Cyprus-Forum.com

[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?

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

It baffles me how the bananiots of this world (who i assume have good intentions) could not see this! And still the insist on committing the same mistakes now with a virgin birth scenario.

[humanist]

dito dudes


TC's cannot be trusted because they continually support the Turkish perspective. I think Christofias needs to be aware of this fact. But the good thing is that we will have to decide at the end.

[Nikitas]

Magnus said:

"Finally, it is a clear fact that our 'goodwill' has gotten us to the point where our enemies are making a mockery of us."

Well, in another topic there is a statement by a TC spokesman condemning the GC side for proceeding with oil exploration south of Cyprus and the reason quoted is that there is "joint sovereignty" of TCs, and that Turkey too has a right to these resources (assuming they exist) because of its proximity.

Turkey is already putting the territorial integrity of the future state in doubt. It is disputing the fences before they are even set up.

And the inevitable question is, if proximity grants rights over resources, is the reverse also true? Can Cyprus claim part of Turkey's undersea resources by citing proximity as a reason? Ok, it was a joke!

Now just remember what Gul, then foreign minister now president of Turkey had said right after the Annan plan was finalised at Burgenstok. "The TRNC would lose its sovereignty and the GCs would also lose their sovereignty". See how the concept of sovereignty becomes like a rubber band at the hands and minds of Turkey? Separate when it suits them, joint when it suits them. These are the people who will respect a future federation?

[Bananiot]

It baffles me how some people can make a stand behind big words (intentions do not matter, the end result counts only) but really it is quite simple to understand when history lessons are not heeded. The title of this topic says it all. Go for the desirable once again and forget Cyprus.

[humanist]

Bananiot, perhaps you are forgeting Cyprus. Cyprus is a very small Island and home to all Cypriots.

[DT.]

It baffles me how some people can make a stand behind big words (intentions do not matter, the end result counts only) but really it is quite simple to understand when history lessons are not heeded. The title of this topic says it all. Go for the desirable once again and forget Cyprus.

Explain bananiot, I'm really interested to find out where this confidence in the reliability and trustworthiness of Turkey is stemming from. Perhaps if you explain it to me then I might also throw caution to the wind and accept a plan with no safeguards.

[Piratis]

It baffles me how some people can make a stand behind big words (intentions do not matter, the end result counts only) but really it is quite simple to understand when history lessons are not heeded. The title of this topic says it all. Go for the desirable once again and forget Cyprus.

The one who is fooled by big words such as "unification" and "solution" is non else but you.

We see things in a very pragmatic way and look at the essence, and not the big empty words.

We are not going for the "desired" or the "maximum". The "maximum" could include union with Greece (if this is what we still wanted) and a Turkish minority in Cyprus which is not administrating any territory or has any representation guarantees or any other privilages, and has the status of the Greek or Kurdish minorities in Turkey.

What we are asking is the bare minimum and we are making a ton of compromises, for example that the TC minority can have some administrative power over some part of Cyprus within a (true and strong) federation, and that they can have quarantined (but proportional) representation and power.

We reject what you propose not because it is somehting good but not good enough, but because it is something even worst than what we have today. In many cases I tried to have a discussion with you on the essence of this issue, but having no arguments you resort to empty slogans.

So lets start by touching one of the issues:

For a federation kind of solution to result in a united Cyprus, the federal states should be Cypriot states (not Turkish or Greek) where in one state the majority will be TCs and in the other the majority GCs (and that should be the only difference between them) under a strong central goverment AND this central goverment should be elected democratically by the Cypriot people as a whole (possibly with some guarantees for proportional representation of TCs in it).

If what we will have is two separate states, one Greek and one Turkish, and without a democratically elected central Cypriot goverment with authority over them, then the result is partition. Labeling it as "unification" can only fool the fools who can not see the essence and just accept the labels that they are spoon fed.

[Magnus]

In addition to what Piratis has said, I would just like to add that in my opinion, the creation of two separate states along the lines of ethnicity (a 'Turkish state' and a 'Greek state') will only emphasise the divide rather than seal a union. Any future disputes would no longer be a territorial issue but an ethnic one, a situation that is far easier to exploit and manipulate. This would surely make a future breakaway or partition that much simpler.

Again this is a clear indication of what Turkey wants. Short term co-operation so that they can gain entry into the EU and have the (current) RoC help restore stability and legitimise their 'TRNC' colony followed by a complete break and return to an upgraded version of the current status quo with the benefits of EU membership for both Turkey and 'TRNC' and freedom from the handcuffs that are the 'Cyprus Problem'.

[Nikitas]

Precisely because Turkey may have plans for future complications, we should make sure that the territorial issue is settled in all aspects in any agreement we sign. The last thing we need is nonsense like the statements made re the continental shelf of the south and the search and rescue idiocies of the Annan plan. If they break away in the future then they must know exactly what they will take with them.

In fact it is a good idea to define as of now that each component state has its own territory, after all we are talking bizonal federation, and no one but the component state is the sole owner and manager of that territory and that the word territory covers land, sea and air as well as Exclusive Economic Zone and continental shelf.

You wait and see that they will demand to share in the continental shelf of the south on all sorts of pretexts. We must not let that happen under any circumstances. If we do then we are traitors of the worst kind. They cannot stomach that the law of the sea works in favor of the south, and they will demand all kinds of concessions. But ofcourse they will not offer any concessions in the north's continental shelf.

This oil thing is a great coincidence, so that people like Bananiot can see what we are dealing with.

[alekcen]

Nikitas , on the previous subject about a constituent breaking up from the federal state, let me remind you that we are in the EU, and i set the question if u have seen many EU countries break apart????? Cant u understand that EU provides political security, integrity and can ensure many things about a country.

Lets wait first for the negotiations to start, so we can debate with more meaning than all this random talking.

Also piratis, we agreed on previous negotiations and especially on 1977 with Bishop Makarios and Dektas they both agreed ABOUT BBF!!!!!!!
Its been agreed and all the following leaderships should continue their comitment on whats being agreed. Thats how politics works.

Also many here are talking about BBF bringing partition. Have they ever heard of the plans of junta ( greece) and grivas with cooperation with turkey of double Union??? That most of the politcs back then never wanted Cyprus as independent but they were willing to sacrifice half of Cyprus inorder to achieve double Union.