Cyprus-Forum.com

[georgios100]

OK you guarantee-obsessed Cyprus Turks who need to feel safe. Let's see how commited you are to this "guarantee" premise.

What if free Cypriots insist on Russia's guarantee, to replace the fork-tongued Brits and the weak, wishy-washy Greeks? In order to feel safe?

So if Turkey oversteps the mark in Cyprus, Russia would be duty bound to intervene, if needs be in Turkey?

Or how about China? I'm sure either country would be flattered to be asked to play such a peace-keeping role in the eastern-Med?

Or better still, what about Turkey and all five permanent members of the UN Security Council being guarantors? And if Turkey dared to intervene unilaterally against the wishes of the UNSC, all would be duty bound to kick Turkey's backside?

How does any of this sound? Does this solve the guarantee issue? Would everyone feel safe with such an arrangement?

I agree totally with Malapapa.

I would like to add that which ever guarantor is picked, this guarantor must have boots on the ground, an actual armed force to monitor the situation and intervene instantly (within minutes) to prevent/stop possible hostilities before they even start. Because it takes little time for the hardliners to kill innocent civilians or each other.

This force must be on the RoC payroll, both communities share the expense. The force will stay as long as needed. It is well understood that all other armed forces must be desolved including the removal of the 2 British bases ( a sad relic of the colonials).

Georgios100

[CopperLine]

The wish for there to be guarantor powers (by whichever 'side') is a function of insecurity. So those who oppose in principle the idea of guarantors (me included) have to first acknowledge what those insecurities are and second address those insecurities in a manner which will reduce them to such a point which obviates the demand for a guarantor.

Right Copperline, and since both sides can't agree if there should be a certain "Guarantor Power", just because of their history in Cyprus of that particular Guarantor Power, it is then best to find an alternative source to provide the security, if in fact it's needed. The key word here is "security" and not who provides it.

Agreed

Does it matter if I drive a Ford or a Nissan to get from A to B just because Toyota cars are having a brake problems. No, of course not. I can still get to where I'm going, just not with a car with faulty brakes on a Toyota. Same applies here with the security issues, if security was the ONLY issue, which I doubt very much, it being just that.!

Agreed.

[Viewpoint]

I agree each side should be allowed to choose their own guarantor country.

Brilliant. I choose all five permanent members of the UNSC to guarantee Cyprus against Turkey. But failing that I'd live with just Russia, which shares a border with Turkey, has interests in Cyprus, and who would relish the opportunity to kick Turkey's butt if it ever Turkey dared to over-step the mark in Cyprus again.

OK done deal seeing the developing economic relationship between Turkey and Russia you will be left out in the cold.

[Viewpoint]

OK you guarantee-obsessed Cyprus Turks who need to feel safe. Let's see how commited you are to this "guarantee" premise.

What if free Cypriots insist on Russia's guarantee, to replace the fork-tongued Brits and the weak, wishy-washy Greeks? In order to feel safe?

So if Turkey oversteps the mark in Cyprus, Russia would be duty bound to intervene, if needs be in Turkey?

Or how about China? I'm sure either country would be flattered to be asked to play such a peace-keeping role in the eastern-Med?

Or better still, what about Turkey and all five permanent members of the UN Security Council being guarantors? And if Turkey dared to intervene unilaterally against the wishes of the UNSC, all would be duty bound to kick Turkey's backside?

How does any of this sound? Does this solve the guarantee issue? Would everyone feel safe with such an arrangement?

I agree totally with Malapapa.

I would like to add that which ever guarantor is picked, this guarantor must have boots on the ground, an actual armed force to monitor the situation and intervene instantly (within minutes) to prevent/stop possible hostilities before they even start. Because it takes little time for the hardliners to kill innocent civilians or each other.

This force must be on the RoC payroll, both communities share the expense. The force will stay as long as needed. It is well understood that all other armed forces must be desolved including the removal of the 2 British bases ( a sad relic of the colonials).

Georgios100

I agree you can have the Russian troops in your state and we the Turkish army in our state paying the cost for both armies is that OK with you?

[Kifeas]

The wish for there to be guarantor powers (by whichever 'side') is a function of insecurity. So those who oppose in principle the idea of guarantors (me included) have to first acknowledge what those insecurities are and second address those insecurities in a manner which will reduce them to such a point which obviates the demand for a guarantor.

Or maybe a function of megalomaniac regional geo-strategic fixations to have the island under ones perennial suzerainty, and nationalist irredentist complexes that hold Cyprus -being once part of the Ottoman empire, a Turkish province by kismet.

[humanist]

We will never be a country and we will never be one peoples who don't fight with each other until we truly and fully unite

[Malapapa]

I agree each side should be allowed to choose their own guarantor country.

Brilliant. I choose all five permanent members of the UNSC to guarantee Cyprus against Turkey. But failing that I'd live with just Russia, which shares a border with Turkey, has interests in Cyprus, and who would relish the opportunity to kick Turkey's butt if it ever Turkey dared to over-step the mark in Cyprus again.

OK done deal seeing the developing economic relationship between Turkey and Russia you will be left out in the cold.

How do you mean? Are you suggesting Russia wouldn't fulfill her guarantor obligations, if their orthodox co-religionists needed them to intervene against aggression by Turkey?

[Viewpoint]

In order to address your concerns I am willing to accept Russia in response to your accepting Turkey do we have a deal?

[paliometoxo]

why would russia be a garantore power?

[Malapapa]

OK you guarantee-obsessed Cyprus Turks who need to feel safe. Let's see how commited you are to this "guarantee" premise.

What if free Cypriots insist on Russia's guarantee, to replace the fork-tongued Brits and the weak, wishy-washy Greeks? In order to feel safe?

So if Turkey oversteps the mark in Cyprus, Russia would be duty bound to intervene, if needs be in Turkey?

Or how about China? I'm sure either country would be flattered to be asked to play such a peace-keeping role in the eastern-Med?

Or better still, what about Turkey and all five permanent members of the UN Security Council being guarantors? And if Turkey dared to intervene unilaterally against the wishes of the UNSC, all would be duty bound to kick Turkey's backside?

How does any of this sound? Does this solve the guarantee issue? Would everyone feel safe with such an arrangement?

I agree totally with Malapapa.

I would like to add that which ever guarantor is picked, this guarantor must have boots on the ground, an actual armed force to monitor the situation and intervene instantly (within minutes) to prevent/stop possible hostilities before they even start. Because it takes little time for the hardliners to kill innocent civilians or each other.

This force must be on the RoC payroll, both communities share the expense. The force will stay as long as needed. It is well understood that all other armed forces must be desolved including the removal of the 2 British bases ( a sad relic of the colonials).

Georgios100

I agree you can have the Russian troops in your state and we the Turkish army in our state paying the cost for both armies is that OK with you?

Russian troops aren't needed in Cyprus. It would be better for Cypriots to pay for them to be permanently stationed in bases on the border with Turkey (with, say, Georgia's approval - or better still Armenia). They would then be ready to advance into Turkey itself if ever Turkey over-stepped the mark in Cyprus. For Russia would be given intervention rights in Turkey (not Cyprus), as part of our new guarantee agreement.

I think it's important for Turkey to know how Cypriots feel about having a powerful foreign neighbour with rights to invade them in case of trouble. After all, free Cypriots will need to feel safe, the way Cyprus Turks need to feel safe. And this arrangement would certainly have that affect.

How many Turkish troops do you want in Cyprus, because this will determine the level of Russian military (and associated hardware) needed on Turkey's border. The less the better, as remember, all Cypriots will have to pay for these Russians.