Cyprus-Forum.com

[Nikitas]

OK, let us get realistic about BBF.

In law we have the realist theory which justice Oliver Wendell Holmes summarised it as follows:

"it may be useful to look at the law from the point of view of the bad guy, he does not care a damn about inductive or deductive reasoning, he only wants to know what will happen to him".

By analogy I do not care about "governance", or "power sharing" and other such complicated notions. My questions are simple:

Can I own property in the "other state", can I set up business there, can I move my money in and out unhindered as I can do between any two states in the US, any two provines in Canada, any two Cantons in Switzerland?

So far what I have seen are various interpretations of Bizonality and Bicommunality that seem to indicate that in Cyprus there will be special provisions to prevent me doing the above. Ergo: BBF equals partition. The difference between now and formall BBF is our signature, seeing most anything else has been ruled out.

Territorial adjustment is out due to "dislocation", property ownership is out due to diminution of bizonality, free residence is out because it woud undermine bicommunality etc etc. So why not stop kidding ourselves and admit the truth? BBF is partition, the only saving grace is that while it legalises Taksim it outlaws the Enosis of the north with Turkey.

As long as I am told the truth i have no problem with the above. It is when they lie to me and bullshit me that I get pissed off.

[Kikapu]

BBF is the only option left for us to save Cyprus and it is gone past the time where we could engage in meaningless mind exercises. Nikitas proposes that BBF in general is just another name for partition. This is absolutely ridiculous, because he gives the impression that he merely looks at the two zones and bingo, he thinks of partition! However, the basis on which BBF stands has been sorted out a long time ago by the Makarios-Denkash agreements of the late 70's and has been reflected in all solution plans since then. In all solution plans and the Annan Plan, it is especially noted that the central government will have such power as to safeguard the unity of the country taking into account the bicommunal nature of the state. The principle of political equality of the two communities and the two federal zones, also is found in all solution plans, and has been reiterated in a number of Security Council resolutions.

Kikapu, you talk about neopartitionists who you claim are upset because the Annan Plan was rejected. I remember that the people who opened champagne bottles at the rejection of the plan by the GC community, were Denktash and the deep state in Turkey who thanked the GC's for saving the TRNC.

The deliberate facade by Denktash after the AP had to continue, Bananiot. If Denktash was pretending to be against the AP before the referendum, the deliberate impression that was portrait was that the AP had to be good for the GCs and bad for the TCs. It was a trick to manipulate the outcome of the referendum, which some GCs bought into it, and when the GCs said OXI, you would hardly expect for Denktash to say, "Why didn't you GCs fall for my trick". Denktash used the OXI vote then to do some bragging that his attempts being against the plan was to save the "trnc" and was thankful for the GCs for saying OXI. It was nothing but a face saving attempt for himself, or else why would his followers are now still demanding everything in the open, what the AP had it hidden. There is nothing different what Eroglu is demanding than what the AP was offering. Why isn't Denktash and all the NeoPartitionist now refusing what Eroglu and Turkey demanding.?? Sorry Bananiot, but you seem to have more faith in the truthfulness spoken by a Fascist than I would..

The AP was a Partition Plan because despite what you stated here from above "In all solution plans and the Annan Plan, it is especially noted that the central government will have such power as to safeguard the unity of the country taking into account the bicommunal nature of the state.", the central government did NOT have such powers in the AP. The AP gave all three entities equal say in how the country was going to be run, so if one Federal state said we want things to be done this way or the other way or leave the union, it would have been their right. This is not what happens in True Federations, where the laws of the Federal states cannot supersede the laws of the Federal Government. That's why this was not a True Federation but a Confederation. That was the only way to have the partition desired by either side if one wanted, which there were takers.!

Here is what the AP said.

The {common state} shall fully respect and not infringe upon the powers and functions of the {component states} under this Constitution. Each {component state} shall fully respect and not infringe upon the powers and functions of the {common state} or the other {component state} under this Constitution. There shall be no hierarchy between the laws of the {common state} and those of the {component states}.



Once again,

"There shall be no hierarchy between the laws of the {common state} and those of the {component states}."

Basically it means, it was free for all to do as they wished.!

So Denktas outwitted the Un and the EU and the USA because they were all thinking that the OXI vote was going to come from the TCs and in the process PROMISED the Gcs EU admission whatever the outcome of the referendum. Shame they then blamed Tpap for tricking them and using USA money to promote the OXI vote from the GCs side.


You have no idea what the "nationalists are saying about Eroglu at the moment so please stop your claims that you do.....his name is mud at the moment because he is not delivering what he promised and has been sucked into the BBF scam.

All smoking mirrors then and more smoking mirrors now, Zan. What you see is not what it is, unless one is under 10 years old and accepts the illusions and tricks as real. I'm way passed being 10 years old.!

Why would the TCs say OXI to AP when they would be becoming a EU member as well as have the option to secede from the union and keep most of the land and have the GCs pay for everything as well as the Turkey having guarantor rights all over the island.? Only a idiot from the north would have said OXI to the AP. Denktash was not trying to fool anyone except the ones really mattered, the GCs. The quote below says it all, Zan.

"When votes were counted, the results said everything: 65 per cent of Turkish Cypriots accepted it, 76 per cent of Greek Cypriots rejected it. What political scientist, without needing to know anything about the plan, could for an instant doubt whom it favoured?"

The Divisions of Cyprus
by Perry Anderson

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v30/n08/ande01_.html

[zan]

OK, let us get realistic about BBF.

In law we have the realist theory which justice Oliver Wendell Holmes summarised it as follows:

"it may be useful to look at the law from the point of view of the bad guy, he does not care a damn about inductive or deductive reasoning, he only wants to know what will happen to him".

By analogy I do not care about "governance", or "power sharing" and other such complicated notions. My questions are simple:

Can I own property in the "other state", can I set up business there, can I move my money in and out unhindered as I can do between any two states in the US, any two provines in Canada, any two Cantons in Switzerland?

So far what I have seen are various interpretations of Bizonality and Bicommunality that seem to indicate that in Cyprus there will be special provisions to prevent me doing the above. Ergo: BBF equals partition. The difference between now and formall BBF is our signature, seeing most anything else has been ruled out.

Territorial adjustment is out due to "dislocation", property ownership is out due to diminution of bizonality, free residence is out because it woud undermine bicommunality etc etc. So why not stop kidding ourselves and admit the truth? BBF is partition, the only saving grace is that while it legalises Taksim it outlaws the Enosis of the north with Turkey.

As long as I am told the truth i have no problem with the above. It is when they lie to me and bullshit me that I get pissed off.

What if you were given the term "Loose Partition" in face of the unique CYPROB.........With the hope/plan of full unification if the two parties see fit in the future. If true unification is the dream then all efforts should go in that direction with all obstacles compromised.

[Nikitas]

Zan, they can call it Abracadabra, and as long as what I see is what I am going to get, it will be OK with me.

It is these long drawn out talks/negotiations/contacts/proximity talks etc that piss me off.

The only time I heard a straight talk on the matter was when Mesut Yilmaz visited Greece officially when he was PM and Mitsotakis said openly that if we are talking federation the territory issue is not primary, but if we are talking partition then "we are not going to do you any favors on territory".

Mitsotakis has a horrible reputation among the majority of Greeks, but he could talk straight on that point and was understandable by all regardless of sophistication and education status. That was 20 years ago, and we are still waiting to hear something equally simple and understandable.

[zan]

Zan, they can call it Abracadabra, and as long as what I see is what I am going to get, it will be OK with me.

It is these long drawn out talks/negotiations/contacts/proximity talks etc that piss me off.

The only time I heard a straight talk on the matter was when Mesut Yilmaz visited Greece officially when he was PM and Mitsotakis said openly that if we are talking federation the territory issue is not primary, but if we are talking partition then "we are not going to do you any favors on territory".

Mitsotakis has a horrible reputation among the majority of Greeks, but he could talk straight on that point and was understandable by all regardless of sophistication and education status. That was 20 years ago, and we are still waiting to hear something equally simple and understandable.

Does he make it any clearer than that as to maybe taking over some territory and the rest in compensation

[Kikapu]

Zan, they can call it Abracadabra, and as long as what I see is what I am going to get, it will be OK with me.

It is these long drawn out talks/negotiations/contacts/proximity talks etc that piss me off.

The only time I heard a straight talk on the matter was when Mesut Yilmaz visited Greece officially when he was PM and Mitsotakis said openly that if we are talking federation the territory issue is not primary, but if we are talking partition then "we are not going to do you any favors on territory".

Mitsotakis has a horrible reputation among the majority of Greeks, but he could talk straight on that point and was understandable by all regardless of sophistication and education status. That was 20 years ago, and we are still waiting to hear something equally simple and understandable.

Does he make it any clearer than that as to maybe taking over some territory and the rest in compensation

I don't think so, Zan. If partition means losing part of your country, what good is it to receive compensation for it. They want to keep the land. On the other hand, why would you need more land than entitled to based on previous ownership plus state land based on population of each community, since your main concern is security supposedly and self determination.??

[Nikitas]

Zan,

Mitsotakis was clear on it. Federation being co governing of all territory by both, is one thing, partition is another and Greece will insist on its fair share of the territory. As a foreign power it does not give a hoot about property. Remember that Greece has gone through two other rounds of population exchanges and has maybe gotten used to the process.

He might also have had a point that once you get to such a plain idea, partition, then all foreign powers understand it too, there being none of the compilcating factors which confuse the Anglosaxon mind. It becomes as simple as a football score, and that they can get to grips with. Such a process would knock flat all the trickeries of Eroglu and the like with their notions of "dislocation".

Now if anyone can explain the PRACTICAL difference between partition and BBF as described by Talat (emphasis on bizonality) and Erogu (emphasis on bicommunality) I would be grateful.

[zan]

Zan, they can call it Abracadabra, and as long as what I see is what I am going to get, it will be OK with me.

It is these long drawn out talks/negotiations/contacts/proximity talks etc that piss me off.

The only time I heard a straight talk on the matter was when Mesut Yilmaz visited Greece officially when he was PM and Mitsotakis said openly that if we are talking federation the territory issue is not primary, but if we are talking partition then "we are not going to do you any favors on territory".

Mitsotakis has a horrible reputation among the majority of Greeks, but he could talk straight on that point and was understandable by all regardless of sophistication and education status. That was 20 years ago, and we are still waiting to hear something equally simple and understandable.

Does he make it any clearer than that as to maybe taking over some territory and the rest in compensation

I don't think so, Zan. If partition means losing part of your country, what good is it to receive compensation for it. They want to keep the land. On the other hand, why would you need more land than entitled to based on previous ownership plus state land based on population of each community, since your main concern is security supposedly and self determination.??

the state has been doing quite well without this territory so is it right to hold thousands of people at refugee status who might well want to sell their property and get on with their lives......I am sure that a nice new sports car would appeal to the grandchildren of the deceased refugees rather than them being told that they have no rights as second generation Children of Refugees

[Nikitas]

No, they do not lose their rights, the ECHR said that there can be no compensation under the heading "loss of enjoyment", their rights are otherwise unaffected.

In any case, partition has no bearing on the property issue directly. That is the difference between partition and what is going on now in these interminable talks. At the local level there is care and effort to adjust individual property rights.

ALso, if the GC is OK to say stuff it, let me have a sports car, why not apply this easygoing attitude the other way round and say "OK let the owners have their land and use it as they see fit, after all we TCs are in control now and we have no reason to fear people farming or building on their land". Which brings us back to the meaning of "Bizonality" and "Bicommunality".

The issue is further complicated since under EU laws these rules would apply only to the two communities in Cyprus but not to other EU nationals.

So is anyone going to explain the PRACTICALITIES of BBF to us? Why can I put mysef for election as mayor of a distric of Athens, London, Paris, Warsaw, but not of a district in northern Cyprus where I was born?

[zan]

No, they do not lose their rights, the ECHR said that there can be no compensation under the heading "loss of enjoyment", their rights are otherwise unaffected.

In any case, partition has no bearing on the property issue directly. That is the difference between partition and what is going on now in these interminable talks. At the local level there is care and effort to adjust individual property rights.

ALso, if the GC is OK to say stuff it, let me have a sports car, why not apply this easygoing attitude the other way round and say "OK let the owners have their land and use it as they see fit, after all we TCs are in control now and we have no reason to fear people farming or building on their land". Which brings us back to the meaning of "Bizonality" and "Bicommunality".

The issue is further complicated since under EU laws these rules would apply only to the two communities in Cyprus but not to other EU nationals.

So is anyone going to explain the PRACTICALITIES of BBF to us? Why can I put mysef for election as mayor of a distric of Athens, London, Paris, Warsaw, but not of a district in northern Cyprus where I was born?

So you think that it would be alright to force the TCs back into small cantons in their own state........This is where the compromises come in Nikitas.....If the Two state system doesn't work then there is no chance of an agreed unification...Just a forced one and that is the TC worry....