Cyprus-Forum.com

[Panicos UK]

I personally think the agreement to a BBF was a mistake. It's to wooly a definition and is open to a variety of interpretations.

Apologies if I'm going off topic, this is my first post.

[Kikapu]

I personally think the agreement to a BBF was a mistake. It's to wooly a definition and is open to a variety of interpretations.

Apologies if I'm going off topic, this is my first post.

Actually, agreement to BBF was not a mistake for the GCs, since it meant that the 1960's agreements can be pushed aside legally while try and bring about more democratic agreements in the form of BBF. The GCs and the RoC is not obliged to return to the 1960 agreements as long as the agreement to BBF for solution remains intact. As long as the GCs do not agree to another form of settlement, BBF is all there is, except for another Unitary state under EU Principles, of course!

Agreement to BBF was a mistake for the TCs however, for the opposite reasons I gave above. The TCs virtually walked away from the 1960 agreements on their own accord in the late 70's (for the second time some say), even if they were forced out of the government in 1963, but made it official when they agreed to a BBF. What Makarios couldn't do with his 13 points, the TCs did it in a second that threw away the whole 1960 agreements from them, and now they are trying to bring back the 1960 agreements in the form of BBF via the Annan Plan. It's not going to happen. Then again, how could Denktash have know that the RoC would be in the EU in 2004 where EU Principles would apply into any new agreements. He didn't. He thought that time just stood still and that the Cyprus issue was settled in 1974. Funny enough, Turkey fell into the same trap also by believing the same. That's what happens when the two are on the same page together. When the shit hits the fan, it spreads out evenly onto those under it!

[Panicos UK]

I would have thought the opposite, namely that a BBF is a step further for the nationalist Turk/Turkish Cypriots who want formal partition (or complete takeover) of the whole island. Since 1977 and 1979 where the GCs agreed to the now established 'BBF' parameters they have been unable to climb down from this position. Parties like Evroko advocate a fully european solution to the Cyprus issue, but internationally the RoC can't suddenly say 'we now want a unitary state, one member one vote and minority status for the Turkish Cypriots' as they will be branded as the deal breakers. Theoretically if that unitary state voted for Enosis, then it would be fully justified under that system 'i.e. the Turkish Cypriots having no 'special' representation as 'extra special' citizens.

In 1972 the Turkish Cypriots agreed to all 13 of Makarios's points and yet Makarios still wasn't satisfied! I don't think there is a killer plan at work here - I think the current parameters are too biased towards the Turkish Cypriot side and I think the GC side is just muddling through with no real backbone or idea of alternatives that may be available.

Why not offer to re-establish the Vice presidency? Over 100,000 Turkish Cypriots are reportedly registered as citizens of the RoC - they should elect a representative. That'll really get the Turkish nationalists in a panic. But it won't happen. There is a distinct lack of vision in Cypriot politics.

Anyway, just my uneducated opinion.