Cyprus-Forum.com

[shahmaran]

Actually the only power that can do it is the same power that splits or unites any other country as needed.

So when the powers to be need it to be, you fuckers will have to bend over just like anyone else and take it.

If you are so powerful then why don't you take it now?

Why have you been waiting for 35 years?

You are going to have to murder a LOT more people this time, that is probably why...

[kurupetos]

Actually the only power that can do it is the same power that splits or unites any other country as needed.

So when the powers to be need it to be, you fuckers will have to bend over just like anyone else and take it.

If you are so powerful then why don't you take it now?

Why have you been waiting for 35 years?

You are going to have to murder a LOT more people this time, that is probably why...

You are top on the list!

[Get Real!]

Actually the only power that can do it is the same power that splits or unites any other country as needed.

So when the powers to be need it to be, you fuckers will have to bend over just like anyone else and take it.

Tiny Cyprus is a prime example that “powers” don’t always get their way. Despite your assumptions that Turkey is mighty this and Turkey is mighty that… she still cannot defeat Cyprus’ global influence on the CyProb 35 years on.

If you are so powerful then why don't you take it now?

Why have you been waiting for 35 years?

You are going to have to murder a LOT more people this time, that is probably why...

You come up with this despite Turkey murdering 5,000 odd people in 1974?

You may well convince Greek Cypriots that ultimately they’ll have to murder all Turkish Cypriots to liberate their country from all this treason so keep the smug comments up and your wish may well come true when you least expect it.

[MrH]

DT Said:

So to get this straight.

Turkey doesn't want a recognised trnc
The Republic of Cyprus should pursue a recognised trnc
The international community will recognise the trnc anyway.

I will give you kudos on the fact that your posts just got more interesting although the accusation of drunk posting might stick for a while. I only have one thing to say to you once more.

The only POWER on this planet that can grant recognition to the trnc is the Government of Cyprus. That is because the trnc is squatting on territory that belongs to the Republic of Cyprus. The entire island of Cyprus falls under the sovereignty of the Republic of Cyprus and only the Republic of Cyprus can change that.

Now whether or not Turkey's objectives is a federated Cyprus or a partitioned Cyprus doesn't matter in this discussion. What matters is that Turkey is legally powerless when it comes to the territory of the Republic of Cyprus.

Hi DT, thanks for your response. I'll try to answer this as briefly as possible, and as honest - I promise.

Firstly, Yes! to an extent you are right about the current ROC being given sovereignty over the entire island, but as you know this did not come without its limits; particularly at a UN level!

Yes, the EU accepted the GC-lead ROC as having sovereign tights over the entire island, but this is basically in view that, at the time in 2004 (it had ill-predicted) both sides would say yes to the former Annan Plan. Due to the unfortunate outcome after the Annan Plan scenario in 2004, Sovereignty in a practical sense today stops at what is universally accepted as being on the "Cease Fire" line. Also, the ROC does not really represent the entire island through the eyes of the United Nations- otherwise Christofias would never be compelled to sit on any negotiating table! Why need to negotiate if you believe your ROC is the only authority on the island and is the utmost resolute solution between the "Recognised" Cyprus conflict? Christofias should never have agreed to sit around the table with Talat, he should have laid all the blame on Turkey and used its veto until Turkey folded - Or, was this also not politically possible? Complicated isn't it?

Of course this could be disputed, and probably will, but ultimately the current GC-administered ROC is not a PERMENANT viewed state or an end product of what is universally accepted as the Cyprus Republic State wanted as a resolution to the "Cyprus Problem". This is where Mehmet Ali Talat holds Christofias around the neck.

So in conclusion, Yes you are right at a part-international level and perhaps temporarily through the eyes of the EU, but not really in conjunction with seeking a resumption of the Cyprus problem under UN auspices.

Also, please answer the following:
(1) Let's say the Turkish Cyprus suddenly agreed to re-join the ROC, but not as it stands today but how it did under the original 1960 Constitution, would the "Vice President" position held constitutionally by a Turkish Cypriot hold the same Veto rights? Would the GCs of today accept this?
(2) Would the Zurich agreement(s) stand?

The underlying issue here is that the Greek Cypriots, if we had suddenly reverted back to the 1960 original constitution, would not accept it - am I not right here? Why? because it would not then include the 13 additional point changes required to make the original constitution a workable one (as said by Makarios back in the day), thus deeming the original 1960 Constitution "Imperfect" and again subject to change?

In other words, the current ROC is still not a means to an end, it still needs to be changed even if we (TCs) suddenly found a lot of love and trust for our Greek Cypriot compatriots and joined under one umbrella. Therefore, a new basis, new Cyprus plan, a Federal Agreement as what the UN is calling for in order to clear up this 40 year complicated Constitutional mess is inevitable - unless the Greek Cypriots bluff Turkey and choose partition. As I've said DT, I don't really care about the type of solution sought (I was born and raised in the UK, Cyprus is just a holiday for me personally), as long as it's not like the original 1960 agreement as it will obviously no doubt cause another conflict - probably by the Greek Cypriots because it would not be "Workable". And, because we TCs (obviously) will not live under the additional 13 point constitutional changes called for by Makarios in 1963, and you (GCs) understandably will not accept a FEDERAL agreement similar to either the 1992 Ghalis Set of Ideas, the Annan Plan or I guess the new Federal agreement based on a Two Constituent States scenarios being discussed by our current leaders, which acceptable way out do you believe we should realistically take considering all of the inherited rights of the 1960 Constitution and Zurich Agreement(s), Turkey, Greece and the UK?

I look forward to reading your response.

[Kikapu]

DT Said:

So to get this straight.

Turkey doesn't want a recognised trnc
The Republic of Cyprus should pursue a recognised trnc
The international community will recognise the trnc anyway.

I will give you kudos on the fact that your posts just got more interesting although the accusation of drunk posting might stick for a while. I only have one thing to say to you once more.

The only POWER on this planet that can grant recognition to the trnc is the Government of Cyprus. That is because the trnc is squatting on territory that belongs to the Republic of Cyprus. The entire island of Cyprus falls under the sovereignty of the Republic of Cyprus and only the Republic of Cyprus can change that.

Now whether or not Turkey's objectives is a federated Cyprus or a partitioned Cyprus doesn't matter in this discussion. What matters is that Turkey is legally powerless when it comes to the territory of the Republic of Cyprus.

Hi DT, thanks for your response. I'll try to answer this as briefly as possible, and as honest - I promise.

Firstly, Yes! to an extent you are right about the current ROC being given sovereignty over the entire island, but as you know this did not come without its limits; particularly at a UN level!

Yes, the EU accepted the GC-lead ROC as having sovereign tights over the entire island, but this is basically in view that, at the time in 2004 (it had ill-predicted) both sides would say yes to the former Annan Plan. Due to the unfortunate outcome after the Annan Plan scenario in 2004, Sovereignty in a practical sense today stops at what is universally accepted as being on the "Cease Fire" line. Also, the ROC does not really represent the entire island through the eyes of the United Nations- otherwise Christofias would never be compelled to sit on any negotiating table! Why need to negotiate if you believe your ROC is the only authority on the island and is the utmost resolute solution between the "Recognised" Cyprus conflict? Christofias should never have agreed to sit around the table with Talat, he should have laid all the blame on Turkey and used its veto until Turkey folded - Or, was this also not politically possible? Complicated isn't it?

Of course this could be disputed, and probably will, but ultimately the current GC-administered ROC is not a PERMENANT viewed state or an end product of what is universally accepted as the Cyprus Republic State wanted as a resolution to the "Cyprus Problem". This is where Mehmet Ali Talat holds Christofias around the neck.

So in conclusion, Yes you are right at a part-international level and perhaps temporarily through the eyes of the EU, but not really in conjunction with seeking a resumption of the Cyprus problem under UN auspices.

Also, please answer the following:
(1) Let's say the Turkish Cyprus suddenly agreed to re-join the ROC, but not as it stands today but how it did under the original 1960 Constitution, would the "Vice President" position held constitutionally by a Turkish Cypriot hold the same Veto rights? Would the GCs of today accept this?
(2) Would the Zurich agreement(s) stand?

The underlying issue here is that the Greek Cypriots, if we had suddenly reverted back to the 1960 original constitution, would not accept it - am I not right here? Why? because it would not then include the 13 additional point changes required to make the original constitution a workable one (as said by Makarios back in the day), thus deeming the original 1960 Constitution "Imperfect" and again subject to change?

In other words, the current ROC is still not a means to an end, it still needs to be changed even if we (TCs) suddenly found a lot of love and trust for our Greek Cypriot compatriots and joined under one umbrella. Therefore, a new basis, new Cyprus plan, a Federal Agreement as what the UN is calling for in order to clear up this 40 year complicated Constitutional mess is inevitable - unless the Greek Cypriots bluff Turkey and choose partition. As I've said DT, I don't really care about the type of solution sought (I was born and raised in the UK, Cyprus is just a holiday for me personally), as long as it's not like the original 1960 agreement as it will obviously no doubt cause another conflict - probably by the Greek Cypriots because it would not be "Workable". And, because we TCs (obviously) will not live under the additional 13 point constitutional changes called for by Makarios in 1963, and you (GCs) understandably will not accept a FEDERAL agreement similar to either the 1992 Ghalis Set of Ideas, the Annan Plan or I guess the new Federal agreement based on a Two Constituent States scenarios being discussed by our current leaders, which acceptable way out do you believe we should realistically take considering all of the inherited rights of the 1960 Constitution and Zurich Agreement(s), Turkey, Greece and the UK?

I look forward to reading your response.

Also, please answer the following:
(1) Let's say the Turkish Cyprus suddenly agreed to re-join the ROC, but not as it stands today but how it did under the original 1960 Constitution, would the "Vice President" position held constitutionally by a Turkish Cypriot hold the same Veto rights? Would the GCs of today accept this?
(2) Would the Zurich agreement(s) stand?

I'll let DT answer your other points MrH, but I would like to make a point here.

To your above statements, I believe the GCs will not go back to the 1960 agreements, because they don't want to and no longer need to, because Denktash and Makarios had already agreed on a BBF for Cyprus, and if we are going to have a new beginning under BBF, then the 1960 constitution will become invalid, which means a new constitution needs to me made to take it's place. This is why I say, that Denktash made a grave mistake for accepting BBF, which I believe Makarios was more than likely grinning after the fact cheek to cheek, because now he had a way to do away with the 1960 constitution and re-write a new one. Is this not the reason as to why a lot of the provisions that were in the 1960 constitutions that favoured the TCs are now being refused by Christofias, just because they are undemocratic and would also violate EU principles.? Had Cyprus not entered into the EU, the outcome of a new constitution would have been different back in the late 70's with northern part of Cyprus under occupation, but now, it is a altogether different set of rules when the RoC holds a veto vote over Turkey's EU entry plans. The mistake that Denktash made were;

a) Agreeing to a BBF
b) Not sealing the deal when he agreed to BBF while the north was under occupation
c) Never imagined that the RoC would become a EU member
d) Did not do anything to try and prevent RoC from becoming a EU member
e) He forgot that under BBF, there would be a new constitution and the 1960 would become invalid, losing all the provisions that favoured the TCs
f) Now the RoC can only follow the EU principles which are complete opposite to what was in the 1960 constitution and under a BBF, the UN and the EU both recognises that all of the island as the territory of the RoC, therefore only EU principle will apply.

[MrH]

Well Kikapu,

That agreement actually confirmed that a future Cyprus settlement would be based on a federation made up of two states (bi-zonal) and two communities (bi-communal) – and the dissolution of the GC-Adopted ROC after the events of the 1974 conflict. The size of the states would be determined by economic viability and land ownership. The central government would be given powers to ensure the unity of the state (Which doesn’t mean much). Various other issues, such as freedom of movement, Property and freedom of settlement, would be settled through discussion. The agreement marked a monumental change of direction for the Greek Cypriots, who now, mistakenly, accepted that Cyprus would be reunited as a federation and that the Turkish Cypriots would have their own state, canton or autonomous zone of control. Enosis was officially dead. For their part, while the Turkish Cypriots had also recognised the essential unity of the state – an element that Turkey believes in, but only in the form of a Federation! However, it is also true that the idea of Taksim was also now out of the question – so good bye to annexation as northern Cyprus to Turkey. Thus, Turkey’s influence on the ENTIRE Island under a BBF would once again effectively be maintained.

In light of the above, and knowing that the Greek Cypriots want a completely different NON-Federal deal with their so-believed new EU membership found strength, how long do you think the EU will allow Cyprus to step in front of Turkey’s EU membership when the EU is ready to make Turkey a full EU member state (The day will come when the EU will desperately need Turkey in the EU, for whatever Political, Energy or Economic reason - the day will come and it's not very far off) . Also, please don't tell me that every current EU Member state has FULLY met all of the 35 or so EU chapters without by passing a few indicators or two - there's no way Poland, Romania and Bulgaria have meet the Economic indicators by a long stretch! If the Greek Cypriots believe that they can continue saying “OXI” to a BBF deal again, and again, they will one day realise that Turkey’s fast growing Economic, Energy and Political importance to the EU will eventually quash the so-called importance of the “Cyprus Question” and their infamous Veto over Turkey. Money talks my friend. And, you don’t want a Turkey as a full EU member state without Greek Cypriot Government Guarantees in order to keep the Turkish masses tamed, believe you me! A Federal formula for us Turkish Cypriots representing our own Federated State with Turkish gurantees is a dream, one supported by the UN and now the EU. Again, it's all about how the Greek Cypriots will respond in the short-term, before it's too late of course. BBF here we come (and Turkey too!). The Choice is yours.

[Kikapu]

Well Kikapu,

That agreement actually confirmed that a future Cyprus settlement would be based on a federation made up of two states (bi-zonal) and two communities (bi-communal) – and the dissolution of the GC-Adopted ROC after the events of the 1974 conflict. The size of the states would be determined by economic viability and land ownership. The central government would be given powers to ensure the unity of the state (Which doesn’t mean much). Various other issues, such as freedom of movement, Property and freedom of settlement, would be settled through discussion. The agreement marked a monumental change of direction for the Greek Cypriots, who now, mistakenly, accepted that Cyprus would be reunited as a federation and that the Turkish Cypriots would have their own state, canton or autonomous zone of control. Enosis was officially dead. For their part, while the Turkish Cypriots had also recognised the essential unity of the state – an element that Turkey believes in, but only in the form of a Federation! However, it is also true that the idea of Taksim was also now out of the question – so good bye to annexation as northern Cyprus to Turkey. Thus, Turkey’s influence on the ENTIRE Island under a BBF would once again effectively be maintained.

In light of the above, and knowing that the Greek Cypriots want a completely different NON-Federal deal with their so-believed new EU membership found strength, how long do you think the EU will allow Cyprus to step in front of Turkey’s EU membership when the EU is ready to make Turkey a full EU member state (The day will come when the EU will desperately need Turkey in the EU, for whatever Political, Energy or Economic reason - the day will come and it's not very far off) . If the Greek Cypriots believe that they can continue saying “OXI” to a BBF deal again, and again, they will one day realise that Turkey’s fast growing Economic, Energy and Political importance to the EU will eventually quash the so-called importance of the “Cyprus Question” and their infamous Veto over Turkey. Money talks my friend. And, you don’t want a Turkey as a full EU member state without Greek Cypriot Government Guarantees in order to keep the Turkish masses tamed, believe you me! A Federal formula for us Turkish Cypriots representing our own Federated State with Turkish gurantees is a dream, one supported by the UN and now the EU. Again, it's all about how the Greek Cypriots will respond in the short-term, before it's too late of course. BBF here we come (and Turkey too!). The Choice is yours.

Thanks for not answering any of my points but rather giving us a lot of unrelated and wishful thinking comments.!

DT, it is your turn now.....good luck.!

[MrH]

Okay then Kikapu,

f) Now the RoC can only follow the EU principles which are complete opposite to what was in the 1960 constitution and under a BBF, the UN and the EU both recognises that all of the island as the territory of the RoC, therefore only EU principle will apply.

Then, why did Christofias agree to a BBF under UN parameters (only) at the start of the current talks, and why is he discussing a BBF instead of a Involved ROC? I know he said that a new agreement should be an "Envolution of the ROC", but why hasn't he backed his original demand instead of now agreeing to the principals of a BBF deal similarly to those in the High Level Agreement(s). I think you should ask your leader, as I have asked Mehmet Ali Talat whom has confirmed that it's a BBF deal being discussed consisting of two Federated/Constituent States and a Loose federal government!

[DT.]

Well Kikapu,

That agreement actually confirmed that a future Cyprus settlement would be based on a federation made up of two states (bi-zonal) and two communities (bi-communal) – and the dissolution of the GC-Adopted ROC after the events of the 1974 conflict. The size of the states would be determined by economic viability and land ownership. The central government would be given powers to ensure the unity of the state (Which doesn’t mean much). Various other issues, such as freedom of movement, Property and freedom of settlement, would be settled through discussion. The agreement marked a monumental change of direction for the Greek Cypriots, who now, mistakenly, accepted that Cyprus would be reunited as a federation and that the Turkish Cypriots would have their own state, canton or autonomous zone of control. Enosis was officially dead. For their part, while the Turkish Cypriots had also recognised the essential unity of the state – an element that Turkey believes in, but only in the form of a Federation! However, it is also true that the idea of Taksim was also now out of the question – so good bye to annexation as northern Cyprus to Turkey. Thus, Turkey’s influence on the ENTIRE Island under a BBF would once again effectively be maintained.

In light of the above, and knowing that the Greek Cypriots want a completely different NON-Federal deal with their so-believed new EU membership found strength, how long do you think the EU will allow Cyprus to step in front of Turkey’s EU membership when the EU is ready to make Turkey a full EU member state (The day will come when the EU will desperately need Turkey in the EU, for whatever Political, Energy or Economic reason - the day will come and it's not very far off) . If the Greek Cypriots believe that they can continue saying “OXI” to a BBF deal again, and again, they will one day realise that Turkey’s fast growing Economic, Energy and Political importance to the EU will eventually quash the so-called importance of the “Cyprus Question” and their infamous Veto over Turkey. Money talks my friend. And, you don’t want a Turkey as a full EU member state without Greek Cypriot Government Guarantees in order to keep the Turkish masses tamed, believe you me! A Federal formula for us Turkish Cypriots representing our own Federated State with Turkish gurantees is a dream, one supported by the UN and now the EU. Again, it's all about how the Greek Cypriots will respond in the short-term, before it's too late of course. BBF here we come (and Turkey too!). The Choice is yours.

Thanks for not answering any of my points but rather giving us a lot of unrelated and wishful thinking comments.!

DT, it is your turn now.....good luck.!

Erm...i've read the previous posts but am a little confused on what point MrH is trying to make here. Any chance I can get a reminder of what exactly it is that MrH is trying to prove?

[MrH]

DT,

Basically that a BBF serves Turkey's needs of a resolution to the Cyprus question, and Christofias is sucked into it. While recognition of a "TRNC" would actually suit GC-ROC. A BBF deal will reinstate Turkey's rights over the entire island. A BBF will remove the 11 Cyprus influenced chapter on Turkey's EU entry and then will allow Turkey to flood the island when it does become a member. In a Nuttshell.