Personally, unless Akinci and Anastasiades miraculously move away from a BBF (Federal) to a BBC (Con-federal), I see no hope of a breakthrough with the talks. As for the word/term “indigenous”, in places like the UK, and particularly the U.S that could be classed as being borderline racist.
That’s the issue with Cyprus, it has no accepted Nationality; like being British by default if you were born there by let’s say a Polish family whom have newly had children in the UK. In Cyprus we are still bent on this Greek and Turkish Cypriot thing, “settlers” etc, even though we have people in the “TRNC” originally from Turkey after 1974 now with Children born here and are now in their 40s (whom also have children of their own as second generation “Cypriot born” and have never known their native roots in Turkey for instance). Would they now not be Cypriot by Nationality, or does being “Cypriot” only follow an ethnic bloodline? This is where the island loses, particularly now it (Cyprus) has become an EU member. In as little as 20 years from now, due to the influx of people from the EU in the South, and Turkish people in the North, a huge percentage of births are now from none-indigenous “Cypriots”. Thus, being Cypriot should, and will, become a Nationality as opposed to an historical bloodline. This is where Anastasiades will lose in his UN talks in the future as the EU do not see his idea of being an "indigenous Cypriot" as being Politically correct.
The delaying of resolving the Cyprus issue from 1974, particularly on the Turkish side, and now seeing it on the Greek side after entering the EU, is no longer about being an indigenous Turkish or Greek Cypriot but more like where you were born after 1974 and how long your parents have lived on the island. In that capacity, and yes, the indigenous “Turkish Cypriot” are a minority in the North by hundreds of thousands.
That’s where a settlement under what Anastasiades is seeking under a Federal deal is practically impossible.