Cyprus-Forum.com

[utu]

I think people here are missing the point. Look: no agreement is perfect, and the Annan plan had its share of flaws. The problem is that people want a perfect plan, and that's not going to happen. So the question should be whether the rehashed plan is going to be any better than the current status quo. Remember that the first rejection cost RoCy a great deal of goodwill intenationally. A second rejection under these circumstances may well result in the partition being recognized... Is that possibility a risk worth taking?

[Viewpoint]

I think people here are missing the point. Look: no agreement is perfect, and the Annan plan had its share of flaws. The problem is that people want a perfect plan, and that's not going to happen. So the question should be whether the rehashed plan is going to be any better than the current status quo. Remember that the first rejection cost RoCy a great deal of goodwill intenationally. A second rejection under these circumstances may well result in the partition being recognized... Is that possibility a risk worth taking?

GCs do not want to acknowledge that such developments are remotely possible, so with such a mindset they are unable to see the pitfalls before them if they should pull out of these talks or reject yet another internationally backed plan they feel they UN EU will play nanny to them forever. They played with fire in 1974 and got burned they have yet to learn their lesson in knowing how far they can oush their limits but this time they will lose out forever.

[paliometoxo]

well the turks are saying its two states or nothign at all..

so if we said its enosis or nothing at all then started complaining ohh the tcs keep saying no to our enosis plan we wonder WHY?!?!?

[Viewpoint]

well the turks are saying its two states or nothign at all..

so if we said its enosis or nothing at all then started complaining ohh the tcs keep saying no to our enosis plan we wonder WHY?!?!?

any links?

[Nikitas]

Awe said

"The problems that Turkey has are the same as any other prospective candidate country regarding Legal, Economic, Political etc and should they be met then membership could not be denied without the EU appearing biased for whatever reason."

Angela Merkel has already stated that Turkey should be ready to accept a "special status" outside the Eu, and France has said that it will submit the issue of Turkey's membership to a referendum. These moves are in no way related to Cyprus.

Have you thought how the Europeans will take to a majority of EU parliamentarians being Turks, and Turkey having the most Commissioners on the EU Commission? Do you think the EU is ready for that development?

The entry of Bulgaria and Romania is irrrelevant because neither one assumed a leading position in the EU, they do not have the population to make any difference. Turkey does, and that is why it will be kept out.

From a more practical point of view, do you think Turkey can survive in the EU under a constant challenge by Kurds on a whole bunch of issues? Can you see Turkey accepting a development with Kurds similar to that of the Turks in Bulgaria, the Catalans in Spain, the Scots in the UK? That will be the day!

[yialousa1971]

I'd like to see what France, Germany and the rest of the EU have to say about being forced to accept Turkey in this current uncivilised shape or form

... Besides there's the Kurds to sort too

What they say is one thing, what they believe is another and thats what they don't tell you. Sarkozy's ancestors were Young Turks so you can't trust France for now. The Annan Plan was a back door to bring the Turks into the European Union.

[Medman]

I'd like to see what France, Germany and the rest of the EU have to say about being forced to accept Turkey in this current uncivilised shape or form

... Besides there's the Kurds to sort too

What they say is one thing, what they believe is another and thats what they don't tell you. Sarkozy's ancestors were Young Turks so you can't trust France for now. The Annan Plan was a back door to bring the Turks into the European Union.

I wouldn't trust France politically in any shape or form. Turkey has to balance the will of its generals, its left leaning/Islamic government and its people, who unite in Nationalistic frenzy when secularism is threatened. Turkey's people are well aware that the EU doesn't want them and the TC's are even more sceptical.

[Paphitis]

I think people here are missing the point. Look: no agreement is perfect, and the Annan plan had its share of flaws. The problem is that people want a perfect plan, and that's not going to happen. So the question should be whether the rehashed plan is going to be any better than the current status quo. Remember that the first rejection cost RoCy a great deal of goodwill intenationally. A second rejection under these circumstances may well result in the partition being recognized... Is that possibility a risk worth taking?

Yes it is. We will chance it rather than sign away our country.

And any solution which sees GCs as second class citizens with diminished democratic and human rights, is much worse than the present status quo.

The possibility of recognition is quite futile due to the numerous UN resolutions deeming the "trnc" UDI as illegal and other UN resolutions which call upon Turkey to withdraw her forces from Cyprus and respect the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the Republic of Cyprus.

The only avenue left is accession of the "north" by Turkey. Such an act would come at a very big cost..

AWE wrote:

It is only the Cyprus Problem that can truly keep Turkey out of the EU if all other membership requirement were met.

Excellent point!


Zan wrote:

In the same vein....Why doesn't the "RoC" open its governmental doors and invite the return of the TCs to their rightful place. It is a move that neither can take because it would mean the "RoC" was wrong along and that the TRNC would be null and void if it asked before a settlement was going to be signed......It would have to be a big affair for both sides and would mean a virgin birth all over again. Neither side is willing to do this. A double surrender with no winners....Now that would be something!!!

Whilst you illegally occupy 37% of Cyprus, you by default abandon all provisions of the 1960 constitution.

You cannot have your cake and eat it too!

[YFred]

Don't believe a word of it. Political and Paper spin. We've all been there and read it before.
Star signs are more realistic.

Medman, there seems to be much validity in this article, especially when you consider the fact that when Alexander Downer visited Turkey and met with the Turkish Foreign Affairs minister, he was pressured to introduce some form of "time frames" or dead line in drafting a unification plan which can be put to a referendum.

The onus does seem to be on drafting a solution just in time for Turkey's EU summit in Dec 09.

However, I fail how to recognise how this will make things easy for Turkey if a unification plan which is discriminatory to fundamental human and democratic rights is going to pave the way for Turkey's EU admission, if the plan is not accepted by both sides.

Its called compromise mate.......When you guys learn that it will not all go your way and some price has to be paid for your actions in 1963 and that you will nt return to the ORIGINAL Zurich agreement.....

I would have thought that a peace plan which would effectively mean that we sign over 100% control of the north to Turkey, and where we only have 50% control in the Federation, is no compromise.

That is more like Turkey trying to use her might to negotiate an unfair settlement to the detriment of GCs, which will see them as second class citizens.

Basic fundamental human and democratic rights are not negotiable.

You name 1 concession that Turkey has made in these negotiations.

If you do want total control over a part of Cyprus which includes a Confederacy structure, which would make it easy for you to split from the union, then you better relinquish some territory. The only way in which GCs could accept such a deal is with an 82-18 split.

You will sign it over to the TRNC......ust like you are working "WITH" Greece then what we agree with Turkey is none of your business.

We had 18% of land in 1963 mate...What we also had was 30% of government of the whole island......What compromise are you offering us...Our land and no involvement in 82% of our own island......

Your 18% land I am almost certain is the turkish population not the land. I think we had more like 28% of the land. I shall try to find out what the actual land percentage was then.

One source specified 33% before the enclaves in 1963.
Regards

[YFred]

I think people here are missing the point. Look: no agreement is perfect, and the Annan plan had its share of flaws. The problem is that people want a perfect plan, and that's not going to happen. So the question should be whether the rehashed plan is going to be any better than the current status quo. Remember that the first rejection cost RoCy a great deal of goodwill intenationally. A second rejection under these circumstances may well result in the partition being recognized... Is that possibility a risk worth taking?

Possibility or Certainty. That’s why it can’t be allowed to happen. There will be agreement and there will be peace..