Cyprus-Forum.com

[insan]

I don't think he is sincere of being a compromising negotiator. He many times reiterated that there r still big divergences on some basic issues.

I hope you're right, but I don't think so.. what happened to to date does not support the above..

He is well aware of that the problem won't be solved (actually he won't let it be solved) until the end of Talat's term in office. If Eroglu or any other right wingers is elected for presidency after Talat, he will get a great opportunity to put the blame on Turkish side regarding the deadlock. However there is a high possibility of Talat and his team remain as a negotiator. If again Talat is elected for presidency he will continue his tactical negotiation process and exert getting the support of international community to pressurize Turkey and TCs for more concessions in favour of GC-Greek solution thesis.

You seem to be labouring under the illusion that who is the TC negotiator depends on TC "elections" and is not decided by Turkey.. The March deadline is artificial.. Turkey will not allow Eroglu to become the negotiator under any circumstances.. I would bet money on this.

it is most likely that TC-Turkish side will ask for pre-conditions for the next round of talks. One of the pre-conditions will be lifting the isolations and other one most probably be the acceptance of Turkish guarantorship... if these pre-conditions r not accepted by GC-Greek side; TC-Turkish side will officialy start exerting intense international diplomacy for recognition of TRNC.

Pre-conditions, recognition etc used to be Turkey's previous strategy (stating the problem was solved in 74).. why do you think Turkey has changed this in recent years? What do you think will happen if Turkey goes back to this strategy?

I believe that the only way for such a strategy to work is if GCs vote No for a second time, which is where Christofias et al are taking us..

There's a strong cooperation and collabortaion between TC governments and Turkish governments. Turkish governments be it leftists or rightists mostly prefered to cooperate and collaborate with right wing governments of TCs because they don't have much divergences regarding the solution of Cyprus problem.

After the collapse of soviet union as all other left wing parties(except far left i.e socialists) our left wing changed it's ideologic philosophy towards a closer point to right wing ideology and social demcracy ground.

It is true that they one way or another influenced the outcome of TC elections but in a positive way. For example in order to get rid of Denktash hegemony on Cyprus issue, our opposition needed the support of Turkey....

Talat, when compared to Denktash is less experienced but more open minded than Denktash who is no longer needed under the recent circumstances of Cyprus and the world.

I agree with u that Turkey will try to influence the next presidency elections in favour of common TC and Turkish interests despite the fact that abt 35% of TCs believe that Eroğlu would be a far better president and negotiator than Talat.

See, depending on the circumstances; TC political groups invite Turkey to support them for common TC-Turkish interests. When they have close relations and cooperation in all fields; this is inevitable.

"Cyprus problem was solved in 1974"... this statement was made in 2005 by ex-prime minister of Turkey, Ecevit; as a consequence of frustration he felt after the rejection of Annan Plan by GCs. It does not represent official policy of Turkey.

Turkey has never carried out an intense diplomacy for recognition of TRNC. Seeking recognition for TRNC has been the B plan of TC-Turkish governments since 1983. Due to more significant problems of Turkey and political crisis she faced until early 2000s; Turkey couldn't adequately get involved with the solution of Cyprus problem but especially, recently gives strong signs of being decisive to solve Cyprus problem one way or another.

[Tony-4497]

"Cyprus problem was solved in 1974"... this statement was made in 2005 by ex-prime minister of Turkey, Ecevit; as a consequence of frustration he felt after the rejection of Annan Plan by GCs. It does not represent official policy of Turkey.

Turkey has never carried out an intense diplomacy for recognition of TRNC. Seeking recognition for TRNC has been the B plan of TC-Turkish governments since 1983. Due to more significant problems of Turkey and political crisis she faced until early 2000s; Turkey couldn't adequately get involved with the solution of Cyprus problem but especially, recently gives strong signs of being decisive to solve Cyprus problem one way or another.

From 1974 to 2004, a period of 30 long years, the stated Turkish position was that the problem had been solved in 1974. This tune changed ONLY AFTER Cyprus became an EU member and a country that can, on its own, block Turkey's own EU path.

Seeking recognition (i.e. your plan B) is not a plan that can work, except perhaps in respect of a few Turkic "stan" countries noone pays any attention to anyway.

No serious country will ever recognise a state founded on stolen EU land - unless of course GC leadership proves to be stupid enough to take to referendum an unacceptable plan, hence forcing a second No by GCs. In such a case, I am not sure what will happen.

The best you can hope for, as a plan B, is annexation by Turkey.. which of course will not be recognised as such internationally but may ease your self-imposed, so called isolation.. It would, however, also mean the termination of Turkey's European aspirations.

[Bananiot]

Tony, the people I call "rejectionists" are the ones who since 1948 have rejected every single plan that was proposed, probably 15 of them in total. Some of them were far better than the Annan Plan and obviously the plans prior to 1974 gave the edge to the GC's. Yet, some people (Lyssarides, Papadopoulos, just to mention a couple) always said "no", probably because they had something else at the back of their mind.

As to your worries, I could say that you are entitled to feel like this and I can see why, but I feel that the worse scenario is to allow this opportunity to go by without making a really cracking effort, when Turkey has also a vested interest to see the Cyprob solved. In another 5-10 years there will be no problem to solve and the north part of Cyprus will be lost to Turkey forever.

[Sotos]

Tony, the people I call "rejectionists" are the ones who since 1948 have rejected every single plan that was proposed, probably 15 of them in total. Some of them were far better than the Annan Plan and obviously the plans prior to 1974 gave the edge to the GC's. Yet, some people (Lyssarides, Papadopoulos, just to mention a couple) always said "no", probably because they had something else at the back of their mind.

As to your worries, I could say that you are entitled to feel like this and I can see why, but I feel that the worse scenario is to allow this opportunity to go by without making a really cracking effort, when Turkey has also a vested interest to see the Cyprob solved. In another 5-10 years there will be no problem to solve and the north part of Cyprus will be lost to Turkey forever.

And you want to give the south part to Turkey also? Unity under Turkish rule? Thanks but no thanks!

[-mikkie2-]

"And you want to give the south part to Turkey also? Unity under Turkish rule? Thanks but no thanks!"

Keep your friends close and your enemies closer!

It is false to assume that in a united Cyprus, Turkey will use the TC community to get its way on the island. Political interference by Turkey in a united Cyprus would not go down well inside the EU. Remember, Turkey is an aspirant memeber. She will be under constant scrutiny.

Can you imagine the TC's blocking particualr legislastion or agreements because it doesn't suit Turkish interests? It will go down like a lead baloon! Cyprus will not become a Turkey by proxy.

The key here is to ensure that there is a rock solid deadlock resolution mechanism in a united federal Cyprus. And its here were the leaders are stumbling on and it will be interesting to see how this will be resolved.

The alternative of partition is a disaster because the EU border will run through Cyprus and the inevitable consequence of having Turkey outside the EU. Eventually we will be faced by a million Turks in the north - what a fine prospect!

[Piratis]

"And you want to give the south part to Turkey also? Unity under Turkish rule? Thanks but no thanks!"

Keep your friends close and your enemies closer!

It is false to assume that in a united Cyprus, Turkey will use the TC community to get its way on the island. Political interference by Turkey in a united Cyprus would not go down well inside the EU. Remember, Turkey is an aspirant memeber. She will be under constant scrutiny.

Can you imagine the TC's blocking particualr legislastion or agreements because it doesn't suit Turkish interests? It will go down like a lead baloon! Cyprus will not become a Turkey by proxy.

The key here is to ensure that there is a rock solid deadlock resolution mechanism in a united federal Cyprus. And its here were the leaders are stumbling on and it will be interesting to see how this will be resolved.

The alternative of partition is a disaster because the EU border will run through Cyprus and the inevitable consequence of having Turkey outside the EU. Eventually we will be faced by a million Turks in the north - what a fine prospect!

Mikkie, I don't know where you base your EU optimism. Today Turkey is illegally occupying 1/3rd of an EU member state and still this is not a major obstacle for her EU accession process or her relationship with the EU. (The obstacle is the Cyprus government, and if the TCs had a say the Cyprus government would not be an obstacle either)

If Turkey will be able to control Cyprus legally and invisibly through their minority on the island, in what way would this "not go down well inside the EU"?

If we make some bad agreement and give to Turkey the control of the whole Cyprus then be sure Turkey will use this power and the EU will not bother at all about it.

And while now we at least have some power to cause some problems to Turkey by using the EU membership of Cyprus, a bad agreement that would downgrade us from a state to a community will mean that we will not be able to do any of that without the approval of TCs. This means that Turkey will be able to control the whole of Cyprus, and we will not even have the power to fight back through EU.

Regarding the "million Turks in the north", that is better than a million Turks in the whole of Cyprus. Apart from the many 10s of thousands of Settlers we would legalize and they would be free to roam Cyprus, do you think that we (GCs) will have any control of the north coast of Cyprus to stop the migration of Turkish settlers to our island?

Such arrangement is not a solution. Not only we would officially declare the north part of Cyprus as being "Turkish" but we would lose control of our state and create more problems than those we have now.

[Tony-4497]

Tony, the people I call "rejectionists" are the ones who since 1948 have rejected every single plan that was proposed, probably 15 of them in total. Some of them were far better than the Annan Plan and obviously the plans prior to 1974 gave the edge to the GC's. Yet, some people (Lyssarides, Papadopoulos, just to mention a couple) always said "no", probably because they had something else at the back of their mind.

As to your worries, I could say that you are entitled to feel like this and I can see why, but I feel that the worse scenario is to allow this opportunity to go by without making a really cracking effort, when Turkey has also a vested interest to see the Cyprob solved. In another 5-10 years there will be no problem to solve and the north part of Cyprus will be lost to Turkey forever.

My view, back when the Annan plan was rightly rejected, was that the RoC should have taken the initiative and put forward a list of specific changes, founded on universally accepted principles and human rights, that would have made the plan acceptable to us. Then this should have been marketed within the EU, getting buy in and stating that any negotiations between the EU and Turkey are over until this plan is accepted by Turkey.

Something similar should, in my view, be done now, which would indeed amount to a "cracking effort". What certainly is NOT a "cracking effort" is for "generous" Christofias to continue to make unacceptable concessions that CLEARLY lead to a plan very similar to Annan - simply because this will lead to failure AND a steep penalty for us.

If Turkey is not prepared to accept our fundamental rights (still within a BBF), then we have NO OPTION but to wait until this happens. I disagree that there will be no problem to solve in 5-10 years. As time passes, Turkey will become more willing to accept a reasonable compromise - in considering history, you need to note that it is only AFTER 2004 that Turkey has had a MOTIVE for a solution.

Especially if our side finds a clever way to link EU-Turkey talks with protective measures such as limitations on inflow of settlers and development of stolen properties, reinforced by legal cases such as Orams, then time will become a factor which is on OUR side.

[Tony-4497]

Mikkie

Can you imagine the TC's blocking particualr legislastion or agreements because it doesn't suit Turkish interests? It will go down like a lead baloon! Cyprus will not become a Turkey by proxy.

The key here is to ensure that there is a rock solid deadlock resolution mechanism in a united federal Cyprus. And its here were the leaders are stumbling on and it will be interesting to see how this will be resolved.

To add to Piratis's points, pls note that we are WAY past this now... The leaders are no longer stumbling on this issue..

And that's because the GC leader, in a burst of generosity, has accepted, for the first time, Turkish rotational presidency WITH executive authority..

..this means that for the 2 or 3 years when the 82% GCs will have a TC or more likely TURKISH president, the latter will also have the winning vote in any deadlock. This means that for the period of Turkish presidency of the united RoC, the 82% GCs will not only be unable to make any decisions, but will ALSO be unable to BLOCK any decisions.

[Piratis]

Tony, I am not sure if the president will have a winning vote or not, but certainly the Cypriot people will not be able to take any important decision in a democratic way without the decision first being approved by Turkey. The whole of Cyprus will be under the control of Turkey as the pseudo state is today.

We made a compromise for a BBF, but that doesn't mean we should give to Turkey the control of the whole Cyprus. With any kind of BBF Turkey would probably maintain her influence over the north part of Cyprus, but we should be stupid to accept something that would give the power to Turkey to control the whole island.

[YFred]

Mikkie

Can you imagine the TC's blocking particualr legislastion or agreements because it doesn't suit Turkish interests? It will go down like a lead baloon! Cyprus will not become a Turkey by proxy.

The key here is to ensure that there is a rock solid deadlock resolution mechanism in a united federal Cyprus. And its here were the leaders are stumbling on and it will be interesting to see how this will be resolved.

To add to Piratis's points, pls note that we are WAY past this now... The leaders are no longer stumbling on this issue..

And that's because the GC leader, in a burst of generosity, has accepted, for the first time, Turkish rotational presidency WITH executive authority..

..this means that for the 2 or 3 years when the 82% GCs will have a TC or more likely TURKISH president, the latter will also have the winning vote in any deadlock. This means that for the period of Turkish presidency of the united RoC, the 82% GCs will not only be unable to make any decisions, but will ALSO be unable to BLOCK any decisions.

We are finally getting somewhere. We have to trust each other, otherwise it will fall appart like last time, remember.
It takes 2 to tango.