Cyprus-Forum.com

[denizaksulu]

yes but nothing will give turkey the incentive to stop demanding two states on our island and to stop destrying anything tc...

i doubt anything will stop them.. the only thing we have is stopping them to join eu and help of other countries to not recognise trnc and to "convince" them to leave...

what do you think turkey would accept to leave cyprus? what they find acceptable is not acceptable to the south and vice versa

I would leave that to politicians, but try entry into EU with no Veto from the RoC.
Rename Lokoumia 'Turkish delight'.
I warned you I am no politician.

[Kikapu]

the only way that is happening is if they are forced off the island.. they wont go willingly

No one will do that Palio....an incentive is needed and I wonder what that incentive might be?

A no "No Veto" vote on her EU aspirations.!!

The only problem is, there are other nations in front of the RoC's no "No Veto" vote against Turkey.!!

Regardless of what other nations does in time, Turkey's path to the EU runs right through the RoC. Sooner or later, Turkey will need to accept this reality since there won't be any other "back-door" entry possibilities for her.! Even a nation of 70 million need to accept that their EU future rests in the hands of 1 million. This is one of those times, where size does not matter but what it can do with it.!

[paliometoxo]

yes but nothing will give turkey the incentive to stop demanding two states on our island and to stop destrying anything tc...

i doubt anything will stop them.. the only thing we have is stopping them to join eu and help of other countries to not recognise trnc and to "convince" them to leave...

what do you think turkey would accept to leave cyprus? what they find acceptable is not acceptable to the south and vice versa

I would leave that to politicians, but try entry into EU with no Veto from the RoC.
Rename Lokoumia 'Turkish delight'.
I warned you I am no politician.

lol good call..

your right

[vaughanwilliams]

[quote="paliometoxo"]yes but nothing will give turkey the incentive to stop demanding two states on our island and to stop destrying anything tc...

i doubt anything will stop them.. the only thing we have is stopping them to join eu and help of other countries to not recognise trnc and to "convince" them to leave...

what do you think turkey would accept to leave cyprus? what they find acceptable is not acceptable to the south and vice versa[/quote]


Therein lies the dilemma.

[paliometoxo]

unfortunatly yes.. im sure the leaders will be able to come up with a middle thats acceptable to both sides

[vaughanwilliams]

unfortunatly yes.. im sure the leaders will be able to come up with a middle thats acceptable to both sides

Unfortunately, some of the issues don't always have a middle ground. All TR troops out v. all stay - middle ground is some stay? Do you find that acceptable?
Property, land and settlers - middle ground?

[paliometoxo]

unfortunatly yes.. im sure the leaders will be able to come up with a middle thats acceptable to both sides

Unfortunately, some of the issues don't always have a middle ground. All TR troops out v. all stay - middle ground is some stay? Do you find that acceptable?
Property, land and settlers - middle ground?

well in the annan plan they where willing to leave only a few hundred behind. actually 650 i think.but imo thats still unacceptable a turkish army just 75km north of cyprus is that not garantee enough? its not like turkey is next to australia.. geeze i mean the drive to nicosia to pafos is further. middle ground is turkey is so close they could be here in minutes in the unlikely event of war.. turkey is just making stupid excuses to put troops on our island.

settlers christofias offerd them to keep 15 k settlers i think thats more then fair is it not? i would say thats a fair middle ground on the settlers issue?..


but i agree with you..some issues like garantore powers.. south say none turkey says all three original countries same as 1960 agreement.. where is a middle line? maybe always have un stay.. even though they are usless..just as usless as england has been to cyprus.

[vaughanwilliams]

unfortunatly yes.. im sure the leaders will be able to come up with a middle thats acceptable to both sides

Unfortunately, some of the issues don't always have a middle ground. All TR troops out v. all stay - middle ground is some stay? Do you find that acceptable?
Property, land and settlers - middle ground?

well in the annan plan they where willing to leave only a few hundred behind. actually 650 i think.but imo thats still unacceptable a turkish army just 75km north of cyprus is that not garantee enough? its not like turkey is next to australia.. geeze i mean the drive to nicosia to pafos is further. middle ground is turkey is so close they could be here in minutes in the unlikely event of war.. turkey is just making stupid excuses to put troops on our island.

settlers christofias offerd them to keep 15 k settlers i think thats more then fair is it not? i would say thats a fair middle ground on the settlers issue?..


but i agree with you..some issues like garantore powers.. south say none turkey says all three original countries same as 1960 agreement.. where is a middle line? maybe always have un stay.. even though they are usless..just as usless as england has been to cyprus.

"just as usless as england has been to cyprus."
If England hadn't annexed Cyprus from Turkey you might be speaking Turkish instead of Greek these days.

[paliometoxo]

thats true they did take cyprus from turkey because turkey sided with th enimy.. luckily for us..

but they also did not help in the devide and rule putting tc as police and putting cerfues on the island.. i guess one good thing has come out of england.. plus they offerd cyprus to greece unofficially.. not sure thats a good thing though.

[CopperLine]

There is something that I've never understood about this Forum which this topic highlights.

With the exception of a few loopy racist ultra-nationalists, most posters on these Cyprus Problem threads say that they're interested in some kind of negotiated settlement. In other words most posters don't think that the answer is to be found in the barrel of any gun. That being the case, the problem is one, mainly, of setting the parameters of negotiation including defining who the legitimate and effective parties to negotiation should be.

The puzzle I have about the forum is that most posters simply restate over and over and over again what the problem is (in their view) and not what possible solutions might be offered. Unless we air 'possibilities' and not rule them out from the outset, we won't get anywhere. Not getting anywhere is exactly what the loopy racist ultra-nationalists of both sides are quite happy with, but surely not what those wishing for negotiation should settle for.

The axiom I follow is that negotiations are, by definition, always with current or erstwhile enemies or those with very different interests. You don't need to negotiate with friends or those whose interests correspond. And therefore negotiation to be able to produce possibly viable results entails discussion of giving up some of one's own interests.

All very obvious I suppose,but if CF is in any way a reflection of wider Cypriot public ways of addressing the Cyprus problem then we're screwed indefinitely. I know it is a cliched phrase but 'if you are not part of the solution, then you are part of the problem.'

PS Turkey should and could withdraw troops now. Even saying that there is to be a phased withdrawal over, say, three years would be a major filip.