Piratis wrote:
"bicommunal federation" is two words. It is apparent that we do not agree at all how this bi-communal federation should be implemented. As I said many times the Annan plan creates just an association between two separate states, and not a federation - in other words partition.
I do not think that the Annan plan creates an association between two independent states and this is a big example how the UN plan has being misinformed , manipulated and wrongly interpreted. This is what also Alvaro De soto accused the GC side of not presenting the UN plan in an objective truly way. Once he had asked the Media to allow him to intervene and to intrperete the real provisions of the UN plan to the public and the authorities had refused him to do such action on the grounds that he would affect the public opinion . WHo was going to minsisnform the public opinion ? The person who was directly involved on its implementation ? and an officer of UN ? or all those suddenly who appeared as big lawyers and big economist and who had no idea about economics and law.
All the GC parties initially had accepted the original version of the UN plan as a basis for further negotiations and improvements this directly mean that the initial framework of the UN plan had been accepted otherwise they ought to had rejected it from the start. The reason the some extraordinary provisions of the UN 5 plan are there it is because Papadopoulos was not willing to negotiate further the UN plan in switserland. It is very tragic that Denktash and Papadopoulos agreed in New york that the Anan plan as it is had no chance of being accepted!
Federation for me means one thing ! It means sharing power so that no community dominates the other. Federation is much more appropriate in nowadays than unitary states. It allows all views to be heard and therefore one sided events are avoided.
Neither having a Federation or even a confederation is a bad framework. Just look internationally and see what countries have Democracy , freedom , human Rights and prosperity . These are more likely to operate as a Federation or confederation.
Then we have Talad, that rejects any discussions and he insists that the Annan plan should be accepted. So with whom are GC going to talk with and prepare federal plans?
Why Papadopoulos does not construct his own vesrion of a Federal Plan and propose this to the UN?This does not necessarily mean that he need to aggre with Talats plan but it would be a more constructive approach rather than sitting back and anticipating while so valuable time is being wasted for nothing!
I do not need to agree with the majority of people . Whether I am a minority or a majority does not underestimate the logic of my arguments. What is more Glafkos Klerides and George Vasiliou the two last leaders of GC community express similar arguments with me. And they are these people who apply for Cyprus membership to EU and not any other GC party. It is very tragic and a big HYPPOCRICY how many GCs underestimates their views after so much hard work they had done and succeeded in Cyprus membership to EU.
What has Papadopoulos done so Far? Has he moved any step forward ? He fails to anticipate that the world has changed since 60s and it is not the same!