Cyprus-Forum.com

[DT.]

Nikitas, are you saying that double union is okay, under the circumstances? Previously you said that you do not support double union but your incistence on this, albeit in an idirect way, in your last post, makes me wonder. Please clarify.

Regarding the stance of Talat I think it is to be expected. Christofias, prior to referendum in 2004, asked for a short postponement so that the details of the Annan plan could be properly explained to the people. On two occasions he spoke in favour of the plan and furthermore he called for some minor changes in order to accept it fully.

Before his round of negotiatiations with Talat he totally rejected the Plan and this, in my opinion, forced Talat to harden his stance. Talat did the right thing, from his point of view. Eventually he will most probably fall back to the Annan Plan, which the Turkish side accepted and no one will accuse him of being negative. Christofias in effect can only negotiate the Annan Plan and he probably knows this but he is held back by his nationalist partners who have daemonised the plan and made it synonymous to a dirty word.

Where does this leave us? Well, we are staring partition in the face and as Turkey is taking her seat in the G20 summit, some light headed people are calling for agreed partition while others who live in the clouds are calling for patience until the balance of power changes.

I see you've been watching your old mate Papapetrou debate (if you can call it that ) with Koutsou 2 nights ago...Your arguments are identical," if we propose anything outside of the annan plan then we will force talat to move away from the annan plan and present more extreme positions."

Why don't we just discuss the annan plan then?

Why does papapetrou not get that the Cypriot people have voted against that proposal? When they voted against it they voted for either the status quo or for something better, workable, fairer and more democratic.

Papapetrou should be warned that if the annan plan does get in through the back door and 10 years down the line the GC's begin reacting to the injustice of it...the blood will be on him and his supporters. You are leading the country with your ridiculous rhetoric like a cruise missile towards definite civil unrest between the communities in the future. Not all Cypriots are tree hugging, liberal global citizens. Some feel, pride and patriotism whether to Cyprus or to Hellenism. These people will react and they will convince the more moderates to react with them as well.

Once again get it in your heads, an unfair plan today will lead the hard done community to react later on.

[Bananiot]

I did not watch Papapetrou with that Koutsou (EOKA B) guy. Usually these tv talks are very late in the night and mostly I work or read at that time. Yet, if you go back you will find that I expressed the same views some time ago in another thread when the first "clouds" appeared in the Christofia-Talat negotiations. However, the fact that I share the same thoughts with Papapetrou is not a secret.

I think what many people cannot grasp is that the current situation cannot stay forever. A solution will be found or imposed on us in one way or another. This has been done in Kosovo and Cyprus will be no exception. The rivers of blood DT suggests seems to stem from another era, perhaps that of the late Enoch Powell. This is the stereotype approach to instill fear into people in order to block progress. When the next referendum comes around, DT, we will be playing in an even field. Do not forget this.

[DT.]

I did not watch Papapetrou with that Koutsou (EOKA B) guy. Usually these tv talks are very late in the night and mostly I work or read at that time. Yet, if you go back you will find that I expressed the same views some time ago in another thread when the first "clouds" appeared in the Christofia-Talat negotiations. However, the fact that I share the same thoughts with Papapetrou is not a secret.

I think what many people cannot grasp is that the current situation cannot stay forever. A solution will be found or imposed on us in one way or another. This has been done in Kosovo and Cyprus will be no exception. The rivers of blood DT suggests seems to stem from another era, perhaps that of the late Enoch Powell. This is the stereotype approach to instill fear into people in order to block progress. When the next referendum comes around, DT, we will be playing in an even field. Do not forget this.

I seem to recall your side warning about rivers of blood and the abyss at the last referendum. Lets not try to hide from the truth.

[Bananiot]

I predicted eventual partition had we voted "NO" and stick to my prediction. Can you not see where we are led to? Here, even people like Kifeas, have made their peace with partition.

[DT.]

I predicted eventual partition had we voted "NO" and stick to my prediction. Can you not see where we are led to? Here, even people like Kifeas, have made their peace with partition.

So you see no hope for the talks now.

[Bananiot]

No, I have not reached this conclusion yet. There is still hope for solution which will not be the solution Koutsou or Sillouris (or Denktash) dream of, for the reasons we have discussed thousands of times.

[DT.]

No, I have not reached this conclusion yet. There is still hope for solution which will not be the solution Koutsou or Sillouris (or Denktash) dream of, for the reasons we have discussed thousands of times.

so your dire predictions after the annan plan of death, destruction and partition are wrong. There is hope for a solution now.

[CBBB]

No, I have not reached this conclusion yet. There is still hope for solution which will not be the solution Koutsou or Sillouris (or Denktash) dream of, for the reasons we have discussed thousands of times.

so your dire predictions after the annan plan of death, destruction and partition are wrong. There is hope for a solution now.

But will a solution now be worse than that proposed by the Annan Plan?

[Bananiot]

death, destruction these are your words DT. I said Taiwanisation, partition with possible recognition.

Most probably CBBB, with the approval of the international community, as in 2004.

[Tim Drayton]

The Ottoman Turks invaded Cyprus to help Cypriots and punish their own people?

The Ottoman Empire had a long and complex history. It is perfectly possible to argue that there existed a very small Ottoman ruling class which exploited the rest of the population of the empire, including the ordinary Turkish people.

Of course the ruling elite would exploit everybody they can. Isn't this always the case? Even in democracies this can happen, let alone in monarchies.

Still, it is clear that when it came to ordinary people, the Ottomans favored their own. There was the Ottoman ruling elite at the top, the Muslim citizens after, and at the bottom the second category citizens, the Christians.

I am puzzled by the statement "the Ottomans favoured their own". Who were "their own"? The extent to which even the earliest Ottoman Sultans were pure-blooded Turks is debatable. As the years passed, and princesses from European royal families joined the harem to cement various tactical alliances, the Ottoman ruling lineage became more and more hybrid. Over the millenia, real power increasingly moved away from the throne to the vezirs and top layers of the bureaucracy behind the throne. These people had for the most part moved up through the ranks of the Janissaries, and as such were forcible converts to Islam who had their origins in the non-Muslim population of the empire. The Ottoman empire eventually engendered a small, inward-looking ruling elite that had nothing in common with the rest of the population. The only interests they were looking after were their own narrow self-interests.

The ideology of spreading Islam by conquest underpinned Ottoman imperialist expansion. In accordance with this ideology, the population was divided into the Muslim "millet-i hakime" (ruling people) and the non-Muslim "millet-i mahkume" (ruled people), and it is true that the former enjoyed privileges over the latter. However, all the Muslim inhabitants of the empire fell within this category. Indeed, there existed no concept of Turkishness or Turkish nationalism at that time. In fact, the Turks were the last people in the Ottoman empire to develop a national consciousness. Turkish-speaking Muslims were simply considered to be Muslim inhabitants of the empire along with Arab, Kurdish, Caucasian and other Muslims.

When the Ottoman Empire finally collapsed, Anatolia was the poorest and most backward part of the empire. Yet the Turkish speaking population was concentrated in this region. Surely this is proof enough that ordinary Turkish people did not enjoy any particular privileges in the empire.