Cyprus-Forum.com

[Hatter2]

Just goes to show that those that spout opinions, like the guy who suggested the Hague, know fuck all about international law, or about the situation in particular. How the hell did they get to the positions they hold, in what is supposedly a qualification driven system!!

The dude should have known that at the ICJ only states have locus standi, and the process involves rules accepted by the contending parties. Therefore, Turkey cannot go to the ICJ because a- it does not recognise Cyprus and b-it has not accepted the law of the sea convention. These things are elementary aspects of the situation, but a senior man in the EU does not know these facts. Then they tell you that only in Cyprus people are hired with MESON. Seems it is happening all over.

Are you kidding? Of course he knows. Question is, why is he so unashamedly promoting the turkish agenda?

[Pyrpolizer]

Just goes to show that those that spout opinions, like the guy who suggested the Hague, know fuck all about international law, or about the situation in particular. How the hell did they get to the positions they hold, in what is supposedly a qualification driven system!!

The dude should have known that at the ICJ only states have locus standi, and the process involves rules accepted by the contending parties. Therefore, Turkey cannot go to the ICJ because a- it does not recognise Cyprus and b-it has not accepted the law of the sea convention. These things are elementary aspects of the situation, but a senior man in the EU does not know these facts. Then they tell you that only in Cyprus people are hired with MESON. Seems it is happening all over.

Are you kidding? Of course he knows. Question is, why is he so unashamedly promoting the turkish agenda?

It's called shameless lubrication my friend. They did the same thing with the Anan Plan...

[boomerang]

The most recent criticism of Turkey came from the EU High Commissioner Stefan Fule on Tuesday who said during a session of the European Parliament that Turkey’s policy toward Greek Cyprus’ gas exploration plans in the East Mediterranean is “irresponsible” and to be condemned.

Turkish frigates are not directly escorting the research vessel but are sailing in the region, ready to intervene if the Piri Reis is harassed, the Turkish Foreign Ministry official said. “We already had some armed ships in the region patrolling in international waters. What we are doing now [since the Greek Cypriots began drilling] is increasing their visibility.”

“[Turkey’s policy] is irresponsible and needs to be condemned,” Fule said during the parliamentary session, which was discussing tensions between Turkey and Greek Cyprus. Greek Cyprus has the right to search for natural resources within its Exclusive Economic Zone, or EEZ, and can conclude agreements with third countries for hydrocarbon exploration, he said.

Noting that the EU was following the issue very closely, Fule said: “The high representative and I made it very clear right from the start that threats are not an option when it comes to solving problems between neighbors. Disputes need to be settled by peaceful means. This is a guiding principle in international relations and in the EU.”

The European Commission believes reaching a comprehensive settlement to the Cyprus issue is a priority, Fule also said.

“We all acknowledge the most important issue right now is the Cyprus settlement talks. A united Cyprus would bring peace stability and security within the EU, in our close neighborhood and one of the most troubled regions in the world,” Fule said. “I believe Turkey and the EU have much more to gain from integration and dialogue than tension, especially at a time when the stakes in the region following the Arab Spring are so high. Turkey and the EU need to support the aspirations of the people in the southern Mediterranean region in terms of democracy, human rights, stability and prosperity.”

http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/n.php?n=turkey-snubs-eu-us-calls-for-cyprus-thaw-2011-09-28

I am not sure who is reporting what but fule seems to be saying otherwise to turkish aggressions...but sure as hell he is spelling out to the turks the future acceptable cyprob solution...i think we can conclude the EU is not interested to what turkey sees as a solution...the north belongs to the EU and they have set the rules for all EU territtory...

[Nikitas]

The Arab Spring is going to spring a big angouri for the Turks and the EU both. They think that the incoming regimes are going to be OK with having a piasokoliko system where they will switch foreign dominators, ie the Turks and the EU for the Americans.

They are in for a big surprise.

[Get Real!]

Flash a bit of oil and it is amazing how fast they forget notions like "two separate states on Cyprus" .

I told you before they are clowns. Now they are proving it themselves, to everyone. Americans, who were in favor of partition, now must be scratching their heads trying to figure this new angle.

All of a sudden "federation" is a buzz word among the TCs and "confederation" is BAD!

They’re not just clowns Nikitas, but shameless peasants with no honour!

[Nikitas]

GR,

I try to follow the TC press through the summaries published by the government information office. Lately I too have noticed a change in the "two states" rhetoric.

What will be funny is not the oil, but the results of the terrestrial analyses being carried out on land in the RoC. It really would be funny if the gold tests come through positive.

[CBBB]

GR,

I try to follow the TC press through the summaries published by the government information office. Lately I too have noticed a change in the "two states" rhetoric.

What will be funny is not the oil, but the results of the terrestrial analyses being carried out on land in the RoC. It really would be funny if the gold tests come through positive.

We found the gold, but it belongs to Deniz!

cyprus33945.html

[Jerry]

It looks as if someone in Turkey is starting to think seriously about the legal aspects of the EEZs instead of threatening gunboat "diplomacy"


http://www.todayszaman.com/columnistDet ... sId=258246

First, what is an EEZ? It is one of the basic instruments of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) of Dec. 10, 1982, which came into force in 1994. This international legal instrument gives coastal states some sovereignty rights over the area stretching from their shorelines to a maximum of 200 miles, including the sea bed, as well as whatever lies underneath the seabed. Evidently an EEZ cannot be declared unilaterally, and must be agreed upon by other neighboring coastal states. Disputes over an EEZ are addressed at the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea or the International Court of Justice. For more info, see the UN's Division for Ocean Affairs and Law of the Sea at http://www.un.org/depts/los/index.htm.
Let's now turn to Turkey's dilemma. Turkey is not party to UNCLOS, which largely deprives it of the right to challenge Greek Cyprus' EEZ. This is even more true when coastal states other than Greek Cyprus, Lebanon and Egypt are parties. As for Israel and Syria, they, like Turkey, are not party to it.

[Kikapu]

It looks as if someone in Turkey is starting to think seriously about the legal aspects of the EEZs instead of threatening gunboat "diplomacy"


http://www.todayszaman.com/columnistDet ... sId=258246

First, what is an EEZ? It is one of the basic instruments of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) of Dec. 10, 1982, which came into force in 1994. This international legal instrument gives coastal states some sovereignty rights over the area stretching from their shorelines to a maximum of 200 miles, including the sea bed, as well as whatever lies underneath the seabed. Evidently an EEZ cannot be declared unilaterally, and must be agreed upon by other neighboring coastal states. Disputes over an EEZ are addressed at the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea or the International Court of Justice. For more info, see the UN's Division for Ocean Affairs and Law of the Sea at http://www.un.org/depts/los/index.htm.
Let's now turn to Turkey's dilemma. Turkey is not party to UNCLOS, which largely deprives it of the right to challenge Greek Cyprus' EEZ. This is even more true when coastal states other than Greek Cyprus, Lebanon and Egypt are parties. As for Israel and Syria, they, like Turkey, are not party to it.

No doubt the author of this article is just a another impostor pretending to be a Turk!

[Pyrpolizer]

It looks as if someone in Turkey is starting to think seriously about the legal aspects of the EEZs instead of threatening gunboat "diplomacy"


http://www.todayszaman.com/columnistDet ... sId=258246

First, what is an EEZ? It is one of the basic instruments of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) of Dec. 10, 1982, which came into force in 1994. This international legal instrument gives coastal states some sovereignty rights over the area stretching from their shorelines to a maximum of 200 miles, including the sea bed, as well as whatever lies underneath the seabed. Evidently an EEZ cannot be declared unilaterally, and must be agreed upon by other neighboring coastal states. Disputes over an EEZ are addressed at the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea or the International Court of Justice. For more info, see the UN's Division for Ocean Affairs and Law of the Sea at http://www.un.org/depts/los/index.htm.
Let's now turn to Turkey's dilemma. Turkey is not party to UNCLOS, which largely deprives it of the right to challenge Greek Cyprus' EEZ. This is even more true when coastal states other than Greek Cyprus, Lebanon and Egypt are parties. As for Israel and Syria, they, like Turkey, are not party to it.

Unfortunately the law of the sea is not that clear in defining the borders of EEZ (of 200 miles) in comparison to how clear it is regarding the territorial waters (of 12 miles). Whereas it is very clear that in case the territorial waters overlap, then we draw the line in the middle, it does not say the same for EEZ and you are right the borders must be agreed with neighboring coastal states.

If Turkey had signed the treaty then it could perhaps raise a dispute claiming some partial rights on waters that normally belong to other States' EEzs. Look for example what large region could it perhaps place a dispute claim on. I doubt she would earn anything, but she could of have tried.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

According to Turkish logic however they have rights extending everywhere even upto the Indian Ocean.

Damn this means they have rights in the Arab Gulf too