Cyprus-Forum.com

[Kikapu]

just like turkey is trying to join eu... if turkey does not allow cyprus to join nato why should cyporus allow turkey to join eu ? both can use their veto until a solution is found

This is very simplistic. I would agree that the ROC would have massive leverage over turkey if the rest of the EU was dying to take turkey overnight and the ROC was the only reason it couldnt join. TUrkey would probably conceed to a lot of your demands during negotiations if that was the case. But given the vast majority of the EU public is wary to turkey entering, france and austria as well as the netherlands being openly against it and have now put a public referendum in place for any such possibility turkeys gates into the EU have long been shut and turkey understands this full well. ANy EU talk by AKP is for public consumption only and most editorial comments in the major newspapers aside from idiots like mehmet ali birand also recognise this. Even those optimistic are giving dates such as 2020-2025 before any eventual accession. Your veto with all these constraints for membership is worthless. If anything cyprus will be used as a tool for when 2020 or 2025 does come for negotiations. At that point in time we will be discussing an event that happened 51 years ago since 74 and approximately 60 years since 63. You will be begging for the annan plan then. Unless of course getreal starts using proteinmax with his workouts and then singlehandedly takes back the north before that date. In that case you still wont need your veto.



Insan- for the new voting scheme to pass every member has to accept that canadian proposal. Turkey and greece aint accepting that mate.

Beg for the Annan plan for what reason? Just to have gotten only 7% of the scrappiest land you currently occupy, and which would have been of no much use to us; and in exchange to have given you the ownership and the status of a co-founding state on 30% of the best part of Cyprus (55% of the coastlines,) as well as EU access and a 50% sharing of all the privileges that we now control and enjoy alone, as the RoC? Don't you think we are a bit smarter than that?

Maraş scrappy??? Güzelyurt scrappy?? you talk as it suits.

I second viewpoint besides he forgot that up to 20% of TC state would have consisted by GCs.

As foreigners in their own country without any political rights in the TC state which Turkish must be spoken to get any government jobs, and only after paying allegiance to Ataturk, of course.! Oh, almost forgot. They could not sell their land to another GC or leave it in their inheritance to their families, but the Brits and any other foreign national could. Those damn 30,000 GC's missed out on a good thing by saying OXI to the AP.!

[Kikapu]

You did not say who Turkey will team up to prevent Cyprus from becoming a member if the above proposals are accepted.!

My god are you quick with these wet dreams. Before we answer your hypothetical question please do tell us how these proposals are to be accepted without turkey or greece vetoing them at the preliminary stage.

Actually, it was Insan who was having wet dreams of the Canadian proposals which would have neutralized Greece's attempts in stopping Macedonia from becoming a NATO member, but Insan forgot about Turkey also needing a partner to prevent Cyprus becoming a NATO member. In effect, the Canadian proposal would neutralize Turkey also. Insan should always be careful in what he asks for.!

[Get Real!]

Greek Cypriot side is trying to get NATO membership so that it can use it as an advantage on the Cyprus issue .

Where's the credible evidence that the RoC applied for NATO mem recently?

[insan]

just like turkey is trying to join eu... if turkey does not allow cyprus to join nato why should cyporus allow turkey to join eu ? both can use their veto until a solution is found

This is very simplistic. I would agree that the ROC would have massive leverage over turkey if the rest of the EU was dying to take turkey overnight and the ROC was the only reason it couldnt join. TUrkey would probably conceed to a lot of your demands during negotiations if that was the case. But given the vast majority of the EU public is wary to turkey entering, france and austria as well as the netherlands being openly against it and have now put a public referendum in place for any such possibility turkeys gates into the EU have long been shut and turkey understands this full well. ANy EU talk by AKP is for public consumption only and most editorial comments in the major newspapers aside from idiots like mehmet ali birand also recognise this. Even those optimistic are giving dates such as 2020-2025 before any eventual accession. Your veto with all these constraints for membership is worthless. If anything cyprus will be used as a tool for when 2020 or 2025 does come for negotiations. At that point in time we will be discussing an event that happened 51 years ago since 74 and approximately 60 years since 63. You will be begging for the annan plan then. Unless of course getreal starts using proteinmax with his workouts and then singlehandedly takes back the north before that date. In that case you still wont need your veto.



Insan- for the new voting scheme to pass every member has to accept that canadian proposal. Turkey and greece aint accepting that mate.

Beg for the Annan plan for what reason? Just to have gotten only 7% of the scrappiest land you currently occupy, and which would have been of no much use to us; and in exchange to have given you the ownership and the status of a co-founding state on 30% of the best part of Cyprus (55% of the coastlines,) as well as EU access and a 50% sharing of all the privileges that we now control and enjoy alone, as the RoC? Don't you think we are a bit smarter than that?

Maraş scrappy??? Güzelyurt scrappy?? you talk as it suits.

I second viewpoint besides he forgot that up to 20% of TC state would have consisted by GCs.

As foreigners in their own country without any political rights in the TC state which Turkish must be spoken to get any government jobs, and only after paying allegiance to Ataturk, of course.! Oh, almost forgot. They could not sell their land to another GC or leave it in their inheritance to their families, but the Brits and any other foreign national could. Those damn 30,000 GC's missed out on a good thing by saying OXI to the AP.!

Had TPAP genuinely negotiated they could have got political rights just like how TCs would have got political rights in federal government. Where did u invent that Turkis must have been spoken to get any government jobs? Why any GC or TC should pay allegiance to Ataturk in order to get any government jobs? Selling their land or leaving it in their inheritence could also have been solved by genuinely negotiating. It's irrational to deprive them from those rights. What crucial is keeping the political equality of 2 constituent states based on 2 communities until we manage to fully and safely get mixed island wide.

[DT.]

Greek Cypriot side is trying to get NATO membership so that it can use it as an advantage on the Cyprus issue .

Where's the credible evidence that the RoC applied for NATO mem recently?

As I said, this entire thread is coming out of the occupations regime arse and some here have lapped it up.

[insan]

Greek Cypriot side is trying to get NATO membership so that it can use it as an advantage on the Cyprus issue .

Where's the credible evidence that the RoC applied for NATO mem recently?

As I said, this entire thread is coming out of the occupations regime arse and some here have lapped it up.

The truth is, Greek Cypriot administration is under pressure of some European political groups(Pasok in Greece and DESY, DEKO in Cyprus) to contribute PfP. Let's see how strong is AKEL to resist something put in agenda by EP.

Cyprus Mail
February 21, 2009


Cyprus problem major obstacle in EU-NATO relations
By Stefanos Evripidou


-Regarding compatibility between NATO and the EU, the report notes that only six member states of the EU are not NATO members. From those, only one, Cyprus, does not have bilateral ties with NATO through its PfP programme....[T]he resolution insists that all EU member states must be present at joint EU-NATO meetings “without discrimination”.
-A further clause, added by [anti-government MEP] Matsis without government support, encourages Cyprus “to review its political position on its membership of the PfP and also calls on NATO member states to refrain from using their veto to prevent EU Member States from becoming members of NATO”.
-AKEL-backed MEP Adamos Adamou said the report was interfering in the internal affairs of a sovereign country by asking it to join an organisation that it has no obligation to join.


The European Parliament (EP) yesterday identified the Cyprus problem as a major obstacle in EU-NATO relations, “deploring” the fact that it continued to “badly impair the development of EU-NATO cooperation”.

It further called on the Cyprus government to join NATO’s Partnership for Peace (PfP) programme. The controversial clause, included by Cypriot MEP Yiannakis Matsis, served to create divisions among local parties, particularly government partners AKEL and EDEK, over the need for such membership.

The resolution was the Parliament’s first report on NATO, coming just two months before the Alliance’s 60th anniversary, likely to be marked by the membership of Croatia and Albania.
....
The EP adopted the report prepared by Finnish MEP Ari Vatanen on EU-NATO relations by 293 votes in favour, 283 against and 60 abstentions. MEPs called for less overlap and greater cooperation between the two in organising the future collective defence of the EU.

Regarding compatibility between NATO and the EU, the report notes that only six member states of the EU are not NATO members. From those, only one, Cyprus, does not have bilateral ties with NATO through its PfP programme.

In reference to the fact that Turkey prohibits Cypriot officials from discussing EU-NATO issues, the resolution insists that all EU member states must be present at joint EU-NATO meetings “without discrimination”.

It also “deplores the fact that the Turkish-Cypriot dispute continues to badly impair the development of EU-NATO cooperation”. The report gives as example, Turkey’s refusal to allow Cyprus to participate in European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) missions abroad, where they involve NATO intelligence and resources.

“On the other hand, in response, Cyprus refuses to allow Turkey to engage in the overall development of ESDP to an extent commensurate with Turkey’s military weight and strategic importance to Europe and transatlantic alliance,” said the report.

A further clause, added by Matsis without government support, encourages Cyprus “to review its political position on its membership of the PfP and also calls on NATO member states to refrain from using their veto to prevent EU Member States from becoming members of NATO”.

Matsis, backed by most of the Cypriot MEPs apart from the two AKEL parliamentarians, said membership of PfP would help avoid Cyprus’ isolation.

AKEL-backed MEP Adamos Adamou said the report was interfering in the internal affairs of a sovereign country by asking it to join an organisation that it has no obligation to join.

[DT.]

Greek Cypriot side is trying to get NATO membership so that it can use it as an advantage on the Cyprus issue .

Where's the credible evidence that the RoC applied for NATO mem recently?

As I said, this entire thread is coming out of the occupations regime arse and some here have lapped it up.

The truth is, Greek Cypriot administration is under pressure of some European political groups(Pasok in Greece and DESY, DEKO in Cyprus) to contribute PfP. Let's see how strong is AKEL to resist something put in agenda by EP.

Cyprus Mail
February 21, 2009


Cyprus problem major obstacle in EU-NATO relations
By Stefanos Evripidou


-Regarding compatibility between NATO and the EU, the report notes that only six member states of the EU are not NATO members. From those, only one, Cyprus, does not have bilateral ties with NATO through its PfP programme....[T]he resolution insists that all EU member states must be present at joint EU-NATO meetings “without discrimination”.
-A further clause, added by [anti-government MEP] Matsis without government support, encourages Cyprus “to review its political position on its membership of the PfP and also calls on NATO member states to refrain from using their veto to prevent EU Member States from becoming members of NATO”.
-AKEL-backed MEP Adamos Adamou said the report was interfering in the internal affairs of a sovereign country by asking it to join an organisation that it has no obligation to join.


The European Parliament (EP) yesterday identified the Cyprus problem as a major obstacle in EU-NATO relations, “deploring” the fact that it continued to “badly impair the development of EU-NATO cooperation”.

It further called on the Cyprus government to join NATO’s Partnership for Peace (PfP) programme. The controversial clause, included by Cypriot MEP Yiannakis Matsis, served to create divisions among local parties, particularly government partners AKEL and EDEK, over the need for such membership.

The resolution was the Parliament’s first report on NATO, coming just two months before the Alliance’s 60th anniversary, likely to be marked by the membership of Croatia and Albania.
....
The EP adopted the report prepared by Finnish MEP Ari Vatanen on EU-NATO relations by 293 votes in favour, 283 against and 60 abstentions. MEPs called for less overlap and greater cooperation between the two in organising the future collective defence of the EU.

Regarding compatibility between NATO and the EU, the report notes that only six member states of the EU are not NATO members. From those, only one, Cyprus, does not have bilateral ties with NATO through its PfP programme.

In reference to the fact that Turkey prohibits Cypriot officials from discussing EU-NATO issues, the resolution insists that all EU member states must be present at joint EU-NATO meetings “without discrimination”.

It also “deplores the fact that the Turkish-Cypriot dispute continues to badly impair the development of EU-NATO cooperation”. The report gives as example, Turkey’s refusal to allow Cyprus to participate in European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) missions abroad, where they involve NATO intelligence and resources.

“On the other hand, in response, Cyprus refuses to allow Turkey to engage in the overall development of ESDP to an extent commensurate with Turkey’s military weight and strategic importance to Europe and transatlantic alliance,” said the report.

A further clause, added by Matsis without government support, encourages Cyprus “to review its political position on its membership of the PfP and also calls on NATO member states to refrain from using their veto to prevent EU Member States from becoming members of NATO”.

Matsis, backed by most of the Cypriot MEPs apart from the two AKEL parliamentarians, said membership of PfP would help avoid Cyprus’ isolation.

AKEL-backed MEP Adamos Adamou said the report was interfering in the internal affairs of a sovereign country by asking it to join an organisation that it has no obligation to join.

With members in the PfP such as Russia, Switzerland and Serbia it can hardly be labelled Nato's program.

[insan]

Greek Cypriot side is trying to get NATO membership so that it can use it as an advantage on the Cyprus issue .

Where's the credible evidence that the RoC applied for NATO mem recently?

As I said, this entire thread is coming out of the occupations regime arse and some here have lapped it up.

The truth is, Greek Cypriot administration is under pressure of some European political groups(Pasok in Greece and DESY, DEKO in Cyprus) to contribute PfP. Let's see how strong is AKEL to resist something put in agenda by EP.

Cyprus Mail
February 21, 2009


Cyprus problem major obstacle in EU-NATO relations
By Stefanos Evripidou


-Regarding compatibility between NATO and the EU, the report notes that only six member states of the EU are not NATO members. From those, only one, Cyprus, does not have bilateral ties with NATO through its PfP programme....[T]he resolution insists that all EU member states must be present at joint EU-NATO meetings “without discrimination”.
-A further clause, added by [anti-government MEP] Matsis without government support, encourages Cyprus “to review its political position on its membership of the PfP and also calls on NATO member states to refrain from using their veto to prevent EU Member States from becoming members of NATO”.
-AKEL-backed MEP Adamos Adamou said the report was interfering in the internal affairs of a sovereign country by asking it to join an organisation that it has no obligation to join.


The European Parliament (EP) yesterday identified the Cyprus problem as a major obstacle in EU-NATO relations, “deploring” the fact that it continued to “badly impair the development of EU-NATO cooperation”.

It further called on the Cyprus government to join NATO’s Partnership for Peace (PfP) programme. The controversial clause, included by Cypriot MEP Yiannakis Matsis, served to create divisions among local parties, particularly government partners AKEL and EDEK, over the need for such membership.

The resolution was the Parliament’s first report on NATO, coming just two months before the Alliance’s 60th anniversary, likely to be marked by the membership of Croatia and Albania.
....
The EP adopted the report prepared by Finnish MEP Ari Vatanen on EU-NATO relations by 293 votes in favour, 283 against and 60 abstentions. MEPs called for less overlap and greater cooperation between the two in organising the future collective defence of the EU.

Regarding compatibility between NATO and the EU, the report notes that only six member states of the EU are not NATO members. From those, only one, Cyprus, does not have bilateral ties with NATO through its PfP programme.

In reference to the fact that Turkey prohibits Cypriot officials from discussing EU-NATO issues, the resolution insists that all EU member states must be present at joint EU-NATO meetings “without discrimination”.

It also “deplores the fact that the Turkish-Cypriot dispute continues to badly impair the development of EU-NATO cooperation”. The report gives as example, Turkey’s refusal to allow Cyprus to participate in European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) missions abroad, where they involve NATO intelligence and resources.

“On the other hand, in response, Cyprus refuses to allow Turkey to engage in the overall development of ESDP to an extent commensurate with Turkey’s military weight and strategic importance to Europe and transatlantic alliance,” said the report.

A further clause, added by Matsis without government support, encourages Cyprus “to review its political position on its membership of the PfP and also calls on NATO member states to refrain from using their veto to prevent EU Member States from becoming members of NATO”.

Matsis, backed by most of the Cypriot MEPs apart from the two AKEL parliamentarians, said membership of PfP would help avoid Cyprus’ isolation.

AKEL-backed MEP Adamos Adamou said the report was interfering in the internal affairs of a sovereign country by asking it to join an organisation that it has no obligation to join.

With members in the PfP such as Russia, Switzerland and Serbia it can hardly be labelled Nato's program.

As far as I know there r fierce debates regarding this issue since Sunday; in South. U should know better than me how ur political groups tackle with the issue and whether Christofias and AKEL would consent or not.

http://www.abhaber.com/haber.php?id=24952

[turkkan]

Beg for the Annan plan for what reason? Just to have gotten only 7% of the scrappiest land you currently occupy, and which would have been of no much use to us; and in exchange to have given you the recognised ownership and the status of a co-founding state on 30% of the best part of Cyprus (55% of the coastlines,) as well as EU access and a 50% sharing of all the privileges that we now control and enjoy alone, as the RoC? Don't you think we are a bit smarter than that?

It dosent matter anyhow, we are not interested in any annan plans or any power sharing schemes just partition. We will give it a few decades and then negotiate with you some form of partition.

[DT.]

Beg for the Annan plan for what reason? Just to have gotten only 7% of the scrappiest land you currently occupy, and which would have been of no much use to us; and in exchange to have given you the recognised ownership and the status of a co-founding state on 30% of the best part of Cyprus (55% of the coastlines,) as well as EU access and a 50% sharing of all the privileges that we now control and enjoy alone, as the RoC? Don't you think we are a bit smarter than that?

It dosent matter anyhow, we are not interested in any annan plans or any power sharing schemes just partition. We will give it a few decades and then negotiate with you some form of partition.

By then we'll be able to offer you palm island in Dubai.