Cyprus-Forum.com

[erolz3]

Erolz...using the land as a community for its needs is different from selling to the highest international bidder.

I understand this difference but in the context of the discussion I was having with Kifeas I was talking about USE of pre 74 properties not ownership.

I understand that the sale of such property is a different issue and why it is so upsetting and such a sensative one.

As I too understand why many GC choose to see the different ways in which property has been dealt with by each community post 74 as indicative of how moraly good and bad each respective community is rahter than in any context of the factual differences between the two situations.

When 20-30% of your populations property value is 'locked and unseable' and 20-30% of the property in the area under your control is disputed, you can make very different decision ans still function and survive as a society than when the figures are 70-80%.

[DT.]

Erolz...using the land as a community for its needs is different from selling to the highest international bidder.

I understand this difference but in the context of the discussion I was having with Kifeas I was talking about USE of pre 74 properties not ownership.

I understand that the sale of such property is a different issue and why it is so upsetting and such a sensative one.

As I too understand why many GC choose to see the different ways in which property has been dealt with by each community post 74 as indicative of how moraly good and bad each respective community is rahter than in any context of the factual differences between the two situations.

When 20-30% of your populations property value is 'locked and unseable' and 20-30% of the property in the area under your control is disputed, you can make very different decision ans still function and survive as a society than when the figures are 70-80%.

On our previous discussion regarding compromise in the AP by the turkish side Erolz are you including the reduction of Turkish millitary and the 9% land?

[erolz3]

Erolz, if TCs made concessions even compared to the 1960 agreements, then why not agree to return to those agreements, which according to your theory should be better for TCs?

The RoC has never put a return to the 60's agreements on the table since 1965 when they illegaly stole the valid legal and consitutional rights of the TC community, and why should they when they were rewarded by the international community for this illegal theft with recognition as the sole legitimate goverment of all of cyprus ?

The Annan Plan is different from the 60's agreements, in some aspects it represents gains for the TC community and in others it represnests loses relative to what they had in the original 60's agreements that were illegaly denied them by GC. Just as it represents the both improvements to the GC community and looses to them relative to the 60's agreements.

The fact is that TCs only gave back part of what they illegally took 1974. They made no concession from what their rights according to the 1960 agreements are. Compared to the 1960 agreements they got more land, more power, and more separation, and got less of nothing.

This is just simply not true Piratis and I have learnt in the past the futility of having such discussion with you.

The most glaring and serious way in which the Annan Plan differs from the original 60's agreements and that represents a major loss and concession to the TC community is that the Annan Plan defines community membership not through ethnicity but through component state citizenship, in turn based on geographical location of residence. Under the Annan Plan after the staged protections on the ethnical make up of component state citizenship expired there were no guarantees or protections to ensure that TC did not end up as a numercial minority in both Cypriot component states and thus loose all of the political equality granted to them in the Plan originaly. This is so totaly different from the 60's agreements that, in paper theory at least, protected the TC communities equal status as a founding member community of the republic in perpetutity.

Today enosis is totally out of the question. You won that.

Are you saying that in reality you still today want enosis but are stopped from having it because the historic actions of TC and Turkey and the international community ?

What 'we won' was to ensure that Cyprus EXISTED as a nation and a state and not as a hinterland of Greece. That Cypriots decide what happens in and too CYpriots and not Greeks and Athens. And you consider this a 'loss' for you and a 'win' for us ?

Really Piratis I mean no disrepect but experience has tought me that there is nothing to be gained in such discussion with you on such matters, for either of us and much of my time and energy to be lost.

[boulio]

The most glaring and serious way in which the Annan Plan differs from the original 60's agreements and that represents a major loss and concession to the TC community is that the Annan Plan defines community membership not through ethnicity but through component state citizenship, in turn based on geographical location of residence. Under the Annan Plan after the staged protections on the ethnical make up of component state citizenship expired there were no guarantees or protections to ensure that TC did not end up as a numercial minority in both Cypriot component states and thus loose all of the political equality granted to them in the Plan originaly. This is so totaly different from the 60's agreements that, in paper theory at least, protected the TC communities equal status as a founding member community of the republic in perpetutity

and to have component state citizenship you must speak turkish correct under annan plan?

[erolz3]

This is not a double standard but how all nationals are treated. Entitlement to benefits and protection is restricted to members including seeking justice for them even if the crimes are conducted by outsiders.

It is fair that the EU should protect its citizens, first and foremost, since they pay into the organisation. If any EU citizens are compromised by the actions of non-EU residents (who rightfully have no claim to benefits), the EU Laws should still be able to charge non-EU citizens with these infringements upon its citizens ... although it may not be able to recover losses other than by any ownership of assets within the EU.

I really have no idea what you are waffling on about here Oracle. Sorry.

I am an EU citizen, by both my UK nationality and my Cypriot nationality (I have both). I choose to currently live in Cyprus, a km away from the village my father grew up in. The EU tells me that EU law is suspended in the areas in which I live and thus I do not have any of the benfits of EU law as an indivdual. So far no problem. however when it also tells me that whilst as an EU citizen living in the North I have none of the benfits and then ALSO tells me that I am subject to any negative impacts of EU law regarding my choice to live in the North, then that to me is inherently unfair. If I am subject to the negative aspects of EU law I should be subject to the positive as well. If they have no means to make me subject to the positive aspects they should not make me subject to the negative ones. At least as far as I am concerned, but I understand that for you fairness and justice are not your real objectives in and of themselves but just buzz words to be used to push your communites agendas when possible and to be ignored when not.

[erolz3]

nor do I believe they should have:-

On point 2 I agree with you though primarily it was Turkeys decision and pretty much remains so. However I have long ben an advocate of unconditonal unilateral return of varosha and have argued such publicaly in the past.

The same applies on point 7.

On point 3 looting occured on both sides and before 74 as well. It is not right but it was kind of inevitable.

On point 4 I think the TRNC had no real option but to import large numbers of Turkish mainlanders post 74 if it was to have any hope of survival as an entity. I do agree however that freehold title of pre 74 GC properties should not have been given to such people.

On point 5 the simple fact is if that the TRNC had not found a way for the vast majority of it's citizens to be able to realise the monetary value of assets they had lost / locked up in the south post 74 it would not have been able to function. Having said that I think it could have done this better than it has. It should have assigned freehold property in the North on a direct one for one exchange basis with property lost in the South and not through a generic 'points' system and it should have from day one set up a comission that would have in effect represented a valid local remedy for those GC whose pre 74 property in the North freehold was assigned to TC.

On point 6 whilst at certain times it is pretty clear that encouragaing Turkish mainlanders to come ans settle in the North was primarily politicaly motivated it should also be recognised and accepted that at other times is was primarily a matter of pragmatic necessity.

The Greek Cypriots are not blameless in this dispute but they have, in the main, stayed within the law because no other course of action is open to them.

THey have on the main stayed within the law post 74, because they have had more ability to do so than the TC community with a much smaller % of their populations displaced and with unseable land locked up on the 'other side' and because they had allready gained international recognition as a reward from their primary illegal theft back in 64/65 when they stole the the TC communites legal and valid communal rights.

The two main consequences of this judgement are: the property market in the north will collapse and Turkey will never join the EU until there is a solution to the Cyprus Problem. I do not believe there will be a flood of lawsuits now simply because problems in establishing the identity of occupants of GC land and whether or not they have assets in another EU country. The damage to the property market in the north, however, will be profound.

It is actually pretty trivial to establish the identity of current occupiers and if they have assets in the UK or not. However what concerns me more is not more case like the Orams one for example but the potential that having prfoundly damaged the property market in the North GC will move on to prfoundly damage the tourism sector and the education sector and simply keep on going as a preferd appraoch to negotiating a fair settlement that both sides can vote yes to. It would be easy to find a tourist 'victim' in the North and prosecute him in the RoC for illegaly using a hotel in the North and then have the UK courts persued any fines if he refuses to pay the RoC courts for his offence. Result property market in North destroyed and Toursim sector destroyed - and so on and so on. Now this may seem like a great thing to many GC but actually the consequences of such actions, which I personally see as inevitable sooner or later, is to increasingly back TC community into a corner offering them no real alterntives but to increasingly turn away from the RoC and Europe and drive them ever more into total dependancy on and into the hand of Turkey.

There is, in my view, a certain irony (please do not take this personally) in your return to this forum after the failure of the "rival" forum you set up a few years ago. I believe it lost much support from Greek Cypriots because it was too regulated and free expression was discouraged by some argumentative "holier than thou" contributors. In a nutshell your forum failed because of lack of GC support and the "trnc" will do the same, unless artificially supported by Turkey for ever of course.

Here you put me into an impossible situation. I have in the past been banned from this forum for merely mentioning this other forum. However I do feel I have to offer some counter to your assertions about it, even though doing so puts me at risk of being banned once more from here

I do not personaly see the other forum as having failed. It is true that it is near dead currently as far as volume of posting go but it is not totaly dead and still exists and I think it remains what it was, a netural space that seeks to promote reasoned argument about issues realting to Cyprus whilst discouraging personal abuse and childish insults.

I think your assesment that it lost support from GC and this led to its decline in activity is not born out by the facts imo. Activity drained equally from participants from both communites and as far as it did so from me this was due not to a lack of balance but simply down to 'cyprus discussion argument fatigue'. As far as there are still active posters on it, GC actually remain more numercialy dominant than TC.

As far as free expression was discouraged, it only discouraged the free expresion of insulting other posters personaly and not attacking their arguments. Only one person was ever banned from it and no post, baring blatant spam advertising, has EVER been removed from it. Post were moved but NEVER removed (except by accident on a couple of occasions) and all actions of the moderating team were open and public and open to full and frank discussion and critism by any and all members. As such I think it was and remains pretty unique in terms of the balance it strikes between respecting freedom of speech of members whilst trying to maintain an atmosphere that promoted reasoned discussion of issues and discouraged personal insults between members. Certainly you could never get banned on it for mention this or any other fourm.

As far my beliefs as to why it is so little used and currently vs historical or other forums this is coloured by my own personal perspective. It was never dsigned to be a commercial forum or an entertaing forum where people went to it to see the latest 'humorous' attack from one witty menber against another. It was designed to be a netural space where reasoned discussion could be had about serious issues relating to Cyprus could happen. I personaly no longer use that space to any real degree because I personaly, barring the odd event now and again, have little desire or need for such a space. I have pretty much 'discussed myself out' on such things. However the space remains should this change for me or others.

Anyway it was not my intent to have this discussion here and I hope it does not get me banned. I will pledge to say no more about it but hope that others respect this as I do and do not ask about it as doing so places me in a difficult position.

[erolz3]

and to have component state citizenship you must speak turkish correct under annan plan?

No this is not correct to the best of my knowledge.

[The Cypriot]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... yprus.html

Marian Stokes, the founder of the Northern Cyprus Homebuyers' pressure group, described the ruling as "absolutely gutting". She said: "It's so sad, because people stand to lose so much money. We did not think they would rule this way. We bought our land in good faith. It was usually marketed and sold in the UK, so you presume everything is ok. The implications for land ownership and conflict claims are staggering across Europe."
________________________

Embargoed, a Turkish Cypriot human rights group, accused the European court of a "biased" and "politically charged judgment" which could complicate the peace talks designed to reunite the island.

"The decision could be a fatal blow for unification efforts," said Ergin Balli, the group's legal spokesman.

[Kikapu]

Erolz, Welcome back.

As a TC who wants peace in Cyprus under the "BBF" based on True Federation USA style with a slight variation to accommodate the needs of the communities, I welcome this ruling against the Orams. It is not being sadistic by any means, but I believe it is rulings such as these that will eventually start making any settlement talks to be more honest than they have been for the last 30+ years. The RoC has had legality on it's side since 1964, rightly or wrongly is no longer here or there, but fact, and the north has had high hopes since 1974 for one day in having a recognised state to counter the RoC. It is no secret, that Denktash never had any intentions of ever agreeing to a settlement with the GC's as long as the Turkish Troops remained in Cyprus and that Turkey stood by the TC's for economic support, which has been the case since. This arrogant approach by Denktash only emboldened the TC's to believe, that the Cyprus issue was now solved and that life can only get better from then on politically, economically and Internationally.

All these hopes, imaginary or real turned the TC's into the "indestructible Superman" characters with belief yet to be discovered as Obama's campaign slogan, "Yes We Can" attitude. As such attitude, there was never going to be any settlement plan that did not give the TC's not only what was in the 1960 constitution, but more, and of course, the Annan Plan of 2004 was conceived and hatched, which the TC's approved. The GC's of course were not going to have any part of the AP, specially not when the EU gate keys were waiting for them. Not until the entry of the RoC into the EU as a whole island did things start to benefit them and for things to start falling apart for the TC's. This is now the reality and no matter how much bravado the TC leadership want to sound, they are being just as reckless as Denktash was by still trying to give false hopes for the TC's to maintain that "Yes We Can" attitude. The game is over for such "bravery" and it is time for the TC's to sit down with the GC's and formulate an honest plan to settle the Cyprus problems to benefit every Cypriot, even under a BBF, just so that the TC's can still see themselves as having at least gained a state under a True Federation for all their troubles for the past 50+ years, and for the GC's to feel also happy, that no part of their country was lost to the TC's, and that Cyprus as a whole has been maintained to be part of the EU.

True Federation with True Democracy is the only thing that can salvage the TC's from continuing being a "corrupted society" by the way of doing everything they can illegal or immoral in the eyes of International laws and community, no matter how much justifications can be made to commit these illegal and immoral acts for their survival. Some believe, that such rulings as the Orams is designed to make the TC's capitulate to the GC's demands, and I for one do not want to see that to happen, but enough is enough and the TC's have run the gauntlet of International illegalities long enough which has not benefited them anything at all, except for those who has enjoyed on the spoils of war. As a result, TC's are not able to build an "honest society" in the north if the present situation is allowed to continue, so something needed to happen to make the TC's see, that they are fighting a losing battle with the GC's who have all the legalities on their side, specially when the north and Turkey too want to be in the same club as the RoC, in the EU.

This ruling against the Orams is what was needed to wake the TC's up, that the promises made by their own leaders of self determination on others stolen land is not going to happen, but they can still build a life in a state of their own under a True Federation with full participation in the Federal government and in their own state government along side with the GC's. Co existence needs to happen for the sake of what is left of the TC community in Cyprus, because up to this point, nothing has been going right in the TC's direction in having their own recognised state, and the future looks even more bleak for them than the past for it to ever happen.!

[paliometoxo]

damn 47 pages in less then two days :O

....