Cyprus-Forum.com

[Nikiforos]

http://www.cyprus-mail.com/news/main.ph ... 4&cat_id=9

Former UN representative for Cyprus, Gustave Feissel, recommends that the Annan plan be scrapped because it is "unfixable" and that a new approach should be taken. It seems to be the most reasonable piece of advice to come from the international community in the last 18 months. What are the thoughts of members of this forum?

[ELLAS H TEFRA!]

Why scrap it?? I think it was perfect for the Turks residing in Cyprus.

[bg_turk]

Scrap it if you will, but what will you put on the table in its place?

[Piratis]

Annan plan can not can back unless it has major changes in it. Personally I don't care if after they make those major changes the plan is called Annan 6 or Feissel 21. Thats just a name.
Any new plan should be based on universally accepted principles such as:
1)Democracy
2)Respect oh human rights
3)No racist discriminations
4)One independent country

Scrap it if you will, but what will you put on the table in its place?

Bg_turk, I think the best model to use is the one of Bulgaria. Bulgaria is the country which is most similar to the Cyprus situation than any other country in the world.
In both countries we have a Christian majority and a Turkish (Muslim) minority. In both countries no community owns separate part of the country. The history of how the majority and minority came together is also very similar (Ottoman empire).
There are some differences but when Belgium and Switzerland have been used as models when those countries have almost nothing to do with the situation in Cyprus, then why not use Bulgaria as a model?

[bg_turk]

Bg_turk, I think the best model to use is the one of Bulgaria. Bulgaria is the country which is most similar to the Cyprus situation than any other country in the world.
In both countries we have a Christian majority and a Turkish (Muslim) minority. In both countries no community owns separate part of the country. The history of how the majority and minority came together is also very similar (Ottoman empire).
There are some differences but when Belgium and Switzerland have been used as models when those countries have almost nothing to do with the situation in Cyprus, then why not use Bulgaria as a model?

A few differences:
1. We never in our recent history had interethnic violance.
2. Rumelian Turks speak bulgarian and actively participate in the running of the Bulgarian government
3. The Bulgarian President is not a hardcore nationalist, in fact recently he defended the ethnic turks by calling for "Rethinking of the ethnic model of Bulgaria", with the emergence of the extreme ATAKA movement
4. Turkey never intervened in our case

and the final and most significant difference is that Bulgarians are not Greek Cypriots, and Rumelian Turks are not Turkish Cypriots
Besides the Bulgarian model is used in the case of Greece with its Turkish and Slavic minority and you can clearly see the results, many people have been forcefull disenfrenchised, or those too weak to defend their ethnic identiy have been gradually assimilated. All turks in Bulgaria that have left the country during the repressive communist regime on the other hand have reclaimed their BG citizenship, and are free to return to Bulgaria. No forcefull property redistribution has ever occurred in recent history.

In my opinon the best solution in Cyprus would be seperation. You canot force two incompatible parties which hate each other and have hurt each other badly in the past. There could be some territorial adjustment, but I do not believe in unification, because people do not see it as a way of embracing the other, but as a tool to get what they want (for TCs EU membership, for GCs land). Under these conditions unification would spell another disaster.

Why do you want unification Piratis? Is it because of the land you have lost?

[Alexis]

In my opinon the best solution in Cyprus would be seperation. You canot force two incompatible parties which hate each other and have hurt each other badly in the past. There could be some territorial adjustment, but I do not believe in unification, because people do not see it as a way of embracing the other, but as a tool to get what they want (for TCs EU membership, for GCs land). Under these conditions unification would spell another disaster.

On the face of it, separation looks like a great solution, especially if the TCs accept a territorial adjustment. But let's look at just the geographical implications:

You are right in thinking that many GCs will want a territorial adjustment made. The first issue is, how will this be agreed? Remember that in principle the GC community would be against partition - look at the 1960 constitution, it's against union with another country and partition, the two possible worst case scenarios for the two communities. So this will mean they are likely to want to restrict the Turkish-Cypriot state to 20% or less of Cyprus, that's less than 70% of what the TCCS would have been under the Annan Plan. So the question is, could the two sides agree on the territorial adjustment anyway? They probably couldn't.
Second, even if an agreement is reached, let's look at some of the other geographical issues. Would Nicosia remain divided? It's obvious to everyone that a divided Nicosia has impeded the city's and arguably the country's economic growth. Partition would only cement this. What's likely to happen is that each side of the island would adopt another city as the capital, it's already happening to some extent with Limassol in the South. Would a Turkish republic of Cyprus be viable if it only has 20% of the island's territory? Could Tourism make it viable? Perhaps, but wouldn't a unified Cyprus operate better?
We haven't even scratched the surface, what about co-operation, we'll need to co-operate on certain things simply because we are the one island. Issues such as Air Traffic, electricity, food, trade, medicine etc...
We do so now (to a certain degree) because both sides still believe a solution may one day come along.
Would we do so in the future?

I know I've probably said it a hundred times on this forum but I'll say it again: I truly believe a unified Cyprus is the best solution.

[Piratis]

1. We never in our recent history had interethnic violance.

I remember you said that not that long ago you were required to change your names to bulgarian ones. Conflicts did exist the only difference was that Bulgaria had USSR behind her and the Turks didn't dare to do anything.

2. Rumelian Turks speak bulgarian and actively participate in the running of the Bulgarian government

Before the invasion most Turkish Cypriots spoke Greek and they can participate in the RoC government with more power than BG Turks.

3. The Bulgarian President is not a hardcore nationalist, in fact recently he defended the ethnic turks by calling for "Rethinking of the ethnic model of Bulgaria", with the emergence of the extreme ATAKA movement

Just the fact that you bring this point as a difference shows that indeed the differences between the two cases are very few. The president can change every 5 years, and if TCs vote in RoC the current president has no chance of getting re-elected.

4. Turkey never intervened in our case

If it did Bulgaria would have the "bulgarian problem" fortunately for them they had the USSR behind them.

and the final and most significant difference is that Bulgarians are not Greek Cypriots, and Rumelian Turks are not Turkish Cypriots

Bulgarians are very similar to Greek Cypriots and Bg Turks are very similar to Turkish Cypriots. When they have no problem to model solutions after Belgium and Switzerland that we have absolutely nothing to do with them, I don't see why the model can not be Bulgaria that is much more similar.

Why do you want unification Piratis? Is it because of the land you have lost?

The land that we have been living for 3500 years is occupied. Would you ask a French during WWI why he wanted the occupation of his country to end? Such question is ridiculous. The "why" is obvious. (and no, my family doesn't have any property in the occupied areas, if thats what you are asking)

[bg_turk]

I remember you said that not that long ago you were required to change your names to bulgarian ones. Conflicts did exist the only difference was that Bulgaria had USSR behind her and the Turks didn't dare to do anything.

Our names were forcefully changed by the repressive communist regime, which I do not associate with bulgarians in general (or at least try to dissociate it in my mind), since it was very repressive against many bulgarians as well. We all restored our names after communism collapsed in 1989. But as I said there was no violance in Bulgaria, not many people died during that period. The Bulgarian president officially apologized for what had happened to us in Turkey, to all those BG turks that had left the country, and all of them have so far restored their bulgarian citizenship. Bulgaria never comitted massacres against us, we in turn never comitted violance against the bulgarian people. In cyprus the interethnic strife was pretty intense on the other hand. Ordinary people killed each other.
Besides during that period the attitude of the bulgarians was one of assimilation and integration, whereas from what i hear from TCs greeks treated them as different and would never accept them as their own.

Before the invasion most Turkish Cypriots spoke Greek and they can participate in the RoC government with more power than BG Turks.

But not anymore. How are you going to make them learn greek? They cannot participate in the RoC any more. Would Papdadopolous ever accept Talat as a vice-president?

To tell you the truth, being a minority is not easy, and requires one to make a great compromise. Many of my friends in Bulgaria do not speak Turkish very well, they are gradually getting alienated from their own culture, and merging into the Bulgarian majority. There is also an extreme nationalist party called ATAKA now which has a very strong anti-turkish anti-gyprsy anti-jewish extreme right-wing agenda, which so far only 8% of the population support mainly due to disulisionment against the other main parties. Although nobody takes it seriosusly and its chances of winning a majority are tiny, I do feel quite insecure because of its presence and it brings unpleasant old memories back.
We are tolerant to each other with local bulgarians in general, but those that live in cities with no turkish populations can get quite nationalistic, so I have always feared things could become like Bosnia here. But I am glad they never did and with the EU prospect I hope there will never be interethnic strife in Bulgaria. I have made quite heavy compromises in the name of peace, but also because I trust the Bulgarian state, I belive it is capable of delivering justice without taking ethnicity into consideration, or at least I hope it does, and so far after the democratic changes I have never had a reason to doubt that.

I cannot ask TCs to make those compromises having in mind what they have experienced. And I think they are too proud to ever accept being a minority in a greek dominated state now that they have their own state, why would they? Would you? I dont know, maybe you people in Cyprus were unluck to have britain as a colonial power, but things did turn up very badly in Cyprus. And I can sense from your statements that you do dislike Turkish Cypriots and have an intense hatred for Turkey.

[Agios Amvrosios]

Vote OXI to Annan 666

[Piratis]

Our names were forcefully changed by the repressive communist regime, which I do not associate with bulgarians in general

Similarly the violence in Cyprus war carried out by paramilitary organizations on both sides and not by the state.

We all restored our names after communism collapsed in 1989.

Similarly we want the illegal occupation to collapse so we can all (both TCs and GCs) restore all our legal rights.

But as I said there was no violance in Bulgaria, not many people died during that period.

bg_turk, this impression is given to you because while in Bulgaria they are trying to forget about that era in order to have a peaceful united country, in Cyprus those incidents are magnified and used in propaganda in order to be used as an excuse to divide our country.

The Bulgarian president officially apologized for what had happened to us in Turkey, to all those BG turks that had left the country, and all of them have so far restored their bulgarian citizenship.

Similarly, instead of promoting hate, we can simply apologize to each other and allow all people to restore their rights.

Bulgaria never comitted massacres against us, we in turn never comitted violance against the bulgarian people.

TCs between 1963 and 1974 lost some 100s of people. Less than would die in traffic accidents. During that period a comparative amount of GCs died also. In the invasion we lost several thousands, but we are willing to forgive, unlike some others.

Besides during that period the attitude of the bulgarians was one of assimilation and integration, whereas from what i hear from TCs greeks treated them as different and would never accept them as their own.

Again this is a part were you fall victim of the Turkish propaganda. The relationship between the two communities before and after the conflicts (1968) was not ideal, but was not as bad as some describe. Most probably it was better than the relationship between Turks and Bulgarians during the early stages of the BG Republic.

But not anymore. How are you going to make them learn greek? They cannot participate in the RoC any more. Would Papdadopolous ever accept Talat as a vice-president?

The language of the other community can be taught in schools. When legality return the will participate in RoC will much more power than Turks in Bulgaria. According to the RoC constitution the vice president is elected by the TCs directly. The president and GCs have no say in this and therefore if Papadopoulos was the president he would have to accept any vice president even if that was Denctash.

To tell you the truth, being a minority is not easy, and requires one to make a great compromise.

In the case of Cyprus great compromises were done by the majority. Do Turks in Bulgaria have veto power?

But I am glad they never did and with the EU prospect I hope there will never be interethnic strife in Bulgaria.

Then why you still insist that Cyprus of 2005 is the same Cyprus of the 60s. Do you think that within EU, and after what we passed there is a great risk of doing the same mistakes again?

I cannot ask TCs to make those compromises having in mind what they have experienced. And I think they are too proud to ever accept being a minority in a greek dominated state now that they have their own state, why would they? Would you?

I will reverse the question to you: During the time that Bulgarians were changing your names etc, would you prefer if Turkey had used that as an excuse to invade Bulgaria and illegally occupy 25% of Bulgaria, ethnically cleansing the Bulgarians from that part of Bulgaria, and declare in this area a pseudo state that is not recognized by anyone?
Most of us would prefer to have as much as possible. But not all would prefer to gain on the pain and the human right violations of others.

All countries have passed through times that democracy didn't exist (e.g. communism in Bulgaria) and human rights were violated. However some years of bad history should not be used as an excuse why our future should always be bad without democracy and human rights.