Cyprus-Forum.com

[Piratis]

If you agree that TC have a RIGHT to these 'protections / privelages /equality on certain issues' (call them what you will) and they are not a 'gift' given to the TC by GC then I think our postions are not as far apart as they would seem to be.

There are somethings that are your rights, and some things that are given from us as a compromise because we are the weak side.

For example, the protection that the constidution will provide for TCs is your right, you also have the right to determine things like Turkish language, turkish education, religion etc.

But things like accepting a federal system are a compromise. It is not your right to demand a separate federal state, but we accepted this as a compromise. Also, it is a compromise to accept that not only you will have a federal state, but also this stae will be bigger than 18%.

[erolz]

There are somethings that are your rights, and some things that are given from us as a compromise because we are the weak side.

So what is the basis of these rights in your opinion?

But things like accepting a federal system are a compromise. It is not your right to demand a separate federal state, but we accepted this as a compromise. Also, it is a compromise to accept that not only you will have a federal state, but also this stae will be bigger than 18%.

So what happens if 3 years after a 'settlement' GC declare that the federates system is 'unworkable' and propose fundamental changes to it and the TC respons that they will talk about probelms of the federal system but not on the basis of fundamental proposed revision or removal of it? Should then the will of the GC numerical majority over ride the TC wishes?

[MicAtCyp]

Acknowledging each other’s distinct identity and integrity and that our relationship is not one of majority and minority but of political equality where neither side may claim authority or jurisdiction over the other

Thats why Papadopoulos and the majority of GCs (me included) supported that the Anan Plan actually legalised the results of the Invasion. The TC people were upgraded from a minority status, to a community status in the 1960 constitution, and the Anan Plan further upgraded them to "a people" status with separate self determination rights on the condition they would excercise that right only for the formation of his confederation system.That was preposterous!! See my analysis is the "self determination" thread.
I think the Anan Plan cannot be a serious basis for arguments, for the reasons I explained before.

If you agree that TC have a RIGHT to these 'protections / privelages /equality on certain issues' (call them what you will) and they are not a 'gift' given to the TC by GC then I think our postions are not as far apart as they would seem to be.

Wow! At last here’s a happy note among all those disagreements. I will just take that "equality" word out because from the discussions we had it seems we mean different things.
On the rest I agree completely. And not only that but I WILL NOT accept a solution that would not protect the TCs in that way, because otherwise we would have an
unstable system like we had in the past! And of course they are not a "gift", they are "a right" arising from the very existence of the TCs as a group and they should be there to protect the numerical minority from willing or unwilling decisions that would benefit the majority on the expense of the minority.
That’s sincere and that’s from my heart !

[erolz]

Thats why Papadopoulos and the majority of GCs (me included) supported that the Anan Plan actually legalised the results of the Invasion.

Well I do not see accpeting the status of TC as a people legitamises or leaglises the events of 74, but as you say that is a dead document now, so lets not focus on these differences while we seem to be making some general progress elsewhere.

Wow! At last here’s a happy note among all those disagreements. I will just take that "equality" word out because from the discussions we had it seems we mean different things.

OK this seems more positive. I still however remain unsure on what basis you accept we have such rights. The rights are more than the rights of the minority (as per the UN declerations) but less than the (total) rights of self determination. For me I expressed this as a right to self determination (for TC and GC) but with an acceptance of the need for limits and compromise on both sides. If it is to be expressed as some kind of 'third category' (more than a minority and less than a people) then my concern is based arounf there being no internationaly recognised status for such a 'third category'. These concerns are only exasperated by any GC insitance that a settlement has to be on the basis of such internationaly recognised categories and rights, that these rights are absoloute and not subject to any compromise or limits and TC have no rights as a people. How we overcome this I am not sure. Perhaps Cypriots (TC and GC togeather) could ask the UN to formulate and recognise this 'third category' to help a Cyprus solution and using Cyprus as an 'examplar' to help resolve similar issues in similar places (like Kurds in Turkey,Iran, Iraq to mention just one)?

On the rest I agree completely. And not only that but I WILL NOT accept a solution that would not protect the TCs in that way, because otherwise we would have an
unstable system like we had in the past! And of course they are not a "gift", they are "a right" arising from the very existence of the TCs as a group and they should be there to protect the numerical minority from willing or unwilling decisions that would benefit the majority on the expense of the minority.
That’s sincere and that’s from my heart !

Yes this is much more acceptable to me and encouraging. However I would reiterate the point I make above, that if the status of TC as a grpoup is to be defined as more than a minority and less than a majority, then having such a definition written into the consitution alone, but not recognised anywehere else (like the UN) is not sufficent to allay my fears / concerns. This fear / concern would be that if there is no internationaly recognised status of 'more than a minority' and 'less than a people' then at some stage in the future a GC numerical majority could declare such prior acceptance as 'unfair and illegal' under international law, not compatible with UN charter on human rights and that it was only agreed to because of the compulsion of the presense of the Turkish army. And thus the whole sorry story of Cyprus potential starts over again.

[Piratis]

So what is the basis of these rights in your opinion?

These are the correct minority rights for a big minority/community like Turkish Cypriots. Some of them, like official language, are not standard minority rights because that would mean that counties with many small minorities would need 10s of official languages and that is not possible. However in the case of Cyprus, or other countries with big minorities (some Baltic countries for example have over 30% Russians) this is a very correct thing to do. (and it is not a compromise).

So what happens if 3 years after a 'settlement' GC declare that the federates system is 'unworkable' and propose fundamental changes to it and the TC respons that they will talk about probelms of the federal system but not on the basis of fundamental proposed revision or removal of it? Should then the will of the GC numerical majority over ride the TC wishes?

No, the constitution is above everything and it can not be changed just by one community alone.
Furthermore, we will never accept something we are not sure is going to work. With the Annan plan we proved that we will not accept something just because of pressures.

[insan]

Piratis,

Why do you consider the federation as a compromise made by GC side? In 60s and 70s circumstances it was obvious that by provocative actions, compulsion and oppression of both parties extremists two communities were divided and they had fears of being killed by the members of other community. Both parties extremists had sow the seeds of hatred, fears, seperation and retaliation. And unfortunately I've been still observing that those ex-extremists and a new generation of extremists keep frightening the vast majority of both communities.

It was and still it is impossible for both communities to live mixed under past and todays circumstances which dominantly have been predestined by those extremists. They ever more spread the word of propaganda, fears and hatred.

A bi-zonal, bi-communal federation is the best under these circumstances. Though I'll always dream of a unitary state where all Cypriots would live mixed away from the domination of those terrible extremists but according to my observations it seems impossible under todays circumstances.


Why do you think that giving more than %18 of land to TCs is a comprimise? How do you know? Did you investigate the economic viability and productivity of the land which would be TCs? If you have some documents that verify that economic viability and productivity of the land which would belong to TCs after a solution; is as valubale as the land that would belong to GCs; it's OK.


I haven't seen any compromises from both parties yet. Those you always talk about Piratis, are not compromises...

[Piratis]

It is a compromise because you have absolutely no right to demand a federal state. The population was mixed around the island, and the only TC "clean" areas were some villages, that again were spread all over the island and not in a specific region.
Violence existed between groups in almost all countries during their history. This doesn't mean that a minority had the right to cut a part of the country as a federal state. Actually I doubt you will find even one example in the world that such thing happened.
Most federations came into existence by uniting separate regions, and not by violently splitting one unitary state and ethnically cleansing one part.

In any case we accepted as a HUGE compromise to have a federal state, and your side should recognize this and do some serious compromises too. Otherwise, it is like telling us that being compromising was the wrong way to go. (which is actually the message I get from these forums)

[insan]

Violance amongst different ideological groups have happened all around the world but you can't show me just a single country that while one group of extremists were fighting to annex their country to their motherland as a whole and other group of extremists were fighting to annex a part of their country to their motherland.

Cyprus' case is totally different... The federation is the consequence of Enosis VS Taksim.

Show me just a single case which is same or similar to Cyprus'.

[Piratis]

This could be said in all of those countries because all cases have something unique about them!! The fact remains that you have no right of a federal state, and I am quoting from the "Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples - resolution 1514 (XV)." (Found at: http://www.un.org/Depts/dpi/decolonizat ... ration.htm ) The point number 6 is:

Any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and the territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.

And by the way, in that same page it says:

Also in 1960, the Assembly approved resolution 1541 (XV), defining free association with an independent State, integration into an independent State, or independence as the three legitimate options of full self-government.

So there was nothing wrong with the enosis cause (don't tell me about EOKA crimes again, I already condemned them), while there is absolutely nothing right about the taksim cause.

[insan]

Piratis,

If you tell me that there's nothing wrong with GCs Enosis cause I can definetely tell you that there was noıthing wrong with Taksim or annexing Cyprus as a whole to Turkey.


How much Cyprus belongs to GCs, it also belongs to TCs. If you say GCs had/have the right to annex her to their motherland; TCs also should have the same right to annex it to their motherland.


So don't tell me that Enosis was right but Taksim was wrong.