Cyprus-Forum.com

[bg_turk]

Greece would not have minded chopping half of Turkey off at the time.

and ethnically cleansing and partitioning Macedonia and justifying it by saying thats where alexander was from. Even today Greece refuses to recognize the Republic of Macedonia even though that state has no territorial claims whatsoever.

[sadik]

Do not be so certain about this impossibility Sadik! Without an agreed solution and If it becomes a matter of salvaging the national cause, I have the feeling that either the parliament or the people through a referendum may go down to such an approach, regardless of who else from the EU may follow or may be opposed. Turkey becoming an EU member, without a prior agreed solution to the Cyprus problem, equates for the GCs like committing suicide. In fact, the accession process itself may be obstructed, even before a final accession is decided.

I agree that Turkey cannot become a member to the EU without a solution in Cyprus. However, when it comes to the final approval, and all the other issues are sorted out between Turkey and the EU and the only remaining obstacle is Cyprus, I cannot foresee who will be facing the heat. It is possible that another solution plan might be forced upon the GCs this time with a greater pressure, when the stakes become very high. In general GCs blocking Turkey is possible, but it will depend a lot on the international politics at that time. I don't think it is a tool that can be used under any circumstance.

[bg_turk]

I agree that Turkey cannot become a member to the EU without a solution in Cyprus.

Let us not joke with ourselves, Turkey cannot become a member of the EU even with maximal concessions on Cyprus. Should Turkey make any political concessions over a lost cause?

[Kifeas]

can an idiot kindly remind you a small minor detail ?
the last time i checked, i believe we have lost the war.
therefore, there is an upper limit on how much we can demand.
or, there is not, and we are about to re-write history.

Cypezokyli, sorry to say this to you but anyone who would have dared to put such an argument in front of me and simultaneously happens to be standing to some reasonable proximity, I would have most likely smacked his face, and not just once!

What you have said above, and the way you said it, has nothing to do with a realist's approach, but it is a purely submissive approach. It is a fatalistic approach of the worst kind! For your sake, do not present it to someone who you believe to have some minimum sense of dignity, because most likely will smack you, and for a good reason. I would have argued back to you by saying "If this is the case, then fine! Let's prepare and work to win back what we lost, in the same way we lost it, than submitting to anything less than we rightfully own and deserve!"

You have taken us many centuries back Cypezokyli! Shame on you to think in this way! Which war have we lost in 1974! As far as I know and for this matter, on paper we still have a cease fire and not an end of any war! In 1974, did we collectively decide to unilaterally declare a war against Turkey, or against the TCs for this matter, which we subsequently lost and thus we have to be pay war damages and compromise to anyone’s terms and impositions, or it was rather an unjustified to a large extent attack by a much larger country against the people of a smaller neighboring country under some loose pre-text, with the aim of ethnically cleansing a large part of this country in order to ethnically divide and partition it?

Have we in 1974 attacked the TCs, we GC community as a whole and with our elected leadership on the front line, and therefore Turkey had to do what it did in order to rescue them from our hands and therefore we have to accept the consequences of our actions; or it was more the case in which for the previous 4-5 years and up to this time we had been negotiating with their leadership so that we would find a mutually acceptable political solution (which we have almost concluded as a matter of fact,) with them, so that their rights as a community and as individuals would be re-established within the RoC (perhaps under a slightly different concept) and also so that their to a large extent self-imposed isolation into the enclaves would have ended?

I believe it was more the later than the former! Was the coup in 1974 of a very small minority of GCs against Makarios, a direct attack against the TCs? The answer is No! Had any adequate time for international diplomacy and mediation to act against the coup and the Greek junta in order to re-establish the elected government been allowed? The answer is No! Instead, Turkey, which had been ready all along and with its army virtually seating and waiting in south Turkey for the right excuse to invade, did what it had in its plans to do, had a real excuse been offered or in the worst case a made up excuse should a real one wouldn't have become available. And you know how easy it was for Turkey in those days to engineer an excuse. Or you want me to explain to you how.

Therefore, I will be much happier if I do not hear from you such a pathetic argument again, because it is a very brutal insult to the feelings of your GC compatriots, and to any free thinking individual, irrespective of his/her ethnic origin! It doesn't show political realism but rather a submisive and fatalistic character!

[cypezokyli]

thank god we dont speak face to face.

no need for the history lesson. and no need to repeat ou fair demands.

the argument, above was not to justify the war. the argument was concerned with an aim to have 80% of cyprus for us both on land and political respect. therefore i apologise if i insulted you or hurt your feelings. it was just part of the specific discussion.

unless ofcource u also believe that this is possible, you may proceed. the 80% party is about to realise.

if we dont want to accept that we lost a war... no problem. we can call it the unjust barbaric expanding invation from turkey. hope you are satisfied. would you then say that the unjust barbaric imperialistic invation from turkey is going to have an influence on the solution?
thats all i want to hear.

[sadik]

I agree that Turkey cannot become a member to the EU without a solution in Cyprus.

Let us not joke with ourselves, Turkey cannot become a member of the EU even with maximal concessions on Cyprus. Should Turkey make any political concessions over a lost cause?

How can you be so sure? 15 years is a long time. Looking at the rate of the economic development in Turkey, developments in geopolitics, EU-American relations and the developments in the Middle East, I cannot exclude the possiblility of full membership. If not full membership, at least some kind of a membership like arrangement will come out of these talks, tieing Turkey and the EU very closely. And this might just be what Turkey needs. But the membership path needs to be taken to get there.

[Tony-4497]

cypez

great strategy. we dont talk until you give us what we want. with these in mind when would you say we should expect the solution-80? 2008, 2020, 2050? 2080 most probably. then it will rime.
in any case we can just wait till the tcs finaly realise that we right.

Please do not be naive. The only reason Turkey would ever be prepared to hand back a significant piece of land in Cyprus is in order to enter the EU. For 30 (!!) long years Turkey stated that the problem was solved in 1974. Why on earth do you think it suddenly accepted to hand back 7% in the Annan plan?? ONLY because of its EU accession process. And even (most of) that tiny 7% she would have kept until she would actually enter the EU - IF it ever did. Don't kid yourself that they would have handed back large areas before they guaranteed their entry - they're not stupid (many excuses available for delaying the handover- housing, power sharing problems etc..)

Accordingly ANY real solution to the problem will happen ONLY IF AND WHEN Turkey is close to entering the EU. And, at that time, Turkey will be forced to accept a fair solution. That is our best shot at achieving such a solution.

The alternative would be to accept to take back 7% in theory.. and in practice only about half of that.. i.e. increase our part from 63% to say 66% or maximum 70% and sign away the rest.. well, thanks but no thanks - it's simply NOT WORTH IT.

By the way, if that 80% party is set up, i would definately like to join.

Cheers, Simon - let's go for it!

[Piratis]

if we dont want to accept that we lost a war... no problem. we can call it the unjust barbaric expanding invation from turkey. hope you are satisfied. would you then say that the unjust barbaric imperialistic invation from turkey is going to have an influence on the solution?
thats all i want to hear.

What I want to hear is what YOU call the invasion. "peace operation" maybe?

I agree with what Kifeas said about you being a submissive and fatalistic character. As I said if all have been like you we would still be slaves under the Ottomans.

If we lost a war and they won then they shouldn't have a problem, right? But they do have a problem, and our duty is to make sure their problem will never be solved if ours is not.

[cypezokyli]

tony there exists your argument :

Accordingly ANY real solution to the problem will happen ONLY IF AND WHEN Turkey is close to entering the EU. And, at that time, Turkey will be forced to accept a fair solution.

and there exists sadiks argument as well

I agree that Turkey cannot become a member to the EU without a solution in Cyprus. However, when it comes to the final approval, and all the other issues are sorted out between Turkey and the EU and the only remaining obstacle is Cyprus, I cannot foresee who will be facing the heat. It is possible that another solution plan might be forced upon the GCs this time with a greater pressure, when the stakes become very high. In general GCs blocking Turkey is possible, but it will depend a lot on the international politics at that time. I don't think it is a tool that can be used under any circumstance.

upon who the pressure is going to fall, is matter of personal prediction.

looking at the past though....

[bg_turk]

As I said if all have been like you we would still be slaves under the Ottomans.

Slaves!? Is that what they teach you in history books?
A slave is someone who does not own himself, and thus cannot own property either. Were you like that?