Cyprus-Forum.com

[Main_Source]

Main_Source, I fail to see how the human rights of GCs would be suppressed in a TCCS which is open enough to accept GCs in reasonably large numbers.

If for instance there is a limit that "only 1/3rd of the TCCS citizens can be GC" this will amount to 80,000 GCs with full political rights in the TCCS. Add to that, the number of people who will be able to live there anyway, while retaining GCCS internal citizenship - there will not be a single GC who will end up saying "hey, I want to live in this or that place, but I am not allowed to".

What Metecyp says he will accept sounds reasonable to me. What I find objectionable are the particular provisions of the Annan Plan, where in practice no GCs would have been allowed to return, or live in the north, in the foreseeable future. This of course was the handiwork of Rauf Denktash, who had managed to "spit into the soup" of the negotiations, tilting the final product towards the ethnic segregation model he had always supported.

Having said that, a system like that of Belgium, or Finland, or Switzerland, where in different regions different ethnic groups are the majority, is OK with me as a vision for Cyprus. In this sense I can accept a "bizonal bicommunal federation".

This still means that GC are restricted to where they want to settle in their own island...and also that TC unfairly have special rights that GC dont have. Also, does this mean that if this TC controled zone is around Kyrenia...then many of the refugees still wont get their homes back because TC want to gurantee they are the majortiy ethnic group in this area?

This will still be an excuse to cause division.

The only thing I wouldnt mind is if there was TC controlled area, much like a huge borough council or something...but all still came under the umbrella of the RoC...but I totally object to the idea that such an area should be ethnically manipulated. Again, you are making GC suffer because we are the majority ethnicity.

...and dont even BOTHER bringin up something about 63-74, because a lot of TC here like to try and look fair and say they agree both communtiesd were wrong...but still they want to make the GC suffer for problems both peoples caused and in a totally different time in Cyprus than now.

[Alexandros Lordos]

Also, does this mean that if this TC controled zone is around Kyrenia...then many of the refugees still wont get their homes back because TC want to gurantee they are the majortiy ethnic group in this area?

This will still be an excuse to cause division.

This brings us to the heart of the issue. The Annan Plan tried to place restrictions by municipality, so that for instance GCs could not be more than 18% of the population of Lapithos in Lapithos, or 18% of the population of Kyrenia in Kyrenia. This is the precise meaning of "ethnic manipulation" which - I agree with you - is utterly objectionable.

A more humane and reasonable approach is to simply have a safeguard percent for the whole constituent state - e.g GCs can only be 33% of the Turkish Cypriot constituent state - but with no "sub-limits" enforced on the municipality level as well. If GCs end up being the majority in a particular town or village, then so be it. Let them elect a GC mayor. At the politically critical level, that of the constituent state, the TCs will always be the majority.

This would actually work out in quite a natural way - given the realities of social dynamics, it is quite unlikely that this safeguard level of 33% would ever be reached, though it would exist to re-assure the Turkish Cypriots that they will never again become a minority in their own constituent state.

Besides, with a Turkish Cypriot constituent state at about 27% of the area of Cyprus, and with 1/3rd of this constituent state "owned" by GCs, TCs end up controlling 18% of the land - exactly in accordance with their population ratio.

[Main_Source]

If your saying that particular TC zones are controlled by at least 66% of TC but there is no limit in how many GC an live in those zones, then I dont have a problem with that.

but I despise the fact that there would be a special area in Cyprus were TC must be the majority, because to me that is totally ethically wrong and unnatural...and it still means that certain refugee's wouldnt have there right to return home.

[Agios Amvrosios]

If a "bizonal" model was acceptable to us don't you think that it would have been in existence by now?

No amount of "fine tuning" is going to make the Annan Plan comply with EU,International Laws & Human Rights Laws.

Cyprus is not the place to try untested constitutional models based on ethnic cleansing. The refugees want their homes back and they to enjoy all the democratic freedoms enjoyed by everyone else in the EU.

[Alexandros Lordos]

If a "bizonal" model was acceptable to us don't you think that it would have been in existence by now?

A bizonal model is tolerable to us (meaning the GC public), if it is not also saddled with presence of the Turkish Army, presence of settlers, and unreal restrictions on residence rights.

Unfortunately, negotiations so far tried to force upon us not just a bizonal model, which is only just tolerable in itself, but all these other things as well. This is why the "no" at the referendum was so strong, and this is why a bizonal model is not in existence yet.

No amount of "fine tuning" is going to make the Annan Plan comply with EU,International Laws & Human Rights Laws.

Forget the Annan Plan. We are talking here about the need for a new plan for a bizonal federation, with significant departures from the Annan Plan on the issues of security, settlers, property rights, residence rights.

However, it is impossible now to cast aside the notion of a bizonal federation. Whether we like it or not, our leadership already committed itself in 1977 and 1979. If we try to break away from this framework, the result will be partition, not a better solution.

Cyprus is not the place to try untested constitutional models based on ethnic cleansing.

There is nothing untested about bizonal federations, with different linguistic/ethnic groups being the majority in each region. See Belgium, Switzerland, and a host of other examples.

The refugees want their homes back and they to enjoy all the democratic freedoms enjoyed by everyone else in the EU.

This can still happen within the framework of a bizonal federation.

[Alexandros Lordos]

but I despise the fact that there would be a special area in Cyprus were TC must be the majority, because to me that is totally ethically wrong and unnatural...and it still means that certain refugee's wouldnt have there right to return home.

You may not like it, but can you live with it? This is the critical question.

As for refugees not having the right of return, this is not necessarily the case. With a 1/3rd GC northern constituent state, 80,000 refugees could return under TC administration, in addition to the 90,000 or so who can return under GC administration in Varosha, Morfou etc. This number combined, is almost equal to the number of refugees, and far greater than the number of refugees who actually wish to return.

[Dhavlos]

just a question ive thought,

but how could the TCs regulate between who is TC and who is GC? would it just be by language/name/ethnicity, or would it be a person who holds a TCCS 'citizenship' card?

do you know what i mean? who would say 'your TC, your GC'?

[Alexandros Lordos]

just a question ive thought,

but how could the TCs regulate between who is TC and who is GC? would it just be by language/name/ethnicity, or would it be a person who holds a TCCS 'citizenship' card?

do you know what i mean? who would say 'your TC, your GC'?

The way this was handled in the Annan Plan was that people would be defined according to their mother tongue - more or less the same way they were defined in the 1960 constitution.

So you would end up having TCCS citizens who are actually "of Greek mother tongue" and GCCS citizens who are actually "of Turkish mother tongue".

Another possibility is what Turkcyp has suggested in the past, that we would have "primary constituent state citizenship" and "secondary constituent state citizenship" - the primary citizenship would be fixed on the date of the settlement - so in practice all GCs would have GCCS citizenship - while the secondary citizenship would be awarded in accordance to where people choose to live in the future. This proposal is very interesting, and it could solve a lot of problems related to bizonality / freedom of residence - since residence restrictions become redundant, while bizonality is maintained on the political level.