Cyprus-Forum.com

[GreekIslandGirl]

.
...Christopher Hitchens comes to mind, an author, a journalist, also worth reviewing, about Cyprus.

Sadly no longer with us but left a legacy of sound reporting.

[Erwinski]

I see the point you're making, but what I wonder is what your standing point is on possible unification in a federal state. The constitution you mentioned didn't work for (as I would say) obvious reasons, but with a federal stated based on Zwitserland or Belgium, where both communities have their regions on which some autonomy can be applied, but the country functions as one, would that be a problem for you?

So, not some 'student' doing a 'thesis' at all ...

Come again? I'm just asking a question, what's so strange about that?

[Erwinski]

.
...Christopher Hitchens comes to mind, an author, a journalist, also worth reviewing, about Cyprus.

Sadly no longer with us but left a legacy of sound reporting.

Indeed a sad thing, I highly regard him - especially in the debate on religion he's a voice that I can identify myself with a lot. Saw that he did some documentary on the issue as well, but didn't see the full video yet. Will do so though.

[repulsewarrior]

cyprus43479.html

cyprus36397.html

cyprus18426.html

...you will find these interesting, as a slice.

[Erwinski]

Thanks, will read them through. It's funny, this issue is one of these matters where the more you read about it, the less clear it seems to become.

[Jerry]

I'm a semi Cypriot, GC father, British mother. I tend to support and promote the Greek Cypriot standpoint. Briefly, the Turkish Cypriots have wanted and still want more of Cyprus, in every sense of the word, than their numbers can justify. They are one fifth of the population but occupy 37% of the island and want to keep most of it. Many Greek Cypriots see Cyprus as "Greek" and consider the Turkish Cypriots to be an insignificant minority but they ignore the fact that Turkey, for "strategic" reasons has an interest in Cyprus. Because of Turkey's influence and its importance to NATO Cyprus was "gifted" a unique constitution in 1960 that gave the minority almost equal power in the government. Many of the 80% majority resented this, some on both sides considered the Zurich Agreement to be merely an interim measure towards Union with Greece (ENOSIS) or partition (Taksim).

The so called "trnc" is an illegal entity recognised only by Turkey, it survives only because of huge subsidies from Turkey. Turkey has little regard for Cypriots on both sides of the Green Line, it is driven by self interest - principally it claims the "need" to protect its coastline from Greek encirclement. Turkey's utter contempt for Greek Cypriots is on show for the whole world to see, go and take a look at the deserted city of Varosha, once the home of 40,000 Greek Cypriots

This is one of the best sites for researching Cyprus, https://web.archive.org/web/20150927094 ... 0page.html
You could also look here, https://www.prio.org/Programmes/Programme/?x=14

Ah, your reply just came in fresh.

I'm aware of what you mention as I've researched the history of the conflict, which I tried to do with independent sources as much as I could (for example scientific research from universities not based or in anyway connected to the involved countries and communities).

I see the point you're making, but what I wonder is what your standing point is on possible unification in a federal state. The constitution you mentioned didn't work for (as I would say) obvious reasons, but with a federal stated based on Zwitserland or Belgium, where both communities have their regions on which some autonomy can be applied, but the country functions as one, would that be a problem for you?

Also it seems, but maybe I'm not well informed enough here, that Erdogan is actually willing to let Northern Cyprus 'go'. Although his words and deeds tend to differ quite a bit lately, ofcourse.

Unification would be good only if Turkey released its grip on the island and agreed to return a significant portion of Cyprus to Greek Cypriots. Unfortunately Turkey wants to keep its rights as guarantor and retain towns like Morphou for the Turkish Cypriots. Turkey has made many changes in the north that the Greek Cypriots find hard to accept - such as illegally settling thousands of mainland Turks in the occupied territory and "selling" our properties to cheapskate opportunists from Europe.

As for Erdogan, one only has to see how he managed to blackmail the EU into removing visa requirements and coughing up billions of euros to realise what a manipulative leader he is. It's strange how the flow of immigrants to Greece has suddenly been halted whereas a few weeks ago Turkey was "struggling" to stop them.

[Erwinski]

I see. As far as I know the presence of the Turkish army (and therewith Turkey being a guarantor) is one of the (to me logical) breaking points in the ongoing unification talks anyway (together with the property issue). I'm not an expert (yet, hehe...) but to me it seems that unification will never happen when the Turkish army doesn't leave the island. And yes, indeed, Erdogan is an unpredictable one , so it's unsure to know what he means when he says he's willing to let Cyprus 'go', as I already mentioned.

The role and current situation in Turkey regarding both the issue Cyprus and the EU in general is quite interesting. It is arguably because of the Cyprus issue that Turkey did never become a member of the EU, as Greece was avoiding that with veto's (there's an interesting research paper from the University of Utrecht on that matter). Now I do wonder if that in the end is a good or bad thing, somehow my gutfeeling tells me that Turkey being part of the EU in an early stage might have avoided it becoming an autocratic state ruled by someone like Erdogan. On the other hand I know that this is not necessarily a right way of thinking, as one only needs to look at the recent situation in Hungary (although still being a very different case) for that.

[Jerry]

I see. As far as I know the presence of the Turkish army (and therewith Turkey being a guarantor) is one of the (to me logical) breaking points in the ongoing unification talks anyway (together with the property issue). I'm not an expert (yet, hehe...) but to me it seems that unification will never happen when the Turkish army doesn't leave the island. And yes, indeed, Erdogan is an unpredictable one , so it's unsure to know what he means when he says he's willing to let Cyprus 'go', as I already mentioned.

The role and current situation in Turkey regarding both the issue Cyprus and the EU in general is quite interesting. It is arguably because of the Cyprus issue that Turkey did never become a member of the EU, as Greece was avoiding that with veto's (there's an interesting research paper from the University of Utrecht on that matter). Now I do wonder if that in the end is a good or bad thing, somehow my gutfeeling tells me that Turkey being part of the EU in an early stage might have avoided it becoming an autocratic state ruled by someone like Erdogan. On the other hand I know that this is not necessarily a right way of thinking, as one only needs to look at the recent situation in Hungary (although still being a very different case) for that.

We don't know what is going on behind the scenes. Some time ago it was suggested that Turkish troops might leave Cyprus if and when Turkey joins the EU. Both sides claim to have "red lines", perhaps Greek Cypriots will agree to the troops remaining in exchange for a significant piece of territory including Morphou. Turkey does not need control of 37% of the island in order to maintain its influence on Cyprus, apparently some Turkish Cypriots are worried about Ankara's motives. http://www.lgcnews.com/turkish-cypriots ... d-ozersay/

[Sotos]

That's why I'm interested in speaking with all kinds of people and their perspectives, and I'm trying to be as unbiased as possible myself, looking (or at least trying to do so) for the truth in the middle.

Wrong approach. Ever heard of the Middle Ground Fallacy? ( http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacie ... round.html ). That kind of approach encourages extremism. The more extreme you are, the closer to your views you bring that "middle". That is tactic well known by the Turks. If you want to find the truth then you do your research. The "middle ground" approach simply rewards the invaders.

[Sotos]

I see the point you're making, but what I wonder is what your standing point is on possible unification in a federal state. The constitution you mentioned didn't work for (as I would say) obvious reasons, but with a federal stated based on Zwitserland or Belgium, where both communities have their regions on which some autonomy can be applied, but the country functions as one, would that be a problem for you?

Were those regions in Belgium or Switzerland created by ethnic cleansing? The Greek Cypriots have been living in Cyprus for many 1000s of years. The Turkish minority was created in Cyprus during Ottoman rule, just like they created similar minorities in all other Christian territories they occupied (other Greek islands, Greek mainland, Bulgaria etc) and the Turks in Cyprus never lived in a separate region... they have always been a minority spread all over Cyprus. The "north-south" divide was something created in 1974 by means of foreign invasion and ethnic cleansing. Until then the Greek Cypriots were the great majority in the north part of Cyprus as well as every other part. Why should the Turks keep OUR lands as their "Turkish region"? Such thing would be appropriate for Turkey, with the Kurds. The Kurds have been living in Kurdistan even before the arrival of the Turks, and the Kurds are the native majority in South East Turkey.