Cyprus-Forum.com

[Lordo]

get it into your thick head boy that till the agreement is signed there is no us. not after 51 years of being excluded from the roc government. capish

[Nikitas]

Erol you raise mainy points,

Granting citizenship in the RoC is a difficult process which my wife of 35 years cannot fulfill. So I have some personal experience of this. The Pontioi in Paphos are residents, they are not nationals of the RoC. The issue was raised last week in the talks when the GC proposal was that for every one Turk given nationality the GC side would naturalise four Greeks, and the proposal most likely concerns the Pontious, as there is no other major concentration of non Cypriot Greeks in the south. And in fact the Pontioi did not come from Greece but Russia. Denktash had announced in the past with pride the naturalisation of thousands of mainland Turks.

Did Annan have apartheid elements? It introduced bizonality and bicommunality and minimum nationality percentages for each region. It was closer to the South African homelands system than to to anything in federal states like the USA, Switzerland or Germany.

The big test is how the two major communities treat the smaller minorities of Cyprus. The first people to be ethnically cleansed in Cyprus were the Armenians of Nicosia in early 1964. Post 1974 when TCs were in absolute control of the north they treated these communities, their property and their religious sites as badly as the GCs. By contrast the south hosts the smaller communities at full equal standing and their schools and religious sites are important landmarks, an Armenian became the head of a major political party.

The TCs do not do badly in the south either. I was in Limassol a few days ago. The Mosques are renovated. All Turkish street names are in place, as they always were, TCs live in Zakaki and we learned in this forum that they vote for a moukhtar. In Nicosia the staff of the restaurant I stopped at were all TCs.

Is there a single person permitted to cross from the south to the north to work? Are any Greek street names in place?

I do not ascribe the change of names to some evil intent, but to the perennial Turkish national insecurity which has been around since Kemal days. This is a Turkish thing, TCs had no problem regarding a village with a name like Ayios Vasilios as their village, the Turks do, and they brought this cultural trait to the TCs since 1974.

There is a tiny little alley in Limassol officially named ZigZag street because it.... zig zags. I sat there and wondered how the TC administration would rename this street if they were in control.

This BBF thing applies partition. Presumably Turkey would want this following its military success of 1974. But partition is hard to implement on a small island. And since partition cannot survive the complexities included in all the plans proposed so far, I see problems in the future from the natural flow of population to the urban employment centers, ie the creation of new "minorities" in the south. It might therefore be better to opt for the cleaner simpler solution of two totally independent states, that way no one will have any doubts about what is what and where. But that is one solution that Turkey would never accept because a truly independent Cyprus, albeit partial and not whole, is not in their plans.

Until there is a clear statement by Turkey about their real plans, not the public version of them, there will be no solution. What we know so far is that they do not want independence, nor partition, nor double union, nor union with Greece. By a process of elimination we come to the one other solution but that one just aint gonna fly. The only obstacle to that one is the existence of the RoC as formally recognised state. Which is why Turkey wants to dissolve it.

May be now you understand why GCs cling to the RoC so strongly and anything that endangers it is going to be voted down. The RoC is our shield against both motherlands.

[Lordo]

here is an article in cyprus mail 22 sep 1971 quoting magarios desire for enosis. and yet we have assholes here who still believe that the reason why magarios was overthrown was because he no longer believed in enosis. go figure assholes.

http://cyprus-mail.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/September-22-1971.pdf

[Sotos]

get it into your thick head boy that till the agreement is signed there is no us. not after 51 years of being excluded from the roc government. capish

Thanks for providing an example of what I was talking about. There was never "us" boy. The separation was from the very beginning with the Ottomans and it was also part of the first Cyprus constitution that was imposed on us because separation is what you wanted.

[Sotos]

Well said Nikitas. BBF like Annan plan is partition and with that Turkey would control Cyprus. Maybe a different BBF could be OK... like some amount of self-rule for TCs on specific region but then the main government of Cyprus to be democratically elected by the whole population. But this is not what is being discussed because Turkey doesn't accept it.

[Lordo]

get it into your thick head boy that till the agreement is signed there is no us. not after 51 years of being excluded from the roc government. capish

Thanks for providing an example of what I was talking about. There was never "us" boy. The separation was from the very beginning with the Ottomans and it was also part of the first Cyprus constitution that was imposed on us because separation is what you wanted.

stupid idiot. where did i say never. there was for 3 years till you boys decided to enosise.

[erolz66]

In that case I would probably say something along the lines of "next war we will win".

Exactly. You would not have defended such a view if I had said it, yet you did when a GC said it and you did so because a GC said it.

I WANT a Cyprus where being TC or GC does not matter but that is NOT what we have.

You want such a Cyprus, you want change - but you are not prepared to change the one thing you have control over - yourself.

if you support our struggle then you are one of "us", and it doesn't matter if you are GC, TC, English or a Turk from Turkey.

Which 'us' is this that I am supposed to support ? The one that says we should NOT embark on bi-communal efforts to tidy up a GC cemetery, because doing so might make it harder for us to kill each other in the future ? Is that the 'us' I am supposed to be supporting ? Or the 'us' that says historically GC had every right to annex Cyprus to Greece without having to pay ANY regard at all for the wishes of my community ?

But if you position yourself on the opposite side by siding with the Turkish army in case of a war or by propagandizing excuses as to why Cyprus can't be a free democratic country then I treat you as the opponent you choose to be!

Unless I accept your position as the correct position, your truths as the only truths then I can not be part of 'us' I can only be a 'Turk' that you 'are at war with'. That is what you are telling me. If I really did 'side' with the 'Turkish Army' and if want I wanted really was the continued division of Cyprus enforced by the Turkish army, I would not be here, I would be at home simply awaiting the 'next round', or if I were here I would be here simply expressing the view YOU put forward in order to defend Piratis, that we are just Greeks and Turks at war awaiting the next round. All you are saying Sotos is we can only have peace if TC accept your position totally, accept your truths alone as the only truths.

I think we can look at the past objectively if we want to simply understand what happened.

You think claiming that tmt OFTEN killed TC that did not support separation and division in Cyprus is looking at the past 'objectively' ?

But most TCs that come in here are not interested in that ... they are just interested in looking at the past in an one sided way filled with exaggerations and often lies just so they can excuse their current unfair demands.

And most GC here do not do this ? You do not do this ?

[erolz66]

Granting citizenship in the RoC is a difficult process which my wife of 35 years cannot fulfill. So I have some personal experience of this.

As do I in the north. My partner of over 25 years and who has 'resided' here for more than 12 years, is still only a 'temporary resident', with no right to work in north Cyprus, and has to annually renew such status, complete with annual medical tests, including HIV test.

The Pontioi in Paphos are residents, they are not nationals of the RoC. The issue was raised last week in the talks when the GC proposal was that for every one Turk given nationality the GC side would naturalise four Greeks, and the proposal most likely concerns the Pontious, as there is no other major concentration of non Cypriot Greeks in the south. And in fact the Pontioi did not come from Greece but Russia.

Exactly the kind of negotiation and ideas we need in finding a settlement. I would have no issue with such a 4:1 ratio and granting of citizenship, if such could produce a settlement that did not require new imposed hardships on ordinary people (be they 'settlers' in the north or Pontian's in the south) rather than one that does require such.

Denktash had announced in the past with pride the naturalisation of thousands of mainland Turks.

I am not pretending or trying to make out that there has been no element of a desire to 'change demographics' in the influx of Turkish mainlanders into the north since 74. I do not even object to an assertion that such is the overriding motivation for such. What I object too is the notion that this has been the only motivation for such. It is the absolutism that I object too because I think such harms our chances of finding a settlement not aids it.

Did Annan have apartheid elements? It introduced bizonality and bicommunality and minimum nationality percentages for each region. It was closer to the South African homelands system than to to anything in federal states like the USA, Switzerland or Germany.

Once AGAIN. the ability of 'constituent state' under the terms of the Annan plan to "limit the establishment of residence by persons hailing from the other constituent state." were TEMPORARY. Yet you present it as being the equivalent to 'apartheid' and closer to the SA 'homeland' system and expect me to not see such a characterisation as 'extreme' and not one the reflects a sincere desire to reach a fair compromise ?

7. In addition, for a transitional period a constituent state may, pursuant to Constitutional Law, limit the establishment of residence by persons hailing from the other constituent state. To this effect, it may establish a moratorium until the end of the fifth year after entry into force of the Foundation Agreement, after which limitations are permissible if the number of residents hailing from the other constituent state has reached 6% of the population of a village or municipality between the 6th and 9th years and 12% between the 10th and 14th years and 18% of the population of the relevant constituent state thereafter, until the 19th year or Turkey’s accession to the European Union, whichever is earlier. After the second year, no such limitations shall apply to former inhabitants over the age of 65 accompanied by a spouse or sibling, nor to former inhabitants of specified villages.

If the Annan plan had of been accepted in 2004, then today the TC constituent state would have been allowed to restrict residency of GC in their federal areas to 12% of a given area and we would be 7 years away from no such restriction being allowed.

The big test is how the two major communities treat the smaller minorities of Cyprus. The first people to be ethnically cleansed in Cyprus were the Armenians of Nicosia in early 1964. Post 1974 when TCs were in absolute control of the north they treated these communities, their property and their religious sites as badly as the GCs. By contrast the south hosts the smaller communities at full equal standing and their schools and religious sites are important landmarks, an Armenian became the head of a major political party.

And the difference in how each side has treated other communities in Cyprus is in no way related to how those communities choose to not resist enosis in Cyprus ?

The TCs do not do badly in the south either. I was in Limassol a few days ago. The Mosques are renovated. All Turkish street names are in place, as they always were, TCs live in Zakaki and we learned in this forum that they vote for a moukhtar. In Nicosia the staff of the restaurant I stopped at were all TCs.

I would be happy to meet up with you in the south and travel with you to sites of former TC villages and TC cemeteries that have been obliterate from the face of Cyprus post 74 and show you these places directly.

Is there a single person permitted to cross from the south to the north to work?

Is that a function of them not being permitted to do so or of them not wanting to do so. I know the case of one GC who chose to relocate to the north and live and work there.

Are any Greek street names in place?

I do not ascribe the change of names to some evil intent, but to the perennial Turkish national insecurity which has been around since Kemal days. This is a Turkish thing, TCs had no problem regarding a village with a name like Ayios Vasilios as their village, the Turks do, and they brought this cultural trait to the TCs since 1974.

Is this REALLY a 'Turkish' thing. Are such name changes not typical of attempts of new states (and pseudo states) to 'nation build' ? Did not the Greek state go through a very similar process as part of its efforts to build a Greek nation following independence ?

In 1909, a commission appointed by the Greek government reported that one third of the villages of Greece should have their names changed, often because of their non-Greek origin.[1] In other instances names were changed from a contemporary name of Greek origin, to the ancient Greek toponym. Some village names were formed from a Greek root word with a foreign suffix, or vice versa. The majority of the name changes took place in areas populated by ethnic Greeks, where a strata of foreign, or divergent, toponyms had accumulated over the centuries. However, in some parts of Northern Greece the population was not Greek Speaking and many of the former toponyms reflect the diverse ethnic, and linguistic, origins of their inhabitants.

In 1870, the Greek government abolished all Italian schools in the Ionian islands, annexed to Greece six years earlier. This led to the diminution of the community of Corfiot Italians, resident in Corfu since the Middle Ages; by the 1940s there were only four hundred Corfiot Italians left.[11]

There is a tiny little alley in Limassol officially named ZigZag street because it.... zig zags. I sat there and wondered how the TC administration would rename this street if they were in control.

Should you also wonder how the Greek 1909 commission would have done so ?

This BBF thing applies partition. Presumably Turkey would want this following its military success of 1974. But partition is hard to implement on a small island. And since partition cannot survive the complexities included in all the plans proposed so far, I see problems in the future from the natural flow of population to the urban employment centers, ie the creation of new "minorities" in the south. It might therefore be better to opt for the cleaner simpler solution of two totally independent states, that way no one will have any doubts about what is what and where. But that is one solution that Turkey would never accept because a truly independent Cyprus, albeit partial and not whole, is not in their plans.

This is just loaded with your own personal assumptions. Who says a BBF of the kind envisaged in the Annan plan or being negotiated now (that we have yet to see) "cannot survive the complexities" included in them ? Clearly you do but based on what evidence ? I believe that such could survive if we choose to let them do so. Who says that a solution based on agreed partition 'would never be acceptable to Turkey' ? Clearly you do but based on what evidence ? The idea that the only thing standing in the way of agreed partition is Turkey is to me nonsense. First show a GC leadership, any GC leadership, that has EVER proposed such a bsis for a settlement and then I might consider if Turkey really is the only obstacle to such a settlement. Until then for me such claims that they are are just disingenuous.

Until there is a clear statement by Turkey about their real plans, not the public version of them, there will be no solution. What we know so far is that they do not want independence, nor partition, nor double union, nor union with Greece. By a process of elimination we come to the one other solution but that one just aint gonna fly. The only obstacle to that one is the existence of the RoC as formally recognised state. Which is why Turkey wants to dissolve it.

Again nothing more that your own assertions, stated as though they are evident fact, yet with no apparent evidence to back them up. Turkey DID support the adoption of the Annan plan, a plan you claim was based on partition and yet you claim it is also clearly evident that Turkey does not want partition in Cyprus. Can you not see the clear contradictions in these claims ?

May be now you understand why GCs cling to the RoC so strongly and anything that endangers it is going to be voted down. The RoC is our shield against both motherlands.

I do understand why GC want to keep what they 'won' as a result of political machination, inter communal strife and the illegal use of force including against innocents pre 74 - namely international recognition that a RoC government with only GC representation in it could be and was the sole legitimate government of all of Cyprus and all Cypriots, despite what the constitution of the RoC said, whilst at the same time reversing everything that the TC 'won' as a result of the illegal partition of Cyprus in 74.

Nikitas I have to take a personal view on what 'you are about'. I do so based on what you say here but also on what you do NOT say. On the issues you raise and I counter and you then just 'forget'. It is not ideal but that is the way it is.

[Sotos]

Exactly. You would not have defended such a view if I had said it, yet you did when a GC said it and you did so because a GC said it.

It is one thing for a GC to say that there might be a war to defend our island or liberate the part that it is occupied and another thing for a Turk/TC to say that there will be a war for maintaining or expanding their illegal occupation of my island. We are in different "camps", and that is the situation we find ourselves in. It is not my choice.

You want such a Cyprus, you want change - but you are not prepared to change the one thing you have control over - yourself.

What should I change in myself? I already support a free and democratic Cyprus.

Which 'us' is this that I am supposed to support ? The one that says we should NOT embark on bi-communal efforts to tidy up a GC cemetery, because doing so might make it harder for us to kill each other in the future ? Is that the 'us' I am supposed to be supporting ? Or the 'us' that says historically GC had every right to annex Cyprus to Greece without having to pay ANY regard at all for the wishes of my community ?

The "us" that says freedom and democracy to Cyprus without any excuses. It doesn't mean we have to agree on everything and about the past... I don't agree with many things with GR for example, but me and GR are "us" when it comes to this most important issue.

All you are saying Sotos is we can only have peace if TC accept your position totally, accept your truths alone as the only truths.

No. All they need to accept is that Cyprus should be free and democratic and stop trying to excuse the contrary.

You think claiming that tmt OFTEN killed TC that did not support separation and division in Cyprus is looking at the past 'objectively' ?

That really depends on what exactly is "often". I don't claim I have the absolute truth and I am willing listen to other views and see other facts if they are presented. As long as this is not done in an one-sided way and does not aim to create excuses for imposing in Cyprus something which is unfair and undemocratic.

And most GC here do not do this ? You do not do this ?

I have no unfair demands, so no. I just counter the Turkish excuses with facts that show that during our history the blame lies mostly with the Turkish side, that we are the ones who suffered the most and for the longer periods and that therefore the Turkish side have no right to demand anything unfair and undemocratic on our expense.

[Sotos]

I would have no issue with such a 4:1 ratio and granting of citizenship

Shouldn't that ratio be 82:18 or at least 1:5?

Once AGAIN. the ability of 'constituent state' under the terms of the Annan plan to "limit the establishment of residence by persons hailing from the other constituent state." were TEMPORARY.

In an earlier post you admitted that there was a way out of that.

Are such name changes not typical of attempts of new states (and pseudo states) to 'nation build' ? Did not the Greek state go through a very similar process as part of its efforts to build a Greek nation following independence ?

Even if that was the case the Greek state was a truly independent state and had no intention to be part of the Ottoman empire ever again. On the other hand in the north you have been doing such things at the same time that we were negotiating the unification of Cyprus. Doesn't this show that the TC leadership is not honest in their desire for a true unification?

I do understand why GC want to keep what they 'won' as a result of political machination, inter communal strife and the illegal use of force including against innocents pre 74 - namely international recognition that a RoC government with only GC representation in it could be and was the sole legitimate government of all of Cyprus and all Cypriots, despite what the constitution of the RoC said, whilst at the same time reversing everything that the TC 'won' as a result of the illegal partition of Cyprus in 74.

What the constitution of RoC said was the result of political machination, inter communal strife and the illegal use of force including against innocents. What is fair is for TCs to share power in a proportional and democratic way .. neither the pre-63 nor the post-63 arrangement was fair. In terms of land what is fair is to have no division and all Cypriots to be free on the whole of Cyprus. But the Turkish side wants to keep most of what they took illegally in 1974 AND take a share of power that is even more than what they had pre-63.