the more they will demand. I understand the desire for a solution after so many years, but I feel we should not let that desire cloud our judgement and push us into making weak agreements with people we simply cannot trust.

[DT.]

If anyone requires proof of any of these scenarios happening then just remember how many times the turkish side has called itself a legitimate state due to the status that the Annan Plan had given it. Imagine if we actually signed that toilet paper what would have happened?

[Kikapu]

If anyone requires proof of any of these scenarios happening then just remember how many times the turkish side has called itself a legitimate state due to the status that the Annan Plan had given it. Imagine if we actually signed that toilet paper what would have happened?

NeoPartitionist and some GC's would have called it a solution.!!