Cyprus-Forum.com

[Tony-4497]

So what? Most countries today are multi ethnic. Majority-minority sharing power in a country is not a problem.

Do you know of any country in the world where a Muslim and Christian community (never mind the bloody, bitter past) have managed to form a partnership or power sharing arrangement?

Greek-Cypriots have worked too hard for too long to risk losing all they have achieved because some people suffer under the illusion that we can all start living together peacefully and happily. The co-existence story is a myth. We lived together peacefully only UNDER the British rule, where everyone did as told by the Brits.. pretty much in the same way as GCs & TCs live peacefully together in North London. The moment Cyprus became indepedent trouble started and we lived separately since 1963.

Given the bloody history and high degree of nationalism in both communities, the probability of inter-communal violence is high. EVEN if this probability was tiny, it would still be foolish to risk it, because the impact of what could happen would be so large (i.e. fighting, violence, being afraid to walk around at night etc).. we are NOT about to play russian roulette with the safety and future of our people and children.. even if the pistol takes 10 bullets and only 1 bullet is loaded.

I have never met any GC to date who would be prepared to live under TC administration. Polls last year were showing that over 90% of GC under 60 (i think) would never agree to live under TC administration.

The ONLY solution that can be accepted at a referendum by both sides, is one that creates 2 separate, sovereign states (hence TCs will vote for it) and is based on a fair sharing of the land i.e. around 80:20 (hence GC will vote for it, as opposed to maintaining the current status quo).

DYSI and AKEL are dreaming if they think they can cheat the people into voting for anything else - particularly something that involves complex (hence risky) power sharing which is likely to result in bloodshed and disaster.

[Vassos1]

Rubbish. Those countries like Britain and etc who have a multi ethnic population consist of peoples who have chosen to immigrate to the UK and accept living under an English government.

I, will never accept living under a TURKISH government, and I am sure the Turkish people will not accept living under a Greek one. That is like saying, let the UK forget about Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland and let's united as ENGLAND with a multi-cultural federal government. If you think that Britiain uder the scenario above can not unite, how the hell can you expect Greeks and Turks in Cyprus to live as one, under any unified government. This is ridiculous and is unacceptable.

Cyprus should have been divided when the 1960 treaty was signed, as there would have prevented the killing of all of those innocent Greek Cypriots from 1960 to 1974, nevermind the ones that were killed by the British in the 1950s.

[cypezokyli]

the muslim-christian division is not important in cyprus.
the greek-turkish is the one who have to work on.

The co-existence story is a myth. We lived together peacefully only UNDER the British rule, where everyone did as told by the Brits..

many people did leave peacefully. the bicommunal clashe were a concequence of our leaderships and their policies at the time and not any implicit carried in our DNA kind of hatred that you two believe that the two communitites carry. people dont just fight for the fun of it. and hatred it is sth that can be dealt with, by changing our education, by unification, by changed vocybulary from our politicians etc etc

EVEN if this probability was tiny, it would still be foolish to risk it, because the impact of what could happen would be so large (i.e. fighting, violence, being afraid to walk around at night etc)..

even in the case of sth happening this time it will be much easier to control due to the BBF.

DYSI and AKEL are dreaming if they think they can cheat the people into voting for anything else - particularly something that involves complex (hence risky) power sharing which is likely to result in bloodshed and disaster.

DYSI and AKEL are the biggest cyprus parties.

and what kind of logic is this: power sharing leads to bloodshed?
i am sorry but i am afraid to see the link. could you be more specific? why would a gc would be willing to get into this bloodshed story if there is power sharing? this theory misses somekind of mechanism in between the cause in the effect.

as there would have prevented the killing of all of those innocent Greek Cypriots from 1960 to 1974, nevermind the ones that were killed by the British in the 1950s.

and tcs vassos1, and tcs. is it selective memory or no recognition of the crimes we have comited?

[Tony-4497]

cypezokyli

I am afraid it is your rationale that misses a link, not mine.

You have not provided ONE example of a country where a Christian and Muslim community have formed a partnership and share power. When for Christian and Muslim you replace Greek & Turkish things get much, much worse.

What on earth makes you think this is possible in Cyprus when it has not happened ANYWHERE else in the world and when ALL historic data in Cyprus suggests that any such attempt will result in bloodshed? My initial post here explains why in my view any power sharing arrangement is highly likely to fail (i.e. 18 v 82 split, high degree of nationalism in both sides- in leadership & people-, it only takes a few fanatics to start the fighting, bitter and bloody history spanning many centuries etc).

Accordingly, any reasonable and prudent person would expect that such arrangements would lead to bloodshed. This is fully consistent with the polls I mentioned, which show that over 90% of Greek Cypriots will never accept to live under TC rule.

My views regarding the likely failure of any power sharing deal (which can only lead to bloodshed, as it has in the past) are based on all of the above points. On the contrary, you have provided no basis for your expectation that things will work out fine. What do you base this naive (in my view) expectation on??

And, by the way, DISY and AKEL are indeed the largest parties and initially both parties' leaders decided to ask their voters to say Yes to the Annan plan. However, 80% of their supporters completely ignored this call. This shows how detached politicians are from the solution that normal people want.

One of my friends' father is an AKEL MP - their initial decision was to say Yes - they only changed their decision to the farcical, half-arsed yes/no/yes but no/ small no to cement a yes etc.. when thousands of their supporters went amoc when they heard their initial decision... I am not exaggerating - hundreds of supporters threatened to lynch them if they said Yes. Their regional offices told them that 80% of supporters would vote No even if the party said Yes!

The fact is that when it comes to the Cyprus problem GC do not obey parties. This matter relates to their physical survival and will vote putting safety first and avoid risking their way of life in the hope that MAYBE we can start sharing power etc.. People will not play heads or tails with their way of life. 80%-90% in my view would reject power sharing. Based on my discussions with people, of the 24% that accepted the plan, more than half did so because they believed the threats by all involved about the punishment and distaster that would follow a No vote and not because they like the idea of power sharing.

All of the above suggest that given a choice of (1) any power sharing deal (e.g. a substantially improved Annan plan) and (2) a 2-state solution with an 80-20 land split, the GC vote would be overwhelmingly (2).

[Vassos1]

Whatever happened to the TCs dosen't really make much difference now, as they will also fail to win their politics because they are a minority, they are muslim and they are weak.

We will always beat the TCs in politics, we beat them in gaining full EU membership as the ROC, we prevent them from direct trade, we can even veto Turkey if he want to. The only thing I am concerned with is the fact tat they may actually gain recognition only due to two reasons. Firstly, the fact that there is something known as "Self-Determination" and that we have not brokered a settlement in over 30 years, and secondly, that Turkey is gaining serious influence with the Turkic andc OIC organisation and group of nations. This is my primal reason for a two-state formula based on 22:78 ratio.

Regarding history, the TCs point of view is fruitless as they would have been taken seriously by now if the world would have taken their side.

[Kifeas]

Whatever happened to the TCs dosen't really make much difference now, as they will also fail to win their politics because they are a minority, they are muslim and they are weak.

We will always beat the TCs in politics, we beat them in gaining full EU membership as the ROC, we prevent them from direct trade, we can even veto Turkey if he want to. The only thing I am concerned with is the fact tat they may actually gain recognition only due to two reasons. Firstly, the fact that there is something known as "Self-Determination" and that we have not brokered a settlement in over 30 years, and secondly, that Turkey is gaining serious influence with the Turkic andc OIC organisation and group of nations. This is my primal reason for a two-state formula based on 22:78 ratio.

Regarding history, the TCs point of view is fruitless as they would have been taken seriously by now if the world would have taken their side.

Vassos, your anti-Turkish Cypriot paranoia seems to have no limits and leads you to continuing improvisations. Such paranoia is not shared by most GCs who live in Cyprus and you are not any cleverer than we are.

I suggest you stick to were you are now and deal with what you have been doing for all the rest of your life and please live us alone to sort out our problems in the way we believe is more appropriate.

Your idea would have deserved to be given its merit should we have completely exhausted any possibility to re-unite Cyprus under a viable and fair to all federal solution. We believe this possibility has not been exhausted yet.

Do not worry! A “TRNC” is not something that can so easily be recognised under the present international political framework, especially after Cyprus EU accession.

[cypezokyli]

tony-4497 thanks for your reply

I am afraid it is your rationale that misses a link, not mine.

i ll explain you the link and then hopefully you will give me yours. deal?


firstly as i repeated many times we dont have a religious problem in cyprus. its getting tiring that you put the religion as a problem. go back to the tc posts and show me where do they ever mention religion. actually if there is any religious problem that comes from our side (from our priests mostly) and not from the tcs. so you, insisting in an example of a muslim-chtistian country working together i believe has absolutel nothing to do with cyprus.
look at the tc political partys. there is no equivalent to erdigans party which is an islamic or euroislamic or whatever. they have the denktah party which was nationalistic but has never been islamic.

as a concequence the problem is nationalism and not religion.
nationalism, is a disease which - the EU example has shown that it has indeed a cure.
u refer to the 1963 clashes as "history has shown". i said also before the climate at the time was completely different. we wanted enosis they wanted taksim. makarios came up with the idea of the famous 13 points, there was tension and there was a sitation where the political leaders of both communities didnot mind or even thought that the clashes would prove to their own interests. these factors dont exist anymore.

how many times did the tc use the veto power? really how many? and we are talking about a high-tense period? was it perhaps just once?

moreover: education. the root of nationalism. a good revision of our books would be one of the effective ways to deal with rising nationalism. not to mention a re-education of our teachers. did you read the report on our children tony? it was even in phileleftheros (a serious newspaper) some nonths ago? our children have nationalist tensions and we dont really seem to care. these are problemsto be dealt with.

the fact that the gc wouldnt want to live under tc rule doesnt mean that we will face bloodshed. besides that will not happen from one day to the next. in any case the poll should really ask the people of kyrenia if they would like to live under a tc rule.

it only takes a few fanatics to start the fighting

thats true. yet, since the borders have opened your statement is not empirically proven. we had a couple of incidence (from our side...ofcource) but that did not lead to any spiral fighting, or even to a political crisis. people are more mature now to understand that a fanatic doesnot represent a whole community.

And, by the way, DISY and AKEL are indeed the largest parties and initially both parties' leaders decided to ask their voters to say Yes to the Annan plan. However, 80% of their supporters completely ignored this call.

???

I

am not exaggerating - hundreds of supporters threatened to lynch them if they said Yes. Their regional offices told them that 80% of supporters would vote No even if the party said Yes!

hehe. you know there is also a theory that those calls where a set up. never underestimate the AKEL old-communist structure . due to that it has indeed a big control over its members.
next to that the two parties together would and could create a majority feeling not to mention the propaganda effects would have been different.

....
now its your turn. power sharing leads to violence. how come? would gc wake up in the mornin and say lets beat up some tc bc we share power?

[cypezokyli]

tony-4497 thanks for your reply

I am afraid it is your rationale that misses a link, not mine.

i ll explain you the link and then hopefully you will give me yours. deal?


firstly as i repeated many times we dont have a religious problem in cyprus. its getting tiring that you put the religion as a problem. go back to the tc posts and show me where do they ever mention religion. actually if there is any religious problem that comes from our side (from our priests mostly) and not from the tcs. so you, insisting in an example of a muslim-chtistian country working together i believe has absolutel nothing to do with cyprus.
look at the tc political partys. there is no equivalent to erdigans party which is an islamic or euroislamic or whatever. they have the denktah party which was nationalistic but has never been islamic.

as a concequence the problem is nationalism and not religion.
nationalism, is a disease which - the EU example has shown that it has indeed a cure.
u refer to the 1963 clashes as "history has shown". i said also before the climate at the time was completely different. we wanted enosis they wanted taksim. makarios came up with the idea of the famous 13 points, there was tension and there was a sitation where the political leaders of both communities didnot mind or even thought that the clashes would prove to their own interests. these factors dont exist anymore.

how many times did the tc use the veto power? really how many? and we are talking about a high-tense period? was it perhaps just once?

moreover: education. the root of nationalism. a good revision of our books would be one of the effective ways to deal with rising nationalism. not to mention a re-education of our teachers. did you read the report on our children tony? it was even in phileleftheros (a serious newspaper) some nonths ago? our children have nationalist tensions and we dont really seem to care. these are problemsto be dealt with.

the fact that the gc wouldnt want to live under tc rule doesnt mean that we will face bloodshed. besides that will not happen from one day to the next. in any case the poll should really ask the people of kyrenia if they would like to live under a tc rule.

it only takes a few fanatics to start the fighting

thats true. yet, since the borders have opened your statement is not empirically proven. we had a couple of incidence (from our side...ofcource) but that did not lead to any spiral fighting, or even to a political crisis. people are more mature now to understand that a fanatic doesnot represent a whole community.

And, by the way, DISY and AKEL are indeed the largest parties and initially both parties' leaders decided to ask their voters to say Yes to the Annan plan. However, 80% of their supporters completely ignored this call.

???

I

am not exaggerating - hundreds of supporters threatened to lynch them if they said Yes. Their regional offices told them that 80% of supporters would vote No even if the party said Yes!

hehe. you know there is also a theory that those calls where a set up. never underestimate the AKEL old-communist structure . due to that it has indeed a big control over its members.
next to that the two parties together would and could create a majority feeling not to mention the propaganda effects would have been different.

....
now its your turn. power sharing leads to violence. how come? would gc wake up in the mornin and say lets beat up some tc bc we share power?

[bg_turk]

now its your turn. power sharing leads to violence. how come? would gc wake up in the mornin and say lets beat up some tc bc we share power?

Power sharing will fail and it is not because of religion, but because of the simple reality that GC will never accept to share power with TCs as an equal partner. Power sharing has failed before, and it will fail again, simply because of the fact that game theoretically it is not a stable equilibrium. GCs will always try to erode the powers of the TCs because they will think these powers are "unfair" and TC will always feel threatened by such attempts.
Besides power sharing requires consensus between GCs and TCs, something that both groups consistently fail to demonstrate.
The only workable models in the long run are

1. one-man one-vote and an assimilation/integration of TCs into the majority, something which TCs will NEVER accept
2. loose federation or a complete seperation where each community is concerned with its own affairs, and the other community cannot and does not care to interefere.

There is no middle ground and power sharing will eventually evolve towards any one of these two extremes and it is the balance of power that will determine which one of them will be the outcome. I personally hope it will be the second.

[cypezokyli]

Power sharing has failed before, and it will fail again, simply because of the fact that game theoretically it is not a stable equilibrium

whats that economics or politics?