BirKibrisli wrote:Piratis wrote:BirKibrisli wrote:I can see a clear theme emerging from this thread...As far as most GCs are concerned the Annan Plan was Partition in disguise,so the TCs voted for partition in 2004 and they voted for a Partitionist in 2010,nothing has changed...
Perhaps this is where the problem lies...Those TCs who voted for the Annan plan did not think they were voting for Partition...They thought were voting for Reunification with a lot of compromises...Remember that the arch-partitionist,Denktash and his former party,he UBP were srongly against the AP...Varosia and Morphou were to be returned. Turkish Army would be withdrawn,albeit according to a timetable...All but 45000 of the settlers would depart...A certain percentage of the GC refugees would be allowed to return....and of course the ultimate compromise for the TCs,the trnc would be abolished...All this certainly did not seem like partition to the TCs..So the two sides had very different perceptions of what was on offer...There was also a lot of hype and perhaps even some exaggeration regarding the potential EU benefits,but this could not have played such a big role,in my opinion...The TCs knew they would get all the benefits as individuals anyway...As long as they could get themselves an RoC citizenship identity card...The promise of lifting the embargoes and the ensuing turn about did not help the matters either...The TCs saw the GC rejection as a slap in the face...A solution was withing their reach,the long decades of political and social uncertainty and dependence on the goodwill of Turkey were about to come to an end...It would have been a terrible disappointment...Emotions play a big part in most Cypriots life,sometimes to the detriment of sensible and logical analysis of the events...Bloody civil wars and decades of continuing and escalating disputes and animosity often deprive people of objective judgement...This is playing an important part in the current impasse I believe...Neither side really understands or appreciates the other's predicament...Hence what seems to be a big compromise for one side can easily be dismissed as insignificant for the other...This is what happens if you try to solve a long standing dispute without coming to terms objectively with the historical reasons underlining it...
What is a "compromise" according to you?
If Republic of Cyprus allows you to have your own land in Paphos does this count as a compromise from our side? If GCs say that after a solution there can be some TC ministers in the government, some TC members in the parliament and a TC member in the EU parliament, is this a compromise from our side? If we say that we will allow TC teams to play in international games, is this a compromise? If we say that the "Cyprus Turkish Airlines" can fly direct from Cyprus to anywhere they want, is that a compromise?
If TCs believe that giving some land back to the
rightful owners is a compromise from them, or if they believe that the removal of the Turkish troops and Turkish settlers who are
illegally in Cyprus is a compromise from them, then obviously they don't know what "compromise" means.
I believe that the right way to measure how much compromises each side made is to measure against the 1960 agreements (which favor the TCs to begin with). When you do that you will realize that it is
only the GCs who made compromises, and no compromise whatsoever was made by the TCs.
If you take as benchmark the 1960 Constitution to decide on who is making 'compromises" you are on shaky grounds,Piratis...The TCs can argue that they made the ultimate compromise by walking out of government and letting the GCs run the show for all these years...It is time to repay the compromise and let the TCs run the RoC government for the next 46 years...
And during those years they will let us keep twice the land from what we own as they do for the last 35 years? Cyprus will not be enough for that, we will need part of Turkey too
You are again going back to history trying to present the GCs as the evils and the TCs as the innocents, and in this way excuse your demand that GCs should now "pay". Well, I don't see it this way, from my point of view it is the TCs and Turkey who have most of the blame for what happened in the past, although unlike you I do not want them to "pay" as I do not believe that indiscriminately punishing innocent people for what members of their community did in the past is the right way to built a better future.
In the end of the day, regardless of what happened in history and how much blame each side has, do you really expect that GCs will vote for a plan that punishes them? Maybe you think we are masochists?
Why don't you take the post 1974 reality as benchmark..??? a lot has happened since the 1960 agreement,you don't need me to remind you...Will you ever begin to see the world outside official GC propaganda framework???When it does suit you you want to start the argument from 1974,when it doesn't you are happy to go back to 1960...You want to have your cake and eat it too...I can understand why for propaganda purposes the RoC government would insist they reperesent all of Cyprus..But you cannot ignore the reality that across the green line there is an entity self-titled the TRNC,and you need to deal with that reality...This is where most GCs go wrong in my opinion..They cannot differentiate between their governments propaganda and the reality...Hence you cannot see the real compromises the TCs are making...Which is a pity,becuase that stops you from feeling empathy and compassion for them...And vice versa...The biggest obstacle to overcome if we are to find a just and lasting solution...
When did I start the argument from 74. Personally I always say that the problem started in the 50s, and its roots go back a few centuries when the Turks first invaded our island. Selectively choosing parts of history is what you do, not me. Lets not start that discussion again because we had it many times.
The 1960 is important because it is the last and only agreement which defines the legal rights of each side. The way I see it, allowing somebody to have his legal rights does not count as a compromise. This goes for both GCs and TCs. The real compromises are those which
lessen the legal rights of each side and it is
only the GCs side which has accepted that will make such kind of compromises.
But if you want to base the meaning of "compromise" on what each side controls today (legally or illegally), fine! We can do that also.
So what we will "gain" in this case with an Annan plan kind of "solution" would be 7% of land and the refugees that would return to that land. Thats it. Nothing more. Don't tell me about additional refugees that would return under TC admin, because very few would do that. Don't tell me about compensations to those that would not return, because those compensations would come out of our own pockets, while now thought the courts those compensations come out of your and Turkey's pockets. All we would "gain" is that 7% of land.
Now lets see what we will have to give up: Not only we will give up the 100% ownership of the one and only legal state in Cyprus, but we would give to Turkey the right to control the whole island. Democracy will be dissolved. Partition would be
legalized and we will not have any rights over the north part of our island ever again. Along with the north part of our country we would sign away our human rights. We would have to pay out of our pockets to bring the standards of TCs higher, and pay for the welfare of the Settlers. We will give up the stability and prosperity we have now and exchange it with some unstable system that will create deadlocks and possibly conflicts...
I could say a lot more. The conclusion is that with such a solution we would give up a lot more than what we would "gain". In effect we would "gain" 7% of land, and in return we would legalize partition and give control of the whole Cyprus to Turkey. For most of us this is a very very very bad deal.
On the other hand, for most TCs (except maybe those who live in that 7% .. even though their resettlement would again come out of our pockets, not theirs) Annan plan was an excellent deal. Partition would be
legalized and their pseudo state which nobody recognizes would be
upgraded to a recognized Cyprus state within which the TCs would have
more independence than what they have now, not less. All the problems they face today (direct trade, direct flights, international games etc) would disappear right away. They would get shitloads of money from us and EU to develop their economy... the benefits for TCs are endless.
For us to come to an agreements two things need to happen:
1) For the settlers not to vote in a referendum, because obviously they will not vote for something that doesn't suit them (possibly most of those "TCs" who voted "no" in 2004 were settlers)
2) To have a plan which will be lot more balanced so a 55-60% of people from each community will vote for it.
