Erol wrote: The Annan plan is an offical UN document that clearly defines TC in cyprus as a seperate and equal state (peoples).
LOL!! With your logic the GCs in the TC Federal State are TC "a people"!! Furthermoreb with our clear OXI the Anan Plan became a "non paper" like many other "non papers" of the UN are now in the dustbin.
Erol wrote: I do not understand what you are saying here?
What I am saying is that the TC constituent state does not define TC as "a people" because it will consist of a majority of TCs and a minority of GCs.The "a people" in that case is a mixture of
both communitiespeace wrote: The discussion was about if there is a single UN document that accepts the prpincipal that TC are an equal people within Cyprus. For me the Annan plan is such a document.
Like I said above the Anan Plan was
NOT accepting that principle.
In addition to that notice there were in the past UN documents/proposals for two separate states in South Africa. They were not accepted and went to the dustbin.To avoid confusion as to whether those were the official positions of the UN they were called "non papers". A UN document becomes official UN position only when it passes through voting.The Anan plan like its name says was an
Anana document a
non document and its just ridiculous to even refer to it, as the official UN position on the Cyprus issue. (It even contradicts to almost all UN resolutions for Cyprus)
But anyway you always have the right to find a UN document that passed through voting at the UN, to prove Piratis your original position. Or else you may insist on documents in the dustbin.
Erol wrote: If before 1960 the British had given Cypriots a vote and insisted their right to self determination was then met as part of a single British people - would that have been acceptable to you?
Yes if Cyprus would be treated "as part of a single British people".That is to say the same way as Manchester, and get proportionately the same development funds, and pay proportionately the same taxes.
Erol wrote: I am sorry but I find this impossible to beleieve. That GC and GC demands for self determination would have been satisfied with such an approach.
Erol you are always forgetting the basis of your original points. The basis was that the vote of the TCs would never be effective against another big majority.I disregarded the 1960 date you mentioned because your example was not really very appropriate.Here we talk about re unification of Cyprus.In 1960 the subject was not to unify Cyprus with UK.
Then forgetting what the basis of your argument was i.e the zeroying of the voting power over a vast majority, you come back with "a hard to beleive" statement on on the already "hard to beleive" hypothetical scenario of yours, on an already irrelavant part of that scenario....
Erol wrote: You believe no solution is possible unless the TC people agree to subjectage themselves to a GC majority
I beleive that no solution is possible unless the TCs get off their minds that equality means that the 82% GC majority has to take their permission even to sneeze. Equality means each citizen is equal with another citizen (equal individual rights) and on a group basis the 18% has 18% and the 82% 82% Political rights. Any possible decisions of the majority that could possibly tend to harm the minority should be written down in the constitution, so the minority would have nothing to be afraid of. Or better their should be a clause in the constitution that no law or Political decision could benefit the majority on the expense of the minority.
The same principle must apply to a Federal Solution through the Central State. The FedStates should only deal with matters of just community concerns like education, culture and safety, and application of the Primary Central State law.Thats the meaning of "bi-communal Federation".
