Cyprus-Forum.com

[Simon]

As most of you probably know, I favour union for Cyprus and Greece, and so far, all those that have argued against it have not really given me any moral or legal reason as to why it should not happen, that has changed my mind (obviously assuming Cyprus voted for it). Anyway I have mentioned this just to say that I want to put this viewpoint to one side for now and discuss what would be my solution for Cyprus.

My solution would be Cyprus divided into 80% Greek side and 20% Turkish side. I know a lot of people will not like this idea, but let me just explain my arguments.

1) It would mean both sides have made compromises. The Turkish side will have given up the other 17% it currently holds, and the Greek side would have to accept that the people in the northern 20% would not get their homes back and that GCs have lost that land, and would instead have to accept compensation. Further, any TC who could prove that they had land stolen in the south should also be compensated.

2) This split in the island would be proportionate to the relevant populations and current land ownership, which is not the case today.

3) Many GCs who lost land in 1974 would be able to get it back with the 17% being returned.

4) 20% would be enough for TCs, there are many ports, much fertile land etc in the north for them to make a go of it. They could also deal with their own settlers, that have came since 1974, as it would no longer be a matter for the Greek side, hence it would reduce disagreements and friction. It would be TCs dealing with their own problem.

5) Please don't tell me that Cyprus is too small to be split, this is rubbish. Just look at Andorra, San Marino, Luxembourg and even the Vatican (with a population of about 811). They are all independent states and are much smaller than Cyprus and seem to manage just fine.

6) Relations between North and South Cyprus could then become normal. The north could be recognised by all and join Europe (the south could also be recognised by Turkey), the border could open just as any other EU neighbours and people could move freely between the North and South to work etc, just as other EU nations. IF THIS THEN BEGINS TO WORK, AND SLOWLY SLOWLY WE LEARN TO LIVE WITH EACH OTHER AND MIX MORE AND MORE, THEN IF BOTH STATES AGREE, THE ISLAND COULD LOOK TO RE-UNITE AS A FEDERAL STATE. This will take time however, and I believe doing it this way will be safer for all people, rather than just throwing us all back together again, which I believe will continue to make us segregated anyway, if it happens too fast. If the northern side joined the EU, this would be a form of reunification anyway, as in Europe, people can move across borders very freely.

I do not believe this proposal is biased to either side and is fair to all. It would create further stability before we take the final step of reunification. At the moment, I do not believe we're anywhere near as stable, or friendly enough to one another, for this step to be taken now. But for the meantime, this solution is certainly fairer than what we have today, as it means all property disputes being resolved, with either compensation or land being returned, and with this major problem out of the way, reunification seems a more reasonable possibility.

I will be interested to hear sensible responses.

[Rude Gal]

Bizarre, I have just posted a similar response in another thread, "the solution is to make 2 states".

Not sure about the %s but it seems like several people are converging on the same understanding of how to solve this seemingly intractable problem

Will be interested to hear others' views...

[cypezokyli]

simona, i can only tell u this.
once i also believed in that, i honestly did. and i presented the same "logical" arguments as you did. my opinion changed when i came to met with tcs, and when i learned about the wrong doings of our side. then i realised that my "logical" arguments, were based on pure nationalism. not to mention that bc i had many international friends i thought that that makes me immidiately not a nationalist when it comes to the cyprus problem.

btw, both of you are in england i may assume. or at least one is in london and the other is half british.
london has experienced more deaths than cyprus in the last 30 years.or the last 3 if you want, since the borders opened. i mean it is obvious that you cannot live together with muslims. look what they have done to you!! why dont you throw them out? remember it only takes 3 or 4 of them to create such an event again.
the same with france if i may add. two die by accident and france was on fire for two weeks. you see it doesnt take much for everything to go wrong. therefore, lets stay with a pure french nation where we can have our peace and quite. some of those immigrants were even born there. i would go as far and argue that what simon sais is too optimistic :

AND SLOWLY SLOWLY WE LEARN TO LIVE WITH EACH OTHER AND MIX MORE AND MORE,

come on in france, it was as slow as you can get it. they were even born there and still went around and burned thousands of cars. IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THEY CANNOT LIVE TOGETHER; EVEN AFTER A SLOW PROCEDURE

SENT THEM BACK WHERE THEY CAME FROM

[Kifeas]

Bizarre, I have just posted a similar response in another thread, "the solution is to make 2 states".

Not sure about the %s but it seems like several people are converging on the same understanding of how to solve this seemingly intractable problem

Will be interested to hear others' views...

Not that I support this partition idea whatsoever, but when you say you are not sure about the %s, do you mean to say that it has to be based on the 81.6% : 18.4% as it was the actual population ration since 1960, or it has to be based on the 83.5% : 16.5% as it is the actual land /property ownership ratio???

And I have another question to you.
Since all the TCs are legally all citizens of the RoC and the RoC alone and by itself doesn't have the right to wave their citizenship status without their consent, what if 30% of them wish to remain citizens of the RoC and thus also wish to reside within the RoC territory, shouldn't that percentage of the separate TC independed state be reduced accordingly???

[Simon]

then i realised that my "logical" arguments, were based on pure nationalism.

It might be based on nationalism for you, but for me its a clear solution. Anyway, even if your view was based on nationalism, that does not mean that it is automatically wrong, especially if it is a fair and peaceful solution for both sides. I know that people view nationalism negatively, but it would be naive to think that every nationalist view is purely wrong, simply because their nationalists. All the BBF arguments are getting you nowhere are they.

london has experienced more deaths than cyprus in the last 30 years.or the last 3 if you want, since the borders opened. i mean it is obvious that you cannot live together with muslims. look what they have done to you!! why dont you throw them out?

Yes they have been more deaths in London and why, because in the last 30 years Cyprus have been divided, therefore we have peace. Trust me, that wouldn't last for long if we reunified today. Further, the Muslims came to Britain with the agreement of the British government, unlike all the Turkish settlers since 1974. Your comparisons with France are not the same. Put it this way, the minority in France and Britain is a lot smaller than that in Cyprus, so if there is violence there, imagine what could happen in Cyprus.

but when you say you are not sure about the %s, do you mean to say that it has to be based on the 81.6% : 18.4% as it was the actual population ration since 1960, or it has to be based on the 83.5% : 16.5% as it is the actual land /property ownership ratio???

And I have another question to you.
Since all the TCs are legally all citizens of the RoC and the RoC alone and by itself doesn't have the right to wave their citizenship status without their consent, what if 30% of them wish to remain citizens of the RoC and thus also wish to reside within the RoC territory, shouldn't that percentage of the separate TC independed state be reduced accordingly???

Firstly, I was being generous with the percentage, so maybe TCs could accept it, that's why I said 80/20. Secondly, not all TCs are legal citizens of the ROC, certainly not the settlers that came after the invasion. Come on be reasonable, there are going to be very very few TCs who are going to want to remain in the ROC if they have their own state. I can't see this being a problem.

It seems that really I have not had any reasonable argument against this. It is a solution but people don't want to accept this is the way forward. So just keep on squabbling like you do; which will get you nowhere.

[bg_turk]

And I have another question to you.
Since all the TCs are legally all citizens of the RoC and the RoC alone and by itself doesn't have the right to wave their citizenship status without their consent, what if 30% of them wish to remain citizens of the RoC and thus also wish to reside within the RoC territory, shouldn't that percentage of the separate TC independed state be reduced accordingly???

If such a scenario comes true the RoC will have essentially dissolved and its citizenship will be meaningless since it will no longer exist at least in its current form as the internationally recognized representative of the whole of the island.
The citizenship that TCs nows hold is that of the RoC, and not of the greek cypriot state that is to emerge after partition. Those that wish to be citizens of that greek cypriot state, should follow the same procedures as any other foreigner.

[Simon]

Your right Big Turk, so isn't this the best solution for now?

[bg_turk]

Your right Big Turk, so isn't this the best solution for now?

bg_turk stands for bulgarian turk

[Piratis]

Change that 20% to 18% (or 18.4% as Kiffeas said) and I could agree. Resources and coastline should also be split on this ratio though.

Of course after this split it is our problem if we want to open any kind of borders or give our concession to the expansion of EU with any other countries.

That said, such a "solution" would violate the human rights of many people. While it would be "fair" in the sense that it is balanced and nobody is winning on the expense of another, nobody can force a GC from Kerinia to abandon the land of his ancestors. The same goes for a TC from Limassol.
If those people do not accept this "solution" then we are morally obligated to reject it as well.

[Kifeas]

And I have another question to you.
Since all the TCs are legally all citizens of the RoC and the RoC alone and by itself doesn't have the right to wave their citizenship status without their consent, what if 30% of them wish to remain citizens of the RoC and thus also wish to reside within the RoC territory, shouldn't that percentage of the separate TC independed state be reduced accordingly???

If such a scenario comes true the RoC will have essentially dissolved and its citizenship will be meaningless since it will no longer exist at least in its current form as the internationally recognized representative of the whole of the island.
The citizenship that TCs nows hold is that of the RoC, and not of the greek cypriot state that is to emerge after partition. Those that wish to be citizens of that greek cypriot state, should follow the same procedures as any other foreigner.

The RoC is a legal entity and a subject of international law, and cannot be dissolved! As such, (a legal entity) it has entered into various international binding agreements, the most important of which is its membership of the UN, commonwealth, CoE, ECHR and the EU, besides the numerous other interstate political, commercial, financial, and other agreements that it has contracted itself with many other countries. As a legal international entity, it has foreign debts, loans, assets, rights, reserves and deposits with the word bank and other institutions and countries, etc. Therefore it cannot be dissolved! It either has to stay as it is but with a reduced territory -should it accepts partition as a solution, or it has to evolve into something else, which nevertheless will have to carry along with it all the previous legal and other obligations and rights that it had under its previous status as the RoC. One such obligation is that of citizenship rights that all its current legal citizens (including the TCs) have. Without each single individual TC’s consensus, the RoC cannot wave his /her citizenship rights, even if the RoC will change its name 100 times. Any TC that wishes to remain a citizen of the RoC, the RoC has no choice other than to honor its obligation to him /her.