-mikkie2- wrote:Erol,
You have a habit of belittling peoples comments.
I have a habbit of presenting my views and why I hold them. If that comes accross to you as an attempt to belittle others (which is not my intent or motivation the vast majority of the time) I can only appologise for that.
-mikkie2- wrote:The process of negotiating the 35 chapters is not a process of having meetings in Brussels but involves each member state being able to monitor Turkey's progress under each chapter. This will require member states to have representations in Turkey in order to observe that she is indeed meeting her obligations.
I do not see how this requires Turkey to accept full recognition of the RoC as it stands today. Why can not functional recognition meet this need?
-mikkie2- wrote:It is not 'moving the goalposts' for Turkey to actully put into practice what she signs up to. Cyprus for example has the 3rd largest shipping fleet in the EU. This is a major interest for the EU that Cypriot registered vessels should be able to go about their business without hindrance. Clearly Turkey hinders Cypriot registered vessles which goes against the spirit of the protocol and against the fundamental founding principles of the EU.
It is not a case of putting into practice what she signs up for. She should (and I believe will) implement the accords on trade that she has now signed. That is not the same thing as saying she has to recognise formaly the RoC and this was NOT a requirement on her to start the acession process (the former was). To say the later is now a requirment when it was AGREED previoulsy that it was not is moving the goal posts. I do not see how anyone can maintain it is not unless they are only interested in propaganda positions aimed at securing maximum demands with no compromise on their part and no interest in reality.
-mikkie2- wrote:Functional recognition and diplomatic recognition. What is the difference? Just the opening of an embassy in Ankara? Well woopy do! Functional recognition is what counts and Turkey will have to give that irrespective of whether she gets anything in return for it.
The difference is massive. Full political recognition which once granted can not be resinded require Turkey to abanandon the TRNC and TC entirely - removing their recognition of the TRNC and reversing their entire policy on Cyprus and total capitulation of Turkey to GC maximalist demands in Cyprus - and I believe you know this?
If you read the very carefully written statement made by Turkey that she put out when she signed the protocal it is clear that she is prepared to give the RoC 'functional recognition'. If this is what you want and demand as a precondition to starting talks as far as I am concerned you have it. However it seems to me that the RoC is saying that even if you behave as if you recognise the RoC without actually recognising it formaly (and thus abandon TRNC and TC entirely) and despite the fact that this was not the agreed requirment - then you can not start accession talks.
-mikkie2- wrote:The TC's will VANISH under Turkish control and outside the EU. You have to stop and think about what is actually in the best interests of your community. At the moment you are not masters of your own destiny. The GC's at the moment are. Even if we have partition we will still be our own masters whilst you will be assimilated into the Turkish nation with your identity diminishing even further.
We know the risks posed to us (better than you do in all probability). If the TC have a stark choice between no effecitve say in their own country at the hands of GC that have in the past treated us with contempt as a community and violated our rights as a community and indivduals or no effecitve say in their own country at the hands of Turkey that has defended us polticaly and militarily in the past we would I believe chose the later as we have always done.
It is perfectly possible for Turkey to start acession talks with only a 'functional' recognition of the current RoC that preculdes full formal political recognition pending a comprehensive agreed solution in Cyprus, provided of course that the RoC choses to not try and force it's maximal demands on Turkey and TC and in the process 'risk all' but accepts that an agreed negotiatied process of give and take is the right way to solve the Cyprus problem (and in doing so remove the ultimate block on Turkish accession that is due to take 15years +)
-mikkie2- wrote:As opposed to the maximalist demands of Turkey! Where is the spirit of cooperation and comprmise from Turkey?
Turkeys position has moved radically in regard to Cyprus. Where as before they had a position that the matter was solved and finished in 74 and there were two seprate independent states in Cyprus, they now accept and stated their comitment to an agreed negotiatied solution under the auspices of the UN. Where as before they refused to sign or implement the trade agrements with the RoC they have now signed them and agreed to implement with the proviso that this does not represent formal recognition of the RoC. These are real and significant moves by Turkey and yet they are written off as nothing by yourself apparently.
In return the RoC has shown what compromise? She still insits that Turkey recognise the RoC as the sole legitimate government of all of Cyprus. She still insists that Turkey withdraws from Cyprus and abandons the TC polticialy to the 'mercy' of the GC community - and not within the framework of an agreed settlement. She still insits that the agreed (by the RoC included) conditions that were put on Turkey for the start of accession should actualy now be changed, after that agrement was made and extended to total capitualation of Turkeys position on Cyprus and regardless of an agreed settlemenbt in Cprus.
Thats how it looks to me.
The RoC is playing a dangerous game - egged on by anti Turkish entry to the EU forces. She is risking all realistic hope of an agreed settlement in Cyprus based on compromise from both sides (and all that will mean for all cypriots) in the persuit of maximalist GC desires - as she has done many times in the past to all our cost. Thats my view.