Cyprus-Forum.com

[Get Real!]

B25 and Piratis, if you understood the most basic concept of political science "politics is the art of the feasible" perhaps one could have a meaningful debate with you.

I heard that it’s also the art of the impossible… so go figure!

[Gregory]

B25 and Piratis, if you understood the most basic concept of political science "politics is the art of the feasible" perhaps one could have a meaningful debate with you. If not, we are all wasting our time, however, I do have a proposition.

A year after the referendum, Papadopoulos summoned the National Council and asked the members to compile those changes to the Annan plan that could make it palatable to the Greek Cypriot side. As a result, an official document was prepared that bears the name "synopsis". I think that if we proposed this document to the Turkish side we could move on in the talks and gain many friends internationally because we would be showing everybody that we mean business.

This is my idea B25 and the rest of you and since this document contains the collective wisdom of our leadership and was endorsed by Papadopoulos, you should have no problem accepting it. What do you say?

P.S. The imperialists are no joke, says Piratis, and should be taken seriously. Isn't this what I am saying all along? Shouldn't we have taken into consideration the interests of all parties concerned before sinking into the abyss of seeking the desirable instead of the feasible? We have only ourselves to blame and the demagogues that led the people astray, promising them unattainable targets, have been the scourge of our country.

Bananiot, Strassman does indeed point out that "Politics is the art of the feasible" however this also encourages people to do nothing claiming that it is just not feasible.

Politics IS the art of the feasible, but the limits of feasibility are getting stretched and you need clever persistent politicians that acquire every new opportunity in the spectrum of feasability that is open to them.

Let go of 1960-1970-1980s tactics, let go of the Annan Plan. The world changes, opportunities arise and you sound like you're weighed down with concrete blocks that remind you every day how small and insignificant we really are.

Tell me one nation in the world that leaped forward by remaining with the feasible options it had 30-40 years ago.

[bill cobbett]

Sorry, finger trouble.

[insan]

Here's a little light viewing for you all for a Satuday evening.

This is a vid of Martin Packard, who as all will know was a very senior GB intelligence officer in CY in the early '60s, promoting his book "Getting It Wrong" a while ago.

A revealing little vid.

This is no.4 of 11. All are on YouTube.

Enjoy. Now where's the popcorn?

Mr Costas Frangeskides introduces Martin Packard MBE, author of "Getting it Wrong - Fragments from a Cyprus Diary 1964" (http://www.authorhouse.com) at an event organised by the Lobby for Cyprus

How much did Rossides pay to him?

[Oracle]

How much did Rossides pay to him?

BTW Insan ... preliminary findings suggest the yellow pigment in turmeric may elicit stomach cancer ...

[Piratis]

B25 and Piratis, if you understood the most basic concept of political science "politics is the art of the feasible" perhaps one could have a meaningful debate with you. If not, we are all wasting our time, however, I do have a proposition.

A year after the referendum, Papadopoulos summoned the National Council and asked the members to compile those changes to the Annan plan that could make it palatable to the Greek Cypriot side. As a result, an official document was prepared that bears the name "synopsis". I think that if we proposed this document to the Turkish side we could move on in the talks and gain many friends internationally because we would be showing everybody that we mean business.

This is my idea B25 and the rest of you and since this document contains the collective wisdom of our leadership and was endorsed by Papadopoulos, you should have no problem accepting it. What do you say?

P.S. The imperialists are no joke, says Piratis, and should be taken seriously. Isn't this what I am saying all along? Shouldn't we have taken into consideration the interests of all parties concerned before sinking into the abyss of seeking the desirable instead of the feasible? We have only ourselves to blame and the demagogues that led the people astray, promising them unattainable targets, have been the scourge of our country.

There are 2 issues here Bananiot:

1) The historical truth, about who (and to what degree) are responsible for the problems in Cyprus.

2) What our policy should be.

Unfortunately you keep mixing the two.

I talked about the first issue (who is responsible for the Cyprus Problem) in my earlier post, so I will not repeat that.

So now lets talk about he second issue.

Yes, politics is the art of the feasible. I know this very well. This is why I know that a true solution and a true unification under the current balance of power is not feasible. So lets see what is actually feasible today:

1) The status quo. Republic of Cyprus remains the one and only recognized state and at least 2/3rds of the island remain free and prosperous. We have our factional and democratically elected government which can continue to struggle for a fair solution and ensure that TCs and even Turks have consequences for their illegal actions against us. We can also continue with legal measures against Turkey and make them pay compensations to our refugees. Last but not least, this feasible option allows the possibility for a true solution in the future.

2) To surrender 1/3rd of our island to the Turks to officially become "Turkish Cyprus". In essence partition. What you call this "solution" is irrelevant. What is important is the essence, not the name. With this arrangement not only we would officially make 1/3rd of Cyprus officially Turkish, but we would loose control of the other 2/3rds, since Turkey, though the Turkish minority (many of which Settlers), would be able to completely silence Cypriots. The Turks and TCs would suffer absolutely no consequence anymore, and Turkey will not have to pay even a single cent to our refugees. And if the Turks at any point decide that they want an official partition, getting it will be the easiest thing in the world.

Here is an interesting article that Tim posted some time ago:

Turkey’s former Foreign Minister and former Ambassador, İlter Türkmen, has stated that there is no possibility of the TRNC gaining recognition.

Türkmen, expressing the view that the TRNC would not be recognised by the EU or the USA, said that recognition by a number of African states would not bring any benefit whatsoever.

Türkmen, replying to HAVADİS’ Hasan Hastürer and Aral Moral’s questions, noted that a great opportunity for solving the Cyprus problem was lost in The Hague in 2003.

Türkmen, saying that he supported the Annan plan, voiced the opinion, “The Annan Plan had various flaws and was difficult to implement. If the plan could have been shown to be unworkable our basic aim of two states could have been achieved more easily, because it would have been necessary to find a formula within the EU. Just as Czechoslovakia was divided into two it would have been possible to divide Cyprus into two separate states.

Türkmen, who considers the foreign policy which Turkey has lately been following with respect to the Cyprus problem to be exceptionally successful, noted that at a meeting which he attended in the USA following 1974 a proposal was made by American senators for the creation of an independent state in the north in return for Varosha.

Türkmen went on to say that the chief reason for the establishment of the TRNC was the ending of Rauf Denktash’s term in office.

“I supported the Annan Plan, because…”

In response to a question as to whether he was hopeful about the ongoing talks between President Talat and Greek Cypriot leader Christofias, Türkmen said that a settlement was far more problematical than it was in 2002-2003.

Türkmen, stating that the Greek Cypriots’ EU accession in the name of the whole of Cyprus has had a significant effect on the Cyprus problem, said, “We have to see this reality. These will be difficult negotiations.”

Türkmen, pointing out that a great opportunity was lost in 2002 and 2003, said that if the Annan Plan had been accepted at that time the Greek Cypriots would also have been obliged to accept it.

Türkmen, saying, “Mr Simitis was also delighted upon learning that Mr Denktash would not sign the plan at the last minute. Indeed, at that time Hellenism achieved a successful high point. He said that henceforth in the EU there were two Hellenic states,” made the following interesting comments with reference to the Annan Plan:

Following Turkish Cypriot accession to the EU, the Annan Plan had various flaws and was difficult to implement. If the plan could have been shown to be unworkable our basic aim of two states could have been achieved more easily, because it would have been necessary to find a formula within the EU. Just as Czechoslovakia was divided into two it would have been possible to divide Cyprus into two separate states. You will recall that I was also a staunch supporter of the Annan Plan with such points in mind.

“The TRNC will not be recognised”

Türkmen, pointing out in the 24 April referendum the right of Turkish Cypriots to self-determination was confirmed, said, “Henceforth there will be no solution that is unacceptable to the Turkish Cypriot people.”

İlter Türkmen, saying that following the referendum more opportunities have arisen for the Turkish Cypriots to open up to the world, stated that the Turkish Cypriots had gained in legitimacy but were not recognised as a state.

Türkmen, saying, “There is no chance of recognition”, stressed that recognition by a number of African states would not bring any benefit whatsoever.

“In Cyprus the human component is important”

Asked what Turkey’s policy was towards Cyprus, Türkmen said, “There are two components. First, strategic importance. Second, the Turkish Cypriot people.”

Türkmen, pointing to the importance of the human component in Cyprus, continued as follows:

“When the UK annexed Cyprus, a consul was sent here from Turkey. This was because at that time there was no such thing as a Cyprus problem in Turkey. The Turks on the island were supposed to return to Turkey. Thus a consul was sent to simplify these procedures. It shows how different the vision was in those days.”

Independence in return for Varosha.

Türkmen, stressing that he considers the foreign policy which Turkey has lately been following with respect to the Cyprus problem to be exceptionally successful, said, “1974 was massive. I came to Cyprus in 1965. The community at that time was destitute."

Türkmen said that the failure to settle the Cyprus problem immediately after 1974 was Turkey’s greatest mistake.

İlter Türkmen furthermore said that at the time an independent state could have been achieved by giving up Varosha.

Türkmen continued as follows:

“Opportunities were also presented to us. There were interesting dialogues between Helmud Schmitt and Ecevit in 1978. Greece was still trying to accede in those days. Schmitt told Ecevit, 'I do not support Greek accession to the European Community without a settlement of the Cyprus problem. If you give me something then I will block this for you. Give me Varosha.'

Naturally, Greece’s EU accession was a great handicap for us in the Cyprus problem. Ecevit and I attended a meeting with US senators. One of the senators of Greek origin said, 'Give up Varosha and we will not care about the Cyprus problem.' We lost a great amount for the sake of certain compromises. At that time Varosha alone was enough; now it is not."

“In hindsight, I would not support the creation of the TRNC; I think it was a mistake on my part”

Replying to questions concerning former President Rauf Raif Denktash, Türkmen stated that Denktash’s vision was for the creation of a separate Turkish state in Cyprus.

Türkmen, saying that for Denktash the Cyprus problem ended with the proclamation of the TRNC, explained that, “The proclamation of the TRNC was criticised in Turkey. There was a debate as to whether it would be more correct to retain the status of a federated state.”

İlter Türkmen, stressing that he himself had supported the creation of the TRNC continued as follows:

“Later I began to question the wisdom of this. It was said that if I had not supported the TRNC certain things would have been easier.”

Türkmen, explaining that the chief reason for the establishment of the TRNC was the ending of Rauf Denktash’s term as president, said, “The prospect of a Cyprus campaign without Denktash troubled us.”

Türkmen, saying that Denktash’s capacity to lead was superb and at that time the wish was for him to continue as leader, explained that, “We also knew that this would lead to so much difficulty later.”

Türkmen’s bitter joy

İlter Türkmen experienced great emotion at the naming of a street in the area of Nicosia known as Dereboyu after his brother Güner Türkmen who, in the 1959 plane crash in London which befell the Turkish Prime-Minister of the day, Adnan Menderes, was on the delegation and lost his life.

İlter Türkmen informed us that his brother was a Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs Secretary at the time when he lost his life at the age of 27.

So Bananiot, we are very aware that "Politics is the art of the feasible" and we are making the best choices based on what is feasible at the moment.

[Bananiot]

B25 asks

1. Does this Synopsis allow Turkish Guarantor rights?
2. Does it allow the settlers to stay?
3. Does it allow for a full right of return to the GCs and TCs to their properties?
4. Do you agree that for any solution the above 3 points MUST be eliminated?

For a start, the document labelled synopsis contains improvements on the Annan plan for the Greek Cypriot side. This document was prepared after marathon meetings of the National Council but was never utilised, because our leadership then did not believe in bizonal, bicommunal federation. Your questions now:

1. Within the European Union, guarantor rights as contained in the London-Zurich agreements of 1959, are an anachronism. We need to convince the Turkish Cypriots and the rest of the world about this but we also need to accept political equality in order to make our point stronger.
2. The majority of the settlers will need to go but it is a folly to believe that all of them will leave. We will have to accommodate about 50 000 of them, for humanitarian reasons.
3. Do not forget that the solution we are after is bizonal, bicommunal federation and under such circumstances we will be kidding the refugees if we were to promise them that all will return to their properties.
4. Any solution will be based on give and take, whether we like it or not. The UN is calling on both parts to work for a compromise solution and thus, you can see, that even the UN does not take the SC resolutions seriously. In fact we have been trying hard to take the Cyprob to chapter seven of the UN charter but to no avail.

Now, you tell us Gregory, what these opportunities are that have risen that have strenghtened our side and perhaps they can allow us to change the basis of the negotiations. Of course, just like you, I will jump over backwards if we could go for a unified island, but I seem to remember that every time we went for the desirable, despite of the clear indications that such moves could never take us to a happy ending, we suffered immense pain and ended up demoralised and far worse than we were before we made these moves.

[Bananiot]

Piratis, you are wasting you time. You actually believe that things will stay as they are if we waste another opportunity for a compromise solution? Perhaps you should read the dark philosophers who some thousand of years ago told us that nothing remains the same in time. Everything changes and you cannot take a bath in the same river twice.

[bigOz]

Bananiot, I take my hat off to you! (yet again )

[Get Real!]

...you cannot take a bath in the same river twice.

I understand rivers flow so shouldn't that be in the same pond?