I will leave behind your offensive comments about people that you simply do not agree with and move to the next point:
I agree that there're definitely risks for both communities with plan's implementation. However, you have to take risks to gain something. Nothing could be worse than today.
With the general idea that “you have to take risks to gain something” I agree, and I never said that we should not take risks.
The problem is that we have two different sides of view. Personally I perfectly understand your side of view, and as I said many times if I was a TC I would vote “yes” too. Unfortunately you don’t want to understand our side of view.
Let me try explain once more.
Lets see how the two sides view your two phrases “you have to take risks to gain something” and “Nothing could be worse than today.”
The TC side.
What they have is an unrecognized state which might seem to be autonomous but they know themselves that is under the total control of Turkey, not so good economy, embargos, they don’t know where the future is taking them and therefore they are is some insecurity about their future.
With Annan plan they give up some land (which was not theirs in the first place but anyways) but the people affected by this are a minority among them. This minority can not decide the result of a referendum. (I remind you that about 35% did vote against the plan). This is the only “significant” compromise, since Turkey maintains some of their troops and the right to intervene, and that Turkey reduces the number of troops is actually something that TCs wanted too.
With Annan plan they would get the recognition as an independent autonomous entity within Cyprus. With such a solution they would be more autonomous than before, since Turkey’s control would be reduced. All embargos end, and a lot of financial aid comes to them to rebuild their economy. Whats even better is that without having to work for it, they suddenly become EU members, and since they are from the poorest regions they would be on the receiving end for many years.
In the event that “United Cyprus” brakes down, they loose almost nothing from what they gained with the Annan plan. Since the Annan plan requires agreement from them for everything, if they wish they can force “united Cyprus” to dissolve, without actually doing anything illegal.
The GC side:
They live in a recognized state that represents the whole island but part of it is under occupation and the island is effectively partitioned. Their economy is good, and now they are within EU and they feel more secure and more safe about their future. They have a big number of refugees that want to return or regain control of their properties.
With Annan plan they receive some land back, and a promise that some refugees will return and some property will be given back. (these refugees are only a minority within GCs)
At the same time they “sign” and accept the permanent partition of Cyprus, they relinquish many of their rights and enter into an association with another, poorer, state where a lot of their tax money will end up. They give up democracy, since an 18% minority is promoted to 50% power. Their good economy is almost certainly going to become worst, and the time to recover might be a couple or several years. Even worst, they are now less secure, since Turkey maintains their troops and has the right to intervene to the whole Cyprus whenever they see fit.
In the event that “United Cyprus” collapses, they are left with a destroyed economy (at best, I will not even count the possibility of another Turkish invasion – since they have the right, they can find the excuse if they want), almost no return of refugees in the other state (and even if some of them went their, they will be now forced to leave again), and a final an permanent partition of Cyprus.
So, “you have to take risks to gain something” means that TC have to risk almost nothing. Even those people that will be relocated, they will be relocated
after a new home is build for them. And this home will be build by either GC or EU money. Even if “united Cyprus” collapses they again lost nothing compared to what they have now.
It is like a poor man giving one cent to buy almost all the tickets of a lottery. In the worst case instead of winning the grand price of 1 million, they will win the second or third price, of 500 or 200 thousands. That’s a lot more than the 1 cent they bet, and even a lot more than what they have now.
On the other hand, what we can gain is only a part of what we rightfully own. And to gain this part we have to pay its weight in gold. We have to give up democracy, security, many of our human rights, and sacrifice our good economy. Even worst we don’t get what we paid for immediately (like you do), we get a paper that is written on it that we should get it in some time in the future. This is already worst than what we have today. Remember that gains (profits) come after you subtract the cost from the revenues. In our case the cost is much greater than the revenues (and even worst: the paper that says that we will receive these revenues in the future) .
All these even before calculating the risk! So if everything goes according to the plan we will be worst off, and if everything collapses we will be way worst off.
TCs: Gaining a lot OR gaining even more.
GCs: Loosing a lot OR loosing even more.
