Cyprus-Forum.com

[Capt J Sparrow]

I very much appreciate your clarification. It seems you are not in fact proposing a return to the 1960 Agreement - but to some 'advanced' version, very much in line with what Makarios (allegedly) proposed. But, what makes you think, second-time around, the TCs (aka Turkey) would more likely accept these amendments? Have they learnt some lesson?

What makes you think that some Greek Cypriots (aka Greece) would accept the amendments?

Do you think Greece has learnt any lessons? If not, do we have your permission to remind them of the fact that they are total spineless fuck ups?

[Get Real!]

We cannot deny returning to the 1960 agreements, all we can do is negotiate amendments because of the defacto changes and events of all these years.

Nonsense! The Turkish minority invited and collaborated with the Turkish invader to setup a breakaway "state" and in the process denounced the RoC.

There can never be any going back to what they denounced and destroyed.

[Pyrpolizer]

Pyrpolizer, hi and thank you yet for another great post above. I totally agree with your comments.

Pyrpolizer for President.


I wonder if the Presidential office logs onto the Cyprus-Forum because I think they can take some valuable comments form here.

Mate can you expand a little on the comments about solving settler issues and property rights?

cheers

Thank you my friend, but no thank you for "president".
I am a simple man

[Pyrpolizer]

the 1960 agreement actually was functional for 4 years until the TMT took over the Tc leadership, who were backed by the UK,CIA etc...,,does it really matter if we have a new agreement or the old one from 1960 when 50 rufians from either side can turn the island into a basketcase. One addition to the ROC constitution should be a mechanism to impeach the President, as it stands now the prez can blow up a billion euro power station and a naval base with no consequences.

Like I said:
a) we cannot deny returning to the 1960 agreements because this is the status of the RoC until TODAY.
b)Enosis and Taksim are no longer an option, we are in the EU. This was the only reason the Roc was not allowed to function properly by both sides. In addition to that the Kibrislis were depending on Turkey for money to pay their teachers because their communal assembly couldn't raise enough. The Kibrisli teachers were the core of TMT. (Today the Kibrisli teachers are the core pro-unification LOL)
And finally
c) what would you prefer the return to the RoC with amendments or the dissolution of the Roc for an unknown system???

[Pyrpolizer]

It is the easiest and fasted way. Notice Sener does not say return to the 1960 agreements but to the partnership type of those agreements.
I am absolutely sure this is going to happen soon after we start getting gas out. Either the Kibrislis or our side will propose it.It will be return to the RoC system with some amendments. A one week to maximum one month talks at the negotiation table, plus a comprehensive confirmation by the Kibrislis of the laws and agreements the Kypreoi have done all these years running the RoC.

You talk as if the TCs merely caused a minor skirmish and we have only to agree to continue as if nothing much has happened.

Since Turkey revealed its hand, so soon, with the invasion, there cannot be any going back to 'partnerships'. This was undesirable then - and time and Turkey have revealed why such an unfair, one-sided 'partnership' was planned for us in the first place.

Turkey must be rubbing its hands with glee. Its expensive 'investment' might still bring home the bacon...

We cannot deny returning to the 1960 agreements, all we can do is negotiate amendments because of the defacto changes and events of all these years.
The real problems in 1960 agreements were the 30% on government jobs, the 40% in the army positions (of only a couple of thousand men) the veto rights of the vice president, the rights of the Guarantor powers and the fact that for education etc we had the communal assemblies, and . Now we have Ministry of Education, there will be no army, and certainly in the areas where the Kibrislis reside the government employees will be Kibrislis. There won't be fixed quotas for other positions, but positions open for every citizen. I don't have any problem with 30% MPs, and I don't think there will be a problem abolishing the Guarantees since we are now in the EU.
Other than that the 1960 agreements were fully functional in fact this is the constitution we continue running the RoC to date.

Returning to the 1960 agreements with some amendments we automatically solve the property problem, the settlers problem, the power sharing issue,we get full EU aquis, and the kibrislis get a bizonality that might last for ever in the sense they will continue be concentrated in the north. They also get bicommunality because the 1960 system was actually a bicommunal system.

So everybody wins!

I very much appreciate your clarification. It seems you are not in fact proposing a return to the 1960 Agreement - but to some 'advanced' version, very much in line with what Makarios (allegedly) proposed. But, what makes you think, second-time around, the TCs (aka Turkey) would more likely accept these amendments? Have they learnt some lesson?

I disagree with you that bi-zonality/bi-communality are immutable. This bifurcation was at the heart of what was wrong with the imposed Constitution and should be the keynote amendment. The most which would be required would be some positively-discriminated appointments of social workers/civil servants to address the concerns of the minorities (all minorities, not just TCs - much as they have in London Borough Councils).

You have to look at the present situation my friend to work out what could and what could not of happen realistically.
Suppose for a moment we fight a war we win and we expel Turkey from here. Then what? How on earth will you move so many thousand people? To where? Will you throw the Kibrislis in the streets, in the sea, or will you put them in concentration camps???
The simple answer is you will do nothing other then securing your borders put some soldiers to control any uprising and let people continue with their lives under close surveillance. You will have to give them time so that each one settles his properties.In the end you will also have to pay for their schools and other public services and we are talking doing all these in an explosive and hostile environment because of the recent war. Suppose a)everything goes well what will the end result be?
BIZONALITY for one. Yes you would have the power to unilaterally change the constitution and get rid of BICOMMUNALITY. But then again I quite agree with you you will have to have positive discrimination for the Kibrislis as it happens for all minorities let aside a minority of such size. For your information the Maronites and the Armenians already get positive discrimination in RoC.
In the end what will be the net profit? Nothing much in my opinion. And this pre-supposes a wining war Vs Turkey LOL.
Suppose b)everything does not goes well what will the end result be? A new Israelis-Palestinian situation!

On the other hand return to the RoC with some ammendments will give you a better result, peacefully, legally, and with absolutely no sense of hostility, and too much appetite to move ahead for all the Cypriots.

A win-win situation!

[Pyrpolizer]

We cannot deny returning to the 1960 agreements, all we can do is negotiate amendments because of the defacto changes and events of all these years.

Nonsense! The Turkish minority invited and collaborated with the Turkish invader to setup a breakaway "state" and in the process denounced the RoC.

There can never be any going back to what they denounced and destroyed.

This is just your opinion. Try discussing the issue of who denounced and destroyed the RoC with the other side. haven't you learned anything after almost 30,000 posts in here? Haven't you learned that both communities did the same things?

Try telling the UN the EU or anyone you wish that we can deny return of the Kibrislis to the RoC system and see what happens.

[GreekIslandGirl]

It is the easiest and fasted way. Notice Sener does not say return to the 1960 agreements but to the partnership type of those agreements.
I am absolutely sure this is going to happen soon after we start getting gas out. Either the Kibrislis or our side will propose it.It will be return to the RoC system with some amendments. A one week to maximum one month talks at the negotiation table, plus a comprehensive confirmation by the Kibrislis of the laws and agreements the Kypreoi have done all these years running the RoC.

You talk as if the TCs merely caused a minor skirmish and we have only to agree to continue as if nothing much has happened.

Since Turkey revealed its hand, so soon, with the invasion, there cannot be any going back to 'partnerships'. This was undesirable then - and time and Turkey have revealed why such an unfair, one-sided 'partnership' was planned for us in the first place.

Turkey must be rubbing its hands with glee. Its expensive 'investment' might still bring home the bacon...

We cannot deny returning to the 1960 agreements, all we can do is negotiate amendments because of the defacto changes and events of all these years.
The real problems in 1960 agreements were the 30% on government jobs, the 40% in the army positions (of only a couple of thousand men) the veto rights of the vice president, the rights of the Guarantor powers and the fact that for education etc we had the communal assemblies, and . Now we have Ministry of Education, there will be no army, and certainly in the areas where the Kibrislis reside the government employees will be Kibrislis. There won't be fixed quotas for other positions, but positions open for every citizen. I don't have any problem with 30% MPs, and I don't think there will be a problem abolishing the Guarantees since we are now in the EU.
Other than that the 1960 agreements were fully functional in fact this is the constitution we continue running the RoC to date.

Returning to the 1960 agreements with some amendments we automatically solve the property problem, the settlers problem, the power sharing issue,we get full EU aquis, and the kibrislis get a bizonality that might last for ever in the sense they will continue be concentrated in the north. They also get bicommunality because the 1960 system was actually a bicommunal system.

So everybody wins!

I very much appreciate your clarification. It seems you are not in fact proposing a return to the 1960 Agreement - but to some 'advanced' version, very much in line with what Makarios (allegedly) proposed. But, what makes you think, second-time around, the TCs (aka Turkey) would more likely accept these amendments? Have they learnt some lesson?

I disagree with you that bi-zonality/bi-communality are immutable. This bifurcation was at the heart of what was wrong with the imposed Constitution and should be the keynote amendment. The most which would be required would be some positively-discriminated appointments of social workers/civil servants to address the concerns of the minorities (all minorities, not just TCs - much as they have in London Borough Councils).

You have to look at the present situation my friend to work out what could and what could not of happen realistically.
Suppose for a moment we fight a war we win and we expel Turkey from here. Then what? How on earth will you move so many thousand people? To where? Will you throw the Kibrislis in the streets, in the sea, or will you put them in concentration camps???
The simple answer is you will do nothing other then securing your borders put some soldiers to control any uprising and let people continue with their lives under close surveillance. You will have to give them time so that each one settles his properties.In the end you will also have to pay for their schools and other public services and we are talking doing all these in an explosive and hostile environment because of the recent war. Suppose a)everything goes well what will the end result be?
BIZONALITY for one. Yes you would have the power to unilaterally change the constitution and get rid of BICOMMUNALITY. But then again I quite agree with you you will have to have positive discrimination for the Kibrislis as it happens for all minorities let aside a minority of such size. For your information the Maronites and the Armenians already get positive discrimination in RoC.
In the end what will be the net profit? Nothing much in my opinion. And this pre-supposes a wining war Vs Turkey LOL.
Suppose b)everything does not goes well what will the end result be? A new Israelis-Palestinian situation!

On the other hand return to the RoC with some ammendments will give you a better result, peacefully, legally, and with absolutely no sense of hostility, and too much appetite to move ahead for all the Cypriots.

A win-win situation!

It's not a win-win situation, because, it is a non-starter. The TCs did not take to any amendments the first time round and there is no sign Turkey will return to first base (1960) when it has already achieved its aim from what (it claims) the Constitution allowed!

Meanwhile, there is no reason why the RoC should have to be dissolved in order to move on from this hostage situation. We joined the EU without dissolution, didn't we? What a massive accomplishment that was - and it didn't need any referals back to the 1960 imposed Constitution.

There's no way I envisage a break with the ceasefire and for the RoC to attack Turkey, militarily. That's an absurd scenario. However, we need to give the new political situation a chance, sit tight a while longer, and watch Turkey be hoisted by her own petard. Turkey is in 'check', mate! Then we clean up the mess (don't forget we have a history of exchanging populations - Turkey is still down some 600,000 from the last time - now we balance the books), apply all those ECHR decisions for GCs to return to their properties etc ... and expand the Democracy we introduced via our new EU status.

[Pyrpolizer]

Ok 4 posts in a row, sorry for that, but the issue concerns what I really consider to be the best solution for the Cyprob.

[Pyrpolizer]

It's not a win-win situation, because, it is a non-starter. The TCs did not take to any amendments the first time round and there is no sign Turkey will return to first base (1960) when it has already achieved its aim from what (it claims) the Constitution allowed!

Meanwhile, there is no reason why the RoC should have to be dissolved in order to move on from this hostage situation. We joined the EU without dissolution, didn't we? What a massive accomplishment that was - and it didn't need any referals back to the 1960 imposed Constitution.

There's no way I envisage a break with the ceasefire and for the RoC to attack Turkey, militarily. That's an absurd scenario. However, we need to give the new political situation a chance, sit tight a while longer, and watch Turkey be hoisted by her own petard. Turkey is in 'check', mate! Then we clean up the mess (don't forget we have a history of exchanging populations - Turkey is still down some 600,000 from the last time - now we balance the books), apply all those ECHR decisions for GCs to return to their properties etc ... and expand the Democracy we introduced via our new EU status.

A non starter says who? See my reply to GR.
When I said "dissolved" I was referring to solutions like BBF or any other type of agreed solution. Yes the Roc would be partially dissolved then. With the return to the Roc system with amendments there will no dissolving not even partial.
Turkey is not in a check mate it is in stale-mate. It has no power to do anything more than what she did, but on the other hand it has all military power to keep on holding the occupied.I am sure you know what it means to have so much land in your hand. Greece for example could of get out of bankruptcy by just selling some tiny islands...

you said " we need to give the new political situation a chance, sit tight a while longer..."
However you forgot that the whole point of the discussion is that the Kibrislis will not simply sit back and wait. As soon as they realize they are losing it all, they will officially ask for their return to the Roc system and our only demand will be for some amendments. I kind of suspect Turkey will push them to do so as well.
And like I said there is not a chance in a million we could of refuse.

[Hermes]

However you forgot that the whole point of the discussion is that the Kibrislis will not simply sit back and wait. As soon as they realize they are losing it all, they will officially ask for their return to the Roc system and our only demand will be for some amendments. I kind of suspect Turkey will push them to do so as well.
And like I said there is not a chance in a million we could of refuse.

Interesting points, Pyrpolizer. I wonder if you could clarify why you feel sure that the TCs will ask for a return to the RoC. Which among them will ask? Eroglu and his kind want an autonomous state and would prefer a continuation of the status quo, subsidised by Turkey of course, if they can't get partition. The settlers have no future in a return to the 1960 arrangements and given that they are the majority in the north, there is no political pressure from them to re-unify the island. And what makes you suspect that Turkey will agree to the RoC system as the basis for a withdrawal? We won't accept a "guarantee system" that will give them the right of intervention or to keep any troops on the island. And what of their supposed "strategic" interests in Cyprus?

You must have a scenario in mind as to how the TCs would make this happen. We know what the agenda of Turkey and the TC leadership is: it is partition. Always has been. Seems to me you are relying on some kind of Kibrisli grassroots agitation for a return to the 1960 constitution? Sener Levent apart, I don't see too many calling for it. Do you think the majority of Kibrislis would take it if offered a choice? Would the TC leadership want it? Why would Turkey?

I agree that we wouldn't be able to refuse it, with amendments, if it were offered. It might be the most satisfactory option. But how such a scenario would unfold is unclear to me.