Cyprus-Forum.com

[Kifeas]

4. Reaffirms that its position on the solution to the Cyprus problem is based on one State of Cyprus comprising two politically equal communities as defined by Secretary-General in the eleventh paragraph of annex I to his report dated 8 March 1990(S/21183),

http://www.un.int/cyprus/scr716.htm

Is it anti-democratic to consider 2 large communities of Cyprus as "2 politically equal communities of Cyprus"?

If it is anti-democratic why does it adopted by UN and supposedly accepted by GC and Greek political parties?

Insan, I am breaking my vow not to discuss anything with you as I long realized you are a brainwashed nationalist, to ask if you also care provide the definition of the UN SG as to what political equality means in this case. Why did you hide this info?

[insan]

4. Reaffirms that its position on the solution to the Cyprus problem is based on one State of Cyprus comprising two politically equal communities as defined by Secretary-General in the eleventh paragraph of annex I to his report dated 8 March 1990(S/21183),

http://www.un.int/cyprus/scr716.htm

Is it anti-democratic to consider 2 large communities of Cyprus as "2 politically equal communities of Cyprus"?

If it is anti-democratic why does it adopted by UN and supposedly accepted by GC and Greek political parties?

Insan, I am breaking my vow not to discuss anything with you as I long realized you are a brainwashed nationalist, to ask if you also care provide the definition of the UN SG as to what political equality means in this case. Why did you hide this info?

I didn't hide it, galimatias maker Kifeas. Even if I've hidden it u have the freedom to provide it to us, here on this thread... If there r some people brainwashed and coward afraid of questioning some senseless aspects of Cyprus problem; one of them is u and ur alikes.

[bill cobbett]

Agreed that all the communities, major and minor ones, that make up CY should as communities, be politically equal, all having the same level of political power.

That level should, for all the communities, be set at the level of ZERO.

So there you have it, another UN parameter satisfied.

Anything else is Apartheid Democracy, as Our Beloved Refugee from Morphou called it a few days ago.

But the elected politicians of GCs accepted the existence of "2 politically equal communities" in Cyprus. They didn't come with the counter arguments similar to urs stated above... why? They didn't/don't have the balls?

My dear Insan, at the risk of repeating the obvious, there is nothing in the idea of zero political power for all the CY communities, at the community level, that is at variance with the BBF/UN Parameters.

The UN Parameters call for equal communities. Zero community powers satisfies this condition.

Here's the maths ....

Grissy Community Power = Tissy Community Power = Armenian and Maronite Community Power = Ex-Pat Community Power = 0 x pi

[insan]

Agreed that all the communities, major and minor ones, that make up CY should as communities, be politically equal, all having the same level of political power.

That level should, for all the communities, be set at the level of ZERO.

So there you have it, another UN parameter satisfied.

Anything else is Apartheid Democracy, as Our Beloved Refugee from Morphou called it a few days ago.

But the elected politicians of GCs accepted the existence of "2 politically equal communities" in Cyprus. They didn't come with the counter arguments similar to urs stated above... why? They didn't/don't have the balls?

My dear Insan, at the risk of repeating the obvious, there is nothing in the idea of zero political power for all the CY communities, at the community level, that is at variance with the BBF/UN Parameters.

The UN Parameters call for equal communities. Zero community powers satisfies this condition.

Here's the maths ....

Grissy Community Power = Tissy Community Power = Armenian and Maronite Community Power = Ex-Pat Community Power = 0 x pi

Got it...

[Kifeas]

4. Reaffirms that its position on the solution to the Cyprus problem is based on one State of Cyprus comprising two politically equal communities as defined by Secretary-General in the eleventh paragraph of annex I to his report dated 8 March 1990(S/21183),

http://www.un.int/cyprus/scr716.htm

Is it anti-democratic to consider 2 large communities of Cyprus as "2 politically equal communities of Cyprus"?

If it is anti-democratic why does it adopted by UN and supposedly accepted by GC and Greek political parties?

Insan, I am breaking my vow not to discuss anything with you as I long realized you are a brainwashed nationalist, to ask if you also care provide the definition of the UN SG as to what political equality means in this case. Why did you hide this info?

I didn't hide it, galimatias maker Kifeas. Even if I've hidden it u have the freedom to provide it to us, here on this thread... If there r some people brainwashed and coward afraid of questioning some senseless aspects of Cyprus problem; one of them is u and ur alikes.

You are right in saying that I do not discuss or question any senseless aspects of the Cyprus problem, but this is not because I am afraid! It is because I am not stupid like you to discuss senseless things in general. And since I cannot locate the world "galimatias" in any English, Turkish or Greek dictionary, do you care explain its meaning and what language it is?

PS: I am still waiting for you to provide the definition for political equality that you referred to, above.

[insan]

4. Reaffirms that its position on the solution to the Cyprus problem is based on one State of Cyprus comprising two politically equal communities as defined by Secretary-General in the eleventh paragraph of annex I to his report dated 8 March 1990(S/21183),

http://www.un.int/cyprus/scr716.htm

Is it anti-democratic to consider 2 large communities of Cyprus as "2 politically equal communities of Cyprus"?

If it is anti-democratic why does it adopted by UN and supposedly accepted by GC and Greek political parties?

Insan, I am breaking my vow not to discuss anything with you as I long realized you are a brainwashed nationalist, to ask if you also care provide the definition of the UN SG as to what political equality means in this case. Why did you hide this info?

I didn't hide it, galimatias maker Kifeas. Even if I've hidden it u have the freedom to provide it to us, here on this thread... If there r some people brainwashed and coward afraid of questioning some senseless aspects of Cyprus problem; one of them is u and ur alikes.

You are right in saying that I do not discuss or question any senseless aspects of the Cyprus problem, but this is not because I am afraid! It is because I am not stupid like you to discuss senseless things in general. And since I cannot locate the world "galimatias" in any English, Turkish or Greek dictionary, do you care explain its meaning and what language it is?

PS: I am still waiting for you to provide the definition for political equality that you referred to, above.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/galimatias

Since it was defined by Secretary-General in the eleventh paragraph of annex I to his report dated 8 March 1990(S/21183), it's not difficult to find it, eh?

U r afraid of anything, any evidence and any argument that justify the actions and demands of TCs.

[bill cobbett]

Yes, I'd like to see these other Complicated, Convulated, Constructs for "political equality".

I suspect that when we throw in the usual VETO in to these, we're back at the late end of 1959.

We've been there and done it. It failed. The mistakes of recent past history being repeated.

[Piratis]

Insan, since when do you care about UN resolutions?

Did you care about UN resolutions in 1974?

RESOLUTION 353 (1974)

Adopted by the Security Council at its 1771st meeting,
on 20 July 1974



The Security Council,

Having considered the report of the Secretary-General, at its 1779th meeting, about the recent developments in Cyprus,

Having heard the statement of the President of the Republic of Cyprus and the statements of the representatives of Cyprus, Turkey, Greece and other Member States,

Noting also from the report the conditions prevailing in the island,

Deeply deploring the outbreak of violence and the continuing bloodshed,

Gravely concerned about the situation which has led to a serious threat to international peace and security, and which has created a most explosive situation in the whole Eastern Mediterranean area,

Equally concerned about the necessity to restore the constitutional structure of the Republic of Cyprus, established and guaranteed by international agreements,

Conscious of its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security in accordance with Article 24 of the Charter of the United Nations,

1.Calls upon all States to respect the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Cyprus.

2.Calls upon all parties to the present fighting as a first step to cease all firing and requests all States to exercise the utmost restraint and to refrain from any action which might further aggravate the situation;

3.Demands an immediate end to foreign military intervention in the Republic of Cyprus that is in contravention of the provisions of paragraph 1 above;

4. Requests the withdrawal without delay from the Republic of Cyprus of foreign military personnel present otherwise than under the authority of international agreements, including those whose withdrawal was requested by the President of the Republic of Cyprus, Archbishop Makarios, in his letter of 2 July 1974;

5. Calls upon Greece, Turkey and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to enter into negotiations without delay for the restoration of peace in the area and constitutional government of Cyprus and to keep the Secretary-General informed;

6. Calls upon all parties to co-operate fully with the United Nations Peace-keeping Force in Cyprus to enable it to carry out its mandate;

7. Decides to keep the situation under constant review and asks the Secretary-General to report as appropriate with a view to adopting further measures in order to ensure that peaceful conditions are restored as soon as possible.

Adopted unanimously at the 1781st meeting.

Did you care about UN resolutions in 1983?

RESOLUTION 541 (1983)

Adopted by the Security Council
on 18 November 1983



The Security Council,

Having heard the statement of the Foreign Minister of the Government of the Republic of Cyprus,

Concerned at the declaration by the Turkish Cypriot authorities issued on 15 November 1983 which purports to create an independent state in northern Cyprus,

Considering that this declaration is incompatible with the 1960 Treaty concerning the establishment of the Republic of Cyprus and the 1960 Treaty of Guarantee,

Considering therefore that the attempt to create a "Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus", is invalid, and will contribute to a worsening of the situation in Cyprus,

Reaffirming its resolutions 365(1974) and 367(1975),

Aware of the need for a solution of the Cyprus problem, based on the mission of good offices undertaken by the Secretary-General,

Affirming its continuing support for the United Nations Peace-Keeping Force in Cyprus,

Taking note of the Secretary-General's statement of 17 November 1983,

1. Deplores the declaration of the Turkish Cypriot authorities of the purported secession of part of the Republic of Cyprus;

2. Considers the declaration referred to above as legally invalid and calls for its withdrawal;

3. Calls for the urgent and effective implementation of its resolutions 365(1974) and 367(1975);

4. Requests the Secretary-General to pursue his mission of good offices in order to achieve the earliest possible progress towards a just and lasting settlement in Cyprus;

5. Calls upon the parties to cooperate fully with the Secretary-General in his mission of good offices;

6. Calls upon all States to respect the sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and non-alignment of the Republic of Cyprus;

7. Calls upon all States not to recognise any Cypriot state other than the Republic of Cyprus;

8. Calls upon all States and the two communities in Cyprus to refrain from any action which might exacerbate the situation;

9. Requests the Secretary-General to keep the Security Council fully informed.

Adopted at the 2500th meeting by 13 votes to 1 against (Pakistan) with 1 abstention (Jordan).

So obey the above resolutions, and then we have no problem to accept "two politically equal communities" which means that the language and religion of the two communities will be treated equally by the state and not that an 18% minority will have the 50% of power.

[insan]

Yes, I'd like to see these other Complicated, Convulated, Constructs for "political equality".

I suspect that when we throw in the usual VETO in to these, we're back at the late end of 1959.

We've been there and done it. It failed. The mistakes of recent past history being repeated.

The overall framework agreement acknowledges and ensures the political equality of the two communities. While political equality does not mean equal numerical participation in all branches and administration of the federal government, it will be reflected in the fact that the approval and amendment of the federal constitution will require the approval of both communities; in the effective participation of both communities in all organs and decisions of the federal government; in safeguards to ensure that the federal government will not be empowered to adopt any measures against the interests of one community; and in the equality and identical powers and functions of the two federated states.

http://www.btinternet.com/~argyros.argyrou/Ideas.htm

[Nikitas]

Is California with 35 million people equal to Montana with 1.2 million people within the USA federation?

Well, is it? Theoretically yes it is, it has two senators just like California, practically it is a different matter altogether.

The above problem occupies the thinking of GCs and their politicians. Don't you have a daily digest of the GC press in the north so you can see what politicians actually say and what the preoccupations and worry of the GC public are?


The difference is in the interpretation each side puts on BBF. TCs would like to have some permanent deviation from EU accepted norms so as to maintain in perpetuity a TC majority in the north. Understandable, but hardly doable since there is no way in the world anyone can keep the TCs caged in the north. You would have to be a damn fool to prefer lving in Kyrenia or the outer reaches of Karpasia instead of Limassol, Larnaca and Varosha.

So while the majority of the population, GC and TC, will gravitate to the south, there will be an artficial bar to GCs ever purchasing land in the villages they were born in, while ALL other EU citizens will be able to do so.

It is nonsense like the above which confuses the issue. We need someone from the TC side to come forth and clarify how exactly they will prevent TCs from moving to the south. How exactly they plan to prevent a new minority problem arising in the south. TC public must be told about these things and not crap about separate states and such chauvinist bullshit. Separate or Federated, the greater part of the economy will be in the south.

Talat has already stated, more than once, that relying on EU and human rights laws favors the GCs, so he says TCs must go above the law. What more open and clear indication do we need that BBF as Talat and his lot imagine it, is far from being fair or even lawful. As long as he does not clarify exactly what he means by BBF and how he plans to keep these proportions of population stable and unchanging things will be stuck where they are.