Cyprus-Forum.com

[Tony-4497]

cypez

We could go on like this forever. There is fundamental difference between our views of the risk of failure of a complex power sharing arrangement and the impact such a failure would have.

I believe, based primarily on current and historic data and what has been happening around the world, that the risk of failure would be significant and that if such failure occurs the price is likely to be further bloodshed.

You believe (based god knows what) that the risk of failure and its likely impact is not issue.

It is up to the GC public to decide which view they share. I will only remind you of polls during the referendum period which said that over 90% of GCs would never accept living under TC administration, which means they are fundamentally opposed to having to report to a TC authority - I'm guessing because they feel it's unfair for an 18% population to have such authority. I would personally not be happy to have a TC or even worse a Turk as the president or even co-president of Cyprus. If people feel that a fundamentally unfair power sharing arrangement is in place, it is likely they will sooner or later try to change it, which would ignite conflict - just like it did in the 60s.

If this is what political equality means (i.e. 80%=20%), then I would much rather have 2 independent states on a 80:20 land ratio. If this is not acceptable then I would keep the existing situation until Turkey is somehow forced to accept a fair solution (possibly in 5-10 yrs).

As for Tassos's views with regard to the RoC, they are perfectly consistent. In the 1960s he said that the proposed power sharing arragements were likely to cause problems - and they did. In 2004 he said the power sharing arrangements in the Annan plan would be unworkable - and again he was right.

As a result of 30 years of hard work by GCs, the RoC is currently a prosperous sovereign recognised country and member of the EU, which effectively belongs to GC. Only an idiot would accept to dissolve this and turn GCs into a "community" and only 1 of 2 equal partners in some new state which will require Turkey's consent to do anything.

[cypezokyli]

i know you prefer partition tony.

if you think that turkey due to the EU accession will be forced to accept a fair solution (where fair means no tc veto...) !!!! i dont know what to say!!!
the veto they have since 1960. since the war they have also land. therefore any fair solution coming either form the UN the EU or god himself will carry those two facts. bi-comunality , bi-zonality. this is not to be changed, i dont even know why we are discussing it. it doesnt matter if you consider it fair or unjust or beautiful. every plan for solution will consider those two principles.
some others things perhaps we can discuss and change, that is if we ever start discussing.

[peace4cyprus]

I like the proposal of cypezokyli.

Tony, there might be a risk but I believe we should be brave and accept it. There is no solution without risk and this is true for both communities.

What I suggest is that instead of going from nothing to a final settlement to do it in several small steps. This not only will build trust gradually but will also give us a chance to examine in real time on how things are developing which is something that will minimize the risk of another failure.