The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content


provocations

How can we solve it? (keep it civilized)

provocations

Postby DT. » Sun Nov 30, 2008 8:08 pm

Cyprus president condemns Turkey oil `provocation'5 days ago

NICOSIA, Cyprus (AP) — Cyprus' president accused Turkey on Tuesday of naval "provocations" over the island's offshore oil-and-gas exploration bid.

Cypriot officials claim a Turkish warship on two separate occasions this month approached a pair of chartered Norwegian survey ships off southern Cyprus and ordered them to leave the area.

President Dimitris Christofias said his government will lodge protests with the United Nations and the European Union.

"We will defend the Cyprus Republic's sovereign rights with determination," Christofias said, shortly before a new round of peace talks with Turkish Cypriot leader Mehmet Ali Talat.

But Christofias said the alleged harassment would not harm the U.N.-supervised peace talks since Talat "has no authority or power" over Turkish naval actions.

Cyprus has been divided between a Greek Cypriot south — whose government is recognized internationally — and a Turkish-occupied north since 1974, when Turkey invaded in response to a failed Athens-backed coup of supporters of union with Greece.

Greek Cypriots began searching for oil and gas off southern Cyprus several years ago. The island has signed agreements with Lebanon and Egypt to mark the undersea boundaries for oil exploration. Cyprus also wants to auction drilling rights.

But Greek Cypriots have not tried to explore the waters off northern Cyprus, which are controlled by Turkey. Ankara has said it objects to Cyprus' offshore oil search anywhere in the area, where it says it also has legal rights and interests.

Turkey also insists that Turkish Cypriots should have a say in the entire island's oil-and-gas rights.

On Tuesday, Cyprus government spokesman Stefanos Stefanou said the alleged "provocations" by Turkey's navy occurred off the Mediterranean island's southern coast on Monday and Nov. 13.

Cyprus contracted the Norwegian ships to search for hydrocarbon deposits beneath the seabed inside the island's 70,000-square-kilometer (27,000-square-mile) exclusive economic zone.

Christofias and Talat restarted reunification talks in September after a four-year stalemate. U.N. Envoy Alexander Downer has said the talks will continue well into 2009.
Hosted by Copyright © 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
User avatar
DT.
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 12684
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 8:34 pm
Location: Lefkosia

Postby DT. » Mon Dec 01, 2008 12:05 pm

A clear message to Turkey. HANDS OFF THE ISLANDS NATURAL RESOURCES.

http://www.neurope.eu/articles/90872.php
User avatar
DT.
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 12684
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 8:34 pm
Location: Lefkosia

Postby Bananiot » Mon Dec 01, 2008 12:37 pm

Turkey contests plots 4, 5, 6 and 3. What really happened here? It depends on your prospective. It shouldn't be so. Let’s take a neutral person's view of the events.

Turkey perhaps engaged in this harassment of the Norwegian ship in order to cause the withdrawal of Christofias from the talks. On the other hand, we started looking for hydrocarbons in the plots which are contested because we wanted to expose Turkey to the world at a time when the chapter on energy is to be opened by the EU on the accession of Turkey. Was it, though, an inevitable side reaction because the Cyprob remains unsolved in the midst of financial war that is beginning to break out in the Mediterranean?

The above questions are asked by Makarios Droushiotis in Sunday's Politis newspaper. Can anyone be sure of what is the correct explanation of the events? I think that pointing at one direction all the time is cretin.
User avatar
Bananiot
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 6397
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 10:51 pm
Location: Nicosia

Postby Nikitas » Tue Dec 02, 2008 9:47 am

Turkey is trying to play this horse eachway as gamblers say. On one hand it insists that in Cyprus there are two nations and two peoples. But when it comes to the resources off the southern coast then it reminds us all that the TCs have a share in those resources.

Tell us Bananiot, oh wise one. Do you think that Turkey would insist that the GCs have a right to the resources off the northern coast?

The delimitation of the continental shelf was not done unilaterally by Cyprus, it was carried out n consultation with the UN. The point here is that Turkey does not recognise that islands, whether as part of another state or as independent entities, have their own continental shelf. Turkey regards the continental shelf as belonging only to continents and this view has been rejected by the ICJ in several cases, the most notable being the case between the UK and Norway.

In case you do not remember, the USA in a public statement by the State Department, has countered the Turkish assertions because the Americans are not ready to cede to Turkey the whole continental shelf of the eastern Mediterranean.

The British, through the provisions for the continental shelf they inserted in the Annan plan apparently share the American view.

Turkey is trying to gain via intimidation what it cannot gain by law. A way of doing things which is hardly new.
Nikitas
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 7420
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 2:49 pm

Postby Kifeas » Tue Dec 02, 2008 10:09 am

Bananiot wrote:Turkey contests plots 4, 5, 6 and 3. What really happened here? It depends on your prospective. It shouldn't be so. Let’s take a neutral person's view of the events.

Turkey perhaps engaged in this harassment of the Norwegian ship in order to cause the withdrawal of Christofias from the talks. On the other hand, we started looking for hydrocarbons in the plots which are contested because we wanted to expose Turkey to the world at a time when the chapter on energy is to be opened by the EU on the accession of Turkey. Was it, though, an inevitable side reaction because the Cyprob remains unsolved in the midst of financial war that is beginning to break out in the Mediterranean?

The above questions are asked by Makarios Droushiotis in Sunday's Politis newspaper. Can anyone be sure of what is the correct explanation of the events? I think that pointing at one direction all the time is cretin.


Bananiot, you say that Turkey "contests" plots 4, 5, 6 and 3, but you do not bother to mention whether you believe it rightfully does so, or not! What is your view on that? Do you have any idea how far those blocks are from Cyprus’s shores, and how far they are from Turkey's or any other country's ones?

Furthermore, you claim that Cyprus deliberately started searching for hydrocarbons now, because we want to expose Turkey due to the prospects of opening the EU energy chapter. First of all, why not doing that, since Turkey wrongfully contests those areas (plots!) Should we hide the problem and then let Turkey pass the test of the energy chapter, only to loose one of the most important leverages we have against her practices in Cyprus's continental shelf?

However, there is another question that needs to be answered. Do you think or believe that those Norwegian research vessels doing the exploration, are seating idle somewhere waiting for our call to tell them "now is your time to start, and now is your time to finish?" Of course not, since in order to use their services it requires an advance scheduling from many months before, and certainly it cannot be foreseen what the political climate or circumstance will be, at the time they are scheduled to do the assigned job.
User avatar
Kifeas
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 4927
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 10:19 am
Location: Lapithos, Kyrenia, now Pafos; Cyprus.

Postby Bananiot » Tue Dec 02, 2008 10:34 am

A proper state does not start anything unless it is capable of defending its actions. Otherwise it stands to be rediculed.

Why did we back down and asked the Norwegian ship to move to different plots? This is perhaps a question Kifeas needs to answer but if he wants a hint he can compare and contrast with the S300 missiles.

Image
User avatar
Bananiot
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 6397
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 10:51 pm
Location: Nicosia

Postby DT. » Tue Dec 02, 2008 10:57 am

Bananiot wrote:A proper state does not start anything unless it is capable of defending its actions. Otherwise it stands to be rediculed.

Why did we back down and asked the Norwegian ship to move to different plots? This is perhaps a question Kifeas needs to answer but if he wants a hint he can compare and contrast with the S300 missiles.

Image


Had you been president Bananiot, what actions would you have taken for the islands potential oil or gas reserves?
User avatar
DT.
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 12684
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 8:34 pm
Location: Lefkosia

Postby Bananiot » Tue Dec 02, 2008 11:04 am

Probably Christofias was executing plans drawn up by the previous government. Any sane government would avoid anything that could be considered provocative since we cannot show consistency with our actions.

Turkey has not signed the treety for the seas and she feels that she is not bound by an international agreement she did not sign. These problems will haunt us for ever as long as the Cyprob remains unsolved. What is the benefit of starting something which we cannot see it through? We only manage to ridicule ourself when we put our tail between our legs and run away.
User avatar
Bananiot
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 6397
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 10:51 pm
Location: Nicosia

Postby Kifeas » Tue Dec 02, 2008 11:04 am

Bananiot wrote:A proper state does not start anything unless it is capable of defending its actions. Otherwise it stands to be rediculed.

Why did we back down and asked the Norwegian ship to move to different plots? This is perhaps a question Kifeas needs to answer but if he wants a hint he can compare and contrast with the S300 missiles.

Image


This is nonsense Bananiot, because if that would have been the case, half of the countries producing oil or other minerals from within their economic zones or territories, should never have done so due to the fact that they all have more powerful neighbors!

As for changing the location of the research, we certainly did so, because the Norwegian vessel refused to continue without providing security to their crew. However, the point was made, and Turkey was exposed! There will be a time in the future, when we will be able to provide such security, when we decide to give a naval base to the French and perhaps another to the Russians, and some other privileges on the exploitation of whatever reserves are found in the area, on the condition that they will undertake the responsibility of patrolling and securing our economic zone. And then, we will see how willing Turkey will be to go on a war with either one of them!
User avatar
Kifeas
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 4927
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 10:19 am
Location: Lapithos, Kyrenia, now Pafos; Cyprus.

Postby Bananiot » Tue Dec 02, 2008 11:10 am

You are talking rubbish Kifeas. France and Russia need Turkey much more than we need them. However, this is a gem:

This is nonsense Bananiot, because if that would have been the case, half of the countries producing oil or other minerals from within their economic zones or territories, should never have done so due to the fact that they all have more powerful neighbors!


Serious states make sure they safeguard their interests first and then embarg on exploiting their natural wealth. You are calling Cyprus to make a stance now against EU and reach an agreement with Russia. This is the best prescription for total catastrophy of Cyprus. You must be mad!
Last edited by Bananiot on Tue Dec 02, 2008 11:10 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Bananiot
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 6397
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 10:51 pm
Location: Nicosia

Next

Return to Cyprus Problem

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests