Cyprus-Forum.com

[repulsewarrior]

https://books.google.ca/books?id=n4ddDw ... us&f=false

...what i m busy reading.

[Pyrpolizer]

Continuing on the matter of political equality.

For a start it only concerns the Central State and whatever matters that central state is going to deal with, plus the independent institutions like the Central Bank.

Let's take for example the simplest thing the Central government will be doing concerning citizenship, aliens, Immigration, and asylum.
The vast majority of the employees will be doing routine work, issuing IDs,passports, visas etc just like they do today and according to the existing law and directions from their superiors. In other words warming up the chairs.

Some very few decisions have to be referred to the highest Authority in that Department. Today there is only one Authority, the Director of that Department who often asks the approval of the Minister and gets it 99% of the times.

In other words we should translate Anastasiades' saying that "for every simple matter the TCs want to have at least one positive vote" as to "every simple matter" that today is referred to the Director of the department.The whole point of the UN clarification about how the political equality should be, is to safeguard that no community will take decisions against the interests of the other community.

For those of you who got panicked already thinking that such thing would paralyze the state:

The effective participation of the TCs is guaranteed by their 1:3 participation at the top level decision making, whereas their 0 positive vote is translated as a veto. Notice according to what the TC side currently wants, it's not enough for just 1 TC to say no. On the contrary It's enough for just 1 TC to say yes to have a decision by majority.
As the matter currently stand from the TC POV suppose at top level we would have 7 GC voting and 3 TCs. If all 3 TCs say no, then the whatever decision drops.

Now if in fact the decision would be against the interests of their community, and the GC voters consent to it then fine. But what if the GC voters disagree that it has anything to do with the interests of the other community or Fed state?
And what if all TCs who voted no, did so just by personal opinion, without necessarily having to do with the interests of their community/Fed state and they state that clearly?

It's clear to me that it's not enough that all TCs vote a no to halt a decision. They also have to declare that they did so because it's against the interests of their community/State.

In that particular case there should be some court to decide whether that is true or not.
If not then the decision passes by majority vote. If yes then the decision drops.

Imo implementing the matter of political equality is actually very simple, and yes it will guarantee that no community/State will impose it's will against the interests of the other. And why do the Gcs assume that it's always going to be against them? I imagine there would be countless of cases the TCs would bring in matters that would be against the interests of the GC state.
So what's the big deal?? It's just a matter of working up the details.

[Lordo]

has anastasiades explained what he means by de-centralised federal system yet?

[Oceanside50]

has anastasiades explained what he means by de-centralised federal system yet?

Read the Annan plan, you big dummy

[Pyrpolizer]

has anastasiades explained what he means by de-centralised federal system yet?

No, but since he couldn't figure out a way to implement the political equality as defined by the UN.
thinking it would paralyze the State, he suggested to reduce the matters of authority of the central state, so that if paralyzed it won't be too severe.

He now changed his mind and declared he is ready to discuss the matter of the political equality the way the TCs want it.
I am sure he is going to suggest some similar procedure to what I described. Therefore imo the de- centralization idea he had in mind, is no longer valid.

Maybe this forum is been read after all.

[Pyrpolizer]

https://cyprus-mail.com/2019/02/03/akinci-a-lone-fighter-who-wont-give-up/?utm_source=projectagora&utm_medium=contentdiscovery

above is an interesting report about what happened at the talks and what akinci said for those who think akinci has said nothing. he saod plenty.

“There were harsh, hours-long bargains behind closed doors with President Erdogan especially in the territory and guarantees topics,” explains Kahvecioglu. “He even threatened a couple of times to leave the negotiation table if Ankara would stick to maximalist positions.”

On more than one occasion during the negotiations, Akinci took steps despite Ankara’s reservations, even objections.

“The first fight with Ankara was at Mont Pelerin [November 2016] when Akinci said he was ready to increase the percentage of area that would be returned to the future Greek Cypriot constituent state,” said Kahvecioglu. “Anastasiades didn’t reciprocate and asked for a recess. Then in Geneva, when he gave a map before securing a rotating presidency, just before Greece disrupted the conference.”

“Akinci is being reminded at every opportunity that he showed his cards too soon, that Anastasiades didn’t reciprocate,” says Kahvecioglu. “Erdogan is displeased that Akinci acted independently. And Erdogan’s displeasure is behind today’s crises.”

may i take this opporotunity to syggest to those who atill think akinci never said anything in these talks to please shove ......................................... the above info in their pipe and smoooooooooke iiiiiiiiiit. and btw stop smoking what ever itz is you are smoking currently as it aint doing you no good no how.

Don't forget Akinci is not the negotiator, Nami is the one who's negotiating together with Mavroyiannis.
Akinci and Anastasiades only deal with top issues.
Moreover Akinci set some silly red-lines right from the start as e.g. rotating presidency, without even accepting cross-voting from all the people of Cyprus.
And finally if he was really a lonely fighter as the article says, then he should have ignored Ankara's directions not to return to the table unless after the Euro-elections and Brexit. What's Brexit and the Euro elections have to do with the Cyprob??!!

Question is does he really have the guts? If yes, he better show it. Otherwise he will go down in history as another Ankara's puppet, or half puppet if we take the article at face value.

[repulsewarrior]

If he doesn't get down to it, Akinci will be labelled a traitor, by Cypriots, especially by those who in voting for him, voted against Eroglu.

...the question remains, is he fighting for Cypriots who are Turkish, or is he fighting for "Turkishness"? What seems clear to me is, that he must choose because it is not possible to do both.

Does Akinci plan to run for reelection, if not, in my mind it explains a lot. If he does, where does he plan on getting his votes from, what platform does he have that will differentiate him from the other candidates, parroting the same objections?

...to win, Akinci, as a Cypriot representing Turkish Cypriots, (if he wants to be Anastasiades' equal in negotiations), he must find his support from Cypriots, all Cypriots.

[B25]

All this nonesnese about Akinci this Akinci that, haven't you learnt anything yet? He is just a puppet, he has no power to do anything, whatever he agrees is useless unless Ankara says so. Turkey is funding the occupied areas, she only has to turn off the tap for 3 months and they are f*cked and they know this. It is a case of he who pays the piper.

Forget Akinci, we need to be negotiating direct with the occupier, the TCs are no more, they are out numbered 5:1 by gypsies from Anatolia, what say do they really have. They are just being used by Turkey so she gets what she wants. Hade assirktir, wtf.

[Lordo]

All this nonesnese about Akinci this Akinci that, haven't you learnt anything yet? He is just a puppet, he has no power to do anything, whatever he agrees is useless unless Ankara says so. Turkey is funding the occupied areas, she only has to turn off the tap for 3 months and they are f*cked and they know this. It is a case of he who pays the piper.

Forget Akinci, we need to be negotiating direct with the occupier, the TCs are no more, they are out numbered 5:1 by gypsies from Anatolia, what say do they really have. They are just being used by Turkey so she gets what she wants. Hade assirktir, wtf.

did you become stupid later or were you born one. listen to what you are saying you stupid idiot. if he is a puppet of ankara what difference does it make who you negotiate with.

anasbadadez tried to sideline akinci and learnt his lesson. he did not like what ankara said.

may your god have mercy on all your thick gcs.

[Lordo]

If he doesn't get down to it, Akinci will be labelled a traitor, by Cypriots, especially by those who in voting for him, voted against Eroglu.

...the question remains, is he fighting for Cypriots who are Turkish, or is he fighting for "Turkishness"? What seems clear to me is, that he must choose because it is not possible to do both.

Does Akinci plan to run for reelection, if not, in my mind it explains a lot. If he does, where does he plan on getting his votes from, what platform does he have that will differentiate him from the other candidates, parroting the same objections?

...to win, Akinci, as a Cypriot representing Turkish Cypriots, (if he wants to be Anastasiades' equal in negotiations), he must find his support from Cypriots, all Cypriots.

rw you keep harping on about akinci and keep barking up the wrong tree. the fascists in the north have already labled him a traito and the pregressive people know exactly who to blame for the current impass. i mean fancy asking for the guarantees and troops to go from day one. what level of stupidity does a politician reach to come up with that demand.

wake up rw you seem to be infected with a touch of gc fascism.