Cyprus-Forum.com

[Paphitis]

The challenge was only to you GR, and the topic is simple: Why do you think I am wrong in my stance of supporting the Turkish Cypriots right of self-determination? No threats, no bluster, no nationalist rhetoric. Just a dispassionate dissertation on why you think I am wrong.

Does you stance also apply to the NZ Maories, Australian Aboriginals, North American Red Indians and Turkish Kurds?

If not, then you are a hypocrite!

Pathitis, I support the inalienable right to self-determination. That includes Aborigines, Kurds, and of course the Maori.

So you would support the Kurds carving up a good piece of Turkey to form their own nation?

In any respect, the Cyprus Problem is not about the TCs wanting self determination, as this is exactly what they would have under a unified Cyprus, and is something they do not have today under the rule and servitude of the Turkish Army.

The Security Issue is the main focal point for TCs in the Cyprus Issue. Unfortunately, you even fail to grasp the basic fundamentals of the Cyprus Problem.

You should instead focus more on trivial matters such as Australians cheating in sport.

Paphitis, i think you need to stop assuming you know what TC's want. Do you really believe that TC's main issue is security with the Turkey's armed forces being so big? Even if Turkey were to withdraw all its forces from cyprus, they could be back in cyprus in under 1 hour. TC's have lived under a GC government in the past and it didnt work, under a unified cyprus they again become a minority, this is what they dont want, they want to run their own country.

Big Al,

Unfortunately I think you are out of touch with the facts in Cyprus.

The majority of TCs actually want a solution and do not want their own seperate nation. The Annan Plan referendum proved this. The current momentum in negotiations again proves this. There are other factors as well, of which I am unable to mention.

The issue is finding the right formula for a solution that is acceptable to both communities. This is the challenge.

The main stumbling blocks to a solution are the Guarantor Treaties (Security Issue), property rights and power sharing.

Power sharing, you said it, the solution the GC's want is with a strong central government, whereas the TC's want to run their own affairs, this is where the negotiations will go to shit. Guarantor powers and property issues can be sorted, power sharing cant be.

It is inconceivable that the GCs will accept anything that deviates from True Democracy based on equal political representation and power. And nor should we be expected to.

The way I define power sharing is to guarantee the TCs fair and proportional representation in parliament. And perhaps veto rights on issues that effect them only. Nothing more.

Anything other than this could lead to constitutional mayhem.

[Big Al]

Try and think of it from a TC's perspective, what you want is basically to govern the island and allow the TC some "proportionate representation", considering they will be heavy outnumbered by GC's how do you thik TC's feel about this?
A TC's choice is, either allow yourself to be governed by GC's (as they are the majority) or maintain the status quo where you attend elections in a TC state, vote for TC's representatives and have a TC president. At this point you will say that Turkey is pulling the strings which i dont agree with but lets just say that isthe case for arguments sake, its still better than being a minority in a GC state where GC's are pulling the strings. The only advantage for TC's under a unified cyprus is the financial benefits but if they can think more strategically, they can have both a their own state and the financial benefits in the future IF THEY DO THINGS RIGHT.

[Expatkiwi]

Paphitis,

I do support an independent Kurdistan. Such a country would of course include parts of present-day Turkey, Iraq, and Iran. The thing you should know about me is that I beleive in certain inalieanable rights for humanity, and the right of self-determination is one of them. Inalienable means I can't be selective. To say otherwise is indeed hypocritical.

Anyway, I've asked GR to present a rational argument as to why this right should not be extended to the Turkish Cypriot people. If you of course have something to add on this issue that I need to look carefully at - in other words, what you think I have not taken into account before making my stance - I would like to read it.

[Paphitis]

Try and think of it from a TC's perspective, what you want is basically to govern the island and allow the TC some "proportionate representation", considering they will be heavy outnumbered by GC's how do you thik TC's feel about this?
A TC's choice is, either allow yourself to be governed by GC's (as they are the majority) or maintain the status quo where you attend elections in a TC state, vote for TC's representatives and have a TC president. At this point you will say that Turkey is pulling the strings which i dont agree with but lets just say that isthe case for arguments sake, its still better than being a minority in a GC state where GC's are pulling the strings. The only advantage for TC's under a unified cyprus is the financial benefits but if they can think more strategically, they can have both a their own state and the financial benefits in the future IF THEY DO THINGS RIGHT.

This is wrong Big Al.

What you are asking for is for your own Turkified statelet on ethnically cleansed land. You want 100% control of your little statelet + an additional 50% of power in the BBF.

Where is the fairness in that?

[Paphitis]

Paphitis,

I do support an independent Kurdistan. Such a country would of course include parts of present-day Turkey, Iraq, and Iran. The thing you should know about me is that I beleive in certain inalieanable rights for humanity, and the right of self-determination is one of them. Inalienable means I can't be selective. To say otherwise is indeed hypocritical.

Anyway, I've asked GR to present a rational argument as to why this right should not be extended to the Turkish Cypriot people. If you of course have something to add on this issue that I need to look carefully at - in other words, what you think I have not taken into account before making my stance - I would like to read it.

Cyprus as a whole is a sovereign nation, fully recognised by the UN and a member of the EU. There is absolutely no chance the GCs are going to surrender any part of the island.

The TCs have no right to be asking for self determination on stolen and ethnically cleansed territory which does not belong to them.

[DT.]

Paphitis,

I do support an independent Kurdistan. Such a country would of course include parts of present-day Turkey, Iraq, and Iran. The thing you should know about me is that I beleive in certain inalieanable rights for humanity, and the right of self-determination is one of them. Inalienable means I can't be selective. To say otherwise is indeed hypocritical.

Anyway, I've asked GR to present a rational argument as to why this right should not be extended to the Turkish Cypriot people. If you of course have something to add on this issue that I need to look carefully at - in other words, what you think I have not taken into account before making my stance - I would like to read it.

The difference being expat that the Kurds have resided in that part of the world for centuries. That territory has always been inhabited by Kurds regardless of the political boundaries of the states.

Whereas the TC's have never inhabited the northern part of the island, they have been scattered all over the island making their claim on any particular piece of the island impossible to comprehend for anyone else. Why should Kyrenia who has been a Greek town for 1000's of years now have to be Turkish because some army landed on it 34 years ago?

[Get Real!]

The challenge was only to you GR, and the topic is simple: Why do you think I am wrong in my stance of supporting the Turkish Cypriots right of self-determination? No threats, no bluster, no nationalist rhetoric. Just a dispassionate dissertation on why you think I am wrong.

Expatkiwi, you still haven't answered the question...

Being the "fair dinkum" Kiwi you claim to be, why are you not campaigning for a sovereign state in New Zealand for the bullied indigenous Maoris?

[Expatkiwi]

Being the "fair dinkum" Kiwi you claim to be, why are you not campaigning for a sovereign state in New Zealand for the bullied indigenous Maoris?

GR... first, 'fair dinkum' is Aussie slang, not Kiwi. Second, the reason why I am not campaigning on a Maori sovereign state in New Zealand is that there is no popular movement amongst the Maori for it! Their campaigning is for the 1840 Treaty of Waitangi to be properly honored (barring the crown pre-emption clause). TOW does need to be honored in its entirity. I fully support those efforts.

Now, please answer MY question: are you going to accept my challenge to you to present to me in a rational and non-convoluted manner your argument that I am wrong to side with the Turkish Cypriot postion and for recognition of the TRNC? I base my support on the following positions:

1. The intercommunal violence sparked when President Marakios attempted to ammend the 1960 constitution, resulting in the political and economic marginalization of the Turkish Cypriot minority.

2. The Greek-backed coup d'etat of 1974, which had the goal of enosis with Greece, and the removal of the Turkish Cypriot presence on the island.

3. The inalienable right of self-determination - demonstrated with the precedents of countries such as Bangladesh - which resulted in the TRNC's UDI of 1983.

I await your response.

[Nikitas]

Expat,

You show me how the TCs can exercise their self determination without stealing my land and extinguising my patrimony and they can do what the hell they please.

If they have this "inalienable right" presumably so do I. The trick in Cyprus, in case you have nor realised it yet, is that two choices are mutually exclusive because they are conflicting- they are union with another country and partition. You obviously have never been to Cyprus, if you had you would know why these two choices cannot be the way out.

Denktash agreed a long time ago, formally and in writing, that there should be no separate exercise of the right of self determination by the two communities. You think you know more about Cyprus than he does?

And why dont you start with Kurdistan, where you will be benefiting 28 million people, therefore that case being more urgent than the 120 000 TCs, and when we see how that goes then we can proceed accordingly.

[Nikitas]

"2. The Greek-backed coup d'etat of 1974, which had the goal of enosis with Greece, and the removal of the Turkish Cypriot presence on the island."

Fundamental flaw in your premise Kiwi. The coup in 1974 had nothing whatsoever to do with Enosis. It had plenty to do with removing Makarios and double union. Do your research tapping other reliable sources. The first thing the coupists did was to formally exclude union with Greece in their primary statement. You obviously know nothing of the background to this issue. Leave it alone mate.