Cyprus-Forum.com

[erolz3]

Therefore your argument that just because you belong to a different ethnic group that gives to you some special rights, doesn't hold water.

My argument is plain and simple and based on the establishment of the right to self determination of peoples a concept that emerged and became enshrined in 'international law' as colonialism ended. In every encoding of these rights they are ascribed to 'peoples', never to countries, never to governments and never to ethnicities.

When GC in cyprus said we are part of the Greek people, by defnintion they then made TC in cyprus part of some 'other' people. As a seperate people their right to self determination as such is equal to any other peoples rights to self determination. No more and no less.

If that was the case then those special rights would be held by the Greeks of Turkey, the Muslims of Greece and Bulgaria and every other ethnic minority in every other country.

That in nations that were formed BEFORE the formal codification of the rights of peoples to self determination were enshrined in international law display aspects that are at odds with these rights is neither surpising nor is it an excuse to say well they have been ignored or undermined elsewhere in states that were formed before they existed so we must ignore them now.

I understand that you will never accept that we have or had these rights, no matter how plain and obvious it is that we did and do, just as I understand how much such a perspective has been instrumental in leading us to where we are today in cyprus and how today they still remain a massive obstacle to finding an agreed resolution.

[Piratis]

Therefore your argument that just because you belong to a different ethnic group that gives to you some special rights, doesn't hold water.

My argument is plain and simple and based on the establishment of the right to self determination of peoples a concept that emerged and became enshrined in 'international law' as colonialism ended. In every encoding of these rights they are ascribed to 'peoples', never to countries, never to governments and never to ethnicities.

When GC in cyprus said we are part of the Greek people, by defnintion they then made TC in cyprus part of some 'other' people. As a seperate people their right to self determination as such is equal to any other peoples rights to self determination. No more and no less.

If that was the case then those special rights would be held by the Greeks of Turkey, the Muslims of Greece and Bulgaria and every other ethnic minority in every other country.

That in nations that were formed BEFORE the formal codification of the rights of peoples to self determination were enshrined in international law display aspects that are at odds with these rights is neither surpising nor is it an excuse to say well they have been ignored or undermined elsewhere in states that were formed before they existed so we must ignore them now.

I understand that you will never accept that we have or had these rights, no matter how plain and obvious it is that we did and do, just as I understand how much such a perspective has been instrumental in leading us to where we are today in cyprus and how today they still remain a massive obstacle to finding an agreed resolution.

My friend, the rights of people for self-determination were given for people like us, who have been enslaved under foreign empires for centuries. They were not given for the minorities created by those Imperialists on the lands they occupied with their empires!

Even in the most newly formed countries what you say is not the case. Like for example the states created after the collapse of the USSR. E.g. in Latvia the Russians are the 38% and still the Russian minority doesn't get anywhere near the powers and privileges you demand in Cyprus. In Estonia the Russians are the 30% and in Ukraine the 24%. These new states are also all wrong, together with all the older states, and the only ones who got it right are the British and the Turks, with the constitution they imposed on the Cypriots? (but they got it wrong for their own countries, since the Turks give none of the rights they demand for the TCs in Cyprus to their own minorities in Turkey)

What you say could be the case only if the different ethnic groups inhabit different territories, not when they are mixed together like we were, or maybe when non of the ethnic groups is the clear majority, as we are in Cyprus. And this has nothing to do with the time the country was formed.

[erolz3]

E.g. in Latvia the Russians are the 38% and still the Russian minority doesn't get anywhere near the powers and privileges you demand in Cyprus.

Because Lativa formed a nation state in the name of a Latvian people that included those lativans of russian ethnicity. It did not try an annex lativa to an existing state that expliclty exlcuded those living in latvia of russian ethnicity.

If those living in Latvia who were not of russina ethnicity had said, there is no such thing as a latvian people or a latvian state, there are just 'indignous' people of lativa who are german (to pick a nation at random) and some others who are remnants of a foreign colonial power and that in the name of a single unitary lativain people we say does not exist we are going to make all those now living in latvia part of germany and the german nation then I think you would find that the idea that those living in lativa who were most cerrtainly NOT german may well have had a valid claim to be of a sperate people, with a seperate right to self determination from the german latvians.

This is what you seem unable or more realisticly unwilling to accept.

It was Enosis that made us a seperate people. This is why I say that TC have a sperate right to self determination AS FAR AS GC DEFINE THEMSELVES AND ACT AS GREEK AND NOT CYPRIOT. That is what makes Cyprus different.

What you say could be the case only if the different ethnic groups inhabit different territories, not when they are mixed together like we were, or maybe when non of the ethnic groups is the clear majority, as we are in Cyprus. And this has nothing to do with the time the country was formed.

Once more the existance of our rights as a sperate people to GC choosing and acting as part of ther Greek people is not dependant on if we are 'spread out' or not. This may affect what MEANS can be used to express the right but not that the right exists.

The existance of our right to sperate self determination IS dependant on if you choose to define and act as a people 'other' than us or as a people that INCLUDES us.

It really is all very simple at that level.

[Pyrpolizer]

When GC in cyprus said we are part of the Greek people, by defnintion they then made TC in cyprus part of some 'other' people. As a seperate people their right to self determination as such is equal to any other peoples rights to self determination. No more and no less.

All this theory actually summarizes in 2 words: Minority rights.

Piratis is trying to tell you you did not simply get minority rights but rights far far beyond that. The British reduced the 82% majority to the status of "community" just to equalize it with another "community" of 18%!!
It wasn't the divine need (as you portray it) to guard the TC self determination rights which under the circumstances defaulted to mere minority rights. It was either a)what Piratis said as reward for your past collaboration with them, or b) to sow the seeds of divide and rule and future partition or c) both of them.

Either a, or b, or c, it was nothing but a HOSTILE AND UNFAIR ACT against the GCs.

[boulio]

Because Lativa formed a nation state in the name of a Latvian people that included those lativans of russian ethnicity. It did not try an annex lativa to an existing state that expliclty exlcuded those living in latvia of russian ethnicity.

but either did makarios erolz,at least after 1967 when the junta came to power.the coup was agaianst makarios and in some way the t/c and g/c of the island.so in 1967-1974 what did the t/c do for there nation state of cyprus?

[Viewpoint]

When GC in cyprus said we are part of the Greek people, by defnintion they then made TC in cyprus part of some 'other' people. As a seperate people their right to self determination as such is equal to any other peoples rights to self determination. No more and no less.

All this theory actually summarizes in 2 words: Minority rights.

Piratis is trying to tell you you did not simply get minority rights but rights far far beyond that. The British reduced the 82% majority to the status of "community" just to equalize it with another "community" of 18%!!
It wasn't the divine need (as you portray it) to guard the TC self determination rights which under the circumstances defaulted to mere minority rights. It was either a)what Piratis said as reward for your past collaboration with them, or b) to sow the seeds of divide and rule and future partition or c) both of them.

Either a, or b, or c, it was nothing but a HOSTILE AND UNFAIR ACT against the GCs.

Would this be the same for those "minorities" in Switzerland or Belgium?

[Pyrpolizer]

E.g. in Latvia the Russians are the 38% and still the Russian minority doesn't get anywhere near the powers and privileges you demand in Cyprus.

Because Lativa formed a nation state in the name of a Latvian people that included those lativans of russian ethnicity. It did not try an annex lativa to an existing state that expliclty exlcuded those living in latvia of russian ethnicity.

If those living in Latvia who were not of russina ethnicity had said, there is no such thing as a latvian people or a latvian state, there are just 'indignous' people of lativa who are german (to pick a nation at random) and some others who are remnants of a foreign colonial power and that in the name of a single unitary lativain people we say does not exist we are going to make all those now living in latvia part of germany and the german nation then I think you would find that the idea that those living in lativa who were most cerrtainly NOT german may well have had a valid claim to be of a sperate people, with a seperate right to self determination from the german latvians.

This is what you seem unable or more realisticly unwilling to accept.

It was Enosis that made us a seperate people. This is why I say that TC have a sperate right to self determination AS FAR AS GC DEFINE THEMSELVES AND ACT AS GREEK AND NOT CYPRIOT. That is what makes Cyprus different.

What you say could be the case only if the different ethnic groups inhabit different territories, not when they are mixed together like we were, or maybe when non of the ethnic groups is the clear majority, as we are in Cyprus. And this has nothing to do with the time the country was formed.

Once more the existance of our rights as a sperate people to GC choosing and acting as part of ther Greek people is not dependant on if we are 'spread out' or not. This may affect what MEANS can be used to express the right but not that the right exists.

The existance of our right to sperate self determination IS dependant on if you choose to define and act as a people 'other' than us or as a people that INCLUDES us.

It really is all very simple at that level.

The enosis demand had nothing to do with it. People speaking different language and different relegion are different people by definition. Even if Enosis wasn't there whatever rights each group had pre-existed.

[Pyrpolizer]

When GC in cyprus said we are part of the Greek people, by defnintion they then made TC in cyprus part of some 'other' people. As a seperate people their right to self determination as such is equal to any other peoples rights to self determination. No more and no less.

All this theory actually summarizes in 2 words: Minority rights.

Piratis is trying to tell you you did not simply get minority rights but rights far far beyond that. The British reduced the 82% majority to the status of "community" just to equalize it with another "community" of 18%!!
It wasn't the divine need (as you portray it) to guard the TC self determination rights which under the circumstances defaulted to mere minority rights. It was either a)what Piratis said as reward for your past collaboration with them, or b) to sow the seeds of divide and rule and future partition or c) both of them.

Either a, or b, or c, it was nothing but a HOSTILE AND UNFAIR ACT against the GCs.

Would this be the same for those "minorities" in Switzerland or Belgium?

Yes if they were 82-18%

[Pyrpolizer]

And btw theose countries had the chance to evolve democratically not throught the "divine wisdom" of n ex -British ruler who made a mess. If we had the same chance in Cyprus i am sure we wouldn't have such problems today. Constitutions DO NEED TO EVOLVE THROUGH TIME

[Viewpoint]

And btw theose countries had the chance to evolve democratically not throught the "divine wisdom" of n ex -British ruler who made a mess. If we had the same chance in Cyprus i am sure we wouldn't have such problems today. Constitutions DO NEED TO EVOLVE THROUGH TIME

Yet you GCs tried to force change, what have you to say about that?