Cyprus-Forum.com

[Piratis]

Cypriot, I understand what you say. But I ask you again: Who will appoint the leaders that will do the negotiations if they will not be elected democratically by the Cypriot people? Would they be the "nenekoi politicians" that cypezokyli is talking about? (which by the way are the most corrupt of all)

[The Cypriot]

Piratis, here are some ideas of how we might go about appointing people to work on redrafting the UN plan to render it acceptable to both sides (according to the Lordos surveys, a by-no-means insurmountable task). I'd be pleased to hear your thoughts - or anyone else's - as to the best approach as I can see this process would need to be handled with care.

A short-list of Cypriots is drawn up by the EU/UN and offered to the authorities of both sides for approval/endorsement/blessing before redrafting begins with advice from expert EU/UN mediators. Here are some ideas from where this short-list could be drawn:

• Adverts in the media calling for drafters, applications considered based on people's ability to demonstrate a commitment to a solution - those deemed appropriate would then be put in a draw and chosen at random;

• Representatives of active bi-communal organisatons;

• Representatives from the legal profession/business/finance/academia/media/culture/arts who've made a positive contribution to public life and, in particular, rapprochement.

In all the above cases fluent English speakers may be preferable to ensure against communication problems between parties.

While I know the UN is not trusted by GC's I hope the EU is less discredited and both organisations would need to go out of their way to explain that this 'bottom up' initiative was a Cypriot idea - not a US/UK plot! In any event, perhaps representative from a third country might be in a position to take on the role of mediator on the UN/EU's behalf, eg. Switzerland or Belgium.

The delicate process of getting an acceptable redrafting team together might itself be what's needed to help restore public confidence and get both sides thinking positively about a solution. A solution that will, ultimately, be in the people's hands. The EU/UN would need to conduct a co-ordinated and professional PR campaign to promote the activity and spend what it takes to get the media on side.

Cypezokyli. I am not currently in Cyprus. I reside in London. Perhaps those who live on the island may be in a position to put forward more informed idea as to how an appropriate and acceptable group of drafters might be assembled.


O Theos aman theli na hasi don limburan dhia du ftera je beda.
When God wants to get rid of an ant He gives it wings to fly.

[Tony-4497]

I was encouraged by the results of Alexandros Lordos’ recent surveys of Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots regarding the terms of a future revised peace plan.

As I mentioned in a previous topic, I believe that the way the questions were asked in those polls was such that only misleading results could have been generated.

The first message coming from those polls was that GCs overwhelmingly prefer a unitary state - and, let's face it, this is because they believe that in such a state they get to keep the control of the republic as well as 100% of the land with full return of refugees.

The other message is that when IN THEORY GCs have to choose between a BBF and partition, the majority prefers the BBF as the lesser of two evils, with the % of those preferring partition steadily increasing and being perticularly high in younger people.

The TRICK and major flaw of the poll is that it does not clarify what kind of BBF we are talking about. As it has been shown in this forum, there is a huge gap between the BBF that Makarios and GCs accept in principle and the one that TC want.

GC consider a BBF to be essentially a unitary state with a bit of local autonomy for TC, i.e. at local authority level, with full return of refugees, etc. TC understand something completely different i.e. pretty much the Annan plan.

The concept of "political equality" which our leaders have now accepted means that ONLY an Annan-plan type BBF is possible, (essentially a solution that in my view gives TCs the best of both worlds and GCs the worst of both worlds i.e. 2 sovereign states that are losely connected at the top, so that TC get to be masters in the north and partners in the south, and we get to pay for them to perpetuity).

The other MAJOR flaw of the poll, which renders it useless, is that it presumes that the land sharing would be the same in a BBF and in a partition. This is completely misleading. There is an established principle of "land for sovereignty" (see Middle East) which shows that the land we would get back in a partition would be a lot more than what we would get in a BBF.

I firmly believe that if the TRUE available choices were presented to GCs in the poll, then at least 90% of GC would vote for option 2. Those choices are:
1. Annan-plan type BBF with component state sovereignty & political equality and 70:30 land split
2. Clean partition with a land split of 80:20 and a possibility to form a BBF in the future if both states decide to do so.

[Lala_Mustafa_Pasha]

Tony the world doesnt revolve around you, in TODAY'S world, Turkish Cypriots make up betwen 35/40% of the population of Cyprus.

The longer Greek Cyprus stalls negotiations the more our population will grow and grow.

Statehood and Recognition

Although international law today clearly grants a right of self determination to all peoples, ' it does not provide a mechanism for the unilateral secession from an existing state, because this would violate the principles of the integrity and sovereignty of a state. The foundation of the TRNC, however, was no secession from a unitary state of Cyprus, but rather a reaction to the foundation of the national Greek de facto regime leading to 10 years of civil war. Both de facto regimes in the north and in the south of Cyprus have now developed into national states, simply because they possess all essential elements of independent states that are required by international law; i.e. they exercise stable and effective constitutional power on a clearly defined territory and over permanent population without foreign control. The disavowal of the TRNC by all states except Turkey is a severe practical problem, which, however; has no legal effect on the Republic's quality of being an independent state according to the prevailing declaratory theory. The resolutions of the UN Security Council 541/1983 and 550/1984 not to recognize the TRNC as a state are merely political advice and not legally binding. Moreover; they are legally self-contradictory, because they do not consider the illegal acts that were first performed by the Greek Cypriots as being the main reason for the establishment of a separate Turkish state. A new federal or confederal unity of Cyprus must be established guaranteed by a new international treaty system between the two new states and the three "London Powers" (“2 plus 3 treaties ").

We have to accept that the reconstruction of the constitutional situation of 1960 is impossible. Thus, the territorial separation and the establishment of a Turkish Cypriot Republic is the only realistic alternative to guarantee human rights and the right of self determination to the Turkish population.

[Tony-4497]

Lala

You live in a fantasy world.

The Cyprus problem is one of occupation by a foreign military force - go check out not only the "politically motivated" UN resolutions but also all of the inter-state international court decisions and the ECHR decisions which clearly state that the authority controlling occupied Cyprus is the Turkish military and any other auhtority (i.e. Talat) is a SUB-ORDINATE authority to the Turkish forces. That is why it is TURKEY that has paid Loizidou and other refugees and not the TC community.

If your arguments were worth anything, then any country in the world would be able to find an excuse and occupy a smaller one, set up a state on the stolen land, and wait for a few years until it is recognised.. ain't gonna happen.. plus, if this happens, it will form a precedent for all sorts of people such Kurds, Basques etc etc

As for the intercommunal clashes, just refer to my earlier note, which you conveniently chose to ignore, where demonstrated that the clashed in Cyprus were STARTED by Turkey and TMT.I CHALLENGED you to provide an earlier case of inter-communall killings (before the TMT murders in Kondemenos) but you failed.

As for the population, TCs were 18% in the 60s and that % is a lot lower now, due to emigration effected by the Turkish forces "protection"..

If you think you can include the Anatolian settlers you have brought over then you are more deluded than I though..

At the end of the day, you can say what you like, but it is Turkey that needs a solution for its EU accession, and this solution will have to be a hell of a lot better than the Annan plan to pass.

My note above explains what is fair and might be acceptable to GCs (i.e. effective unitary state with some local autonomy in the form of a BBF or 80:20 partition).

Failing this, the status quo continues and Turkey stays out of the EU. Why on earth would GCs be prepared to dissolve the RoC and recognise a TC state, formally accept the loss of 30% of their land, allow Turkey in the EU etc etc and get into all sorts of risks and power sharing complications??? just to take back 7% of land?? They would have to be bonkers to do that.. much better to keep the status quo and try to take it all back in any possible way.

[Lala_Mustafa_Pasha]

Maybe your finding this really hard to take in, I understand man, you've been living in denial all your life.

Here's the facts of today,

Turkish Cypriots make up 35/40% of Island and have a rapid birth growth.

Trnc will be recognised,

About Legallity here you go, read it this time lol

Statehood and Recognition

Although international law today clearly grants a right of self determination to all peoples, ' it does not provide a mechanism for the unilateral secession from an existing state, because this would violate the principles of the integrity and sovereignty of a state. The foundation of the TRNC, however, was no secession from a unitary state of Cyprus, but rather a reaction to the foundation of the national Greek de facto regime leading to 10 years of civil war. Both de facto regimes in the north and in the south of Cyprus have now developed into national states, simply because they possess all essential elements of independent states that are required by international law; i.e. they exercise stable and effective constitutional power on a clearly defined territory and over permanent population without foreign control. The disavowal of the TRNC by all states except Turkey is a severe practical problem, which, however; has no legal effect on the Republic's quality of being an independent state according to the prevailing declaratory theory. The resolutions of the UN Security Council 541/1983 and 550/1984 not to recognize the TRNC as a state are merely political advice and not legally binding. Moreover; they are legally self-contradictory, because they do not consider the illegal acts that were first performed by the Greek Cypriots as being the main reason for the establishment of a separate Turkish state. A new federal or confederal unity of Cyprus must be established guaranteed by a new international treaty system between the two new states and the three "London Powers" (“2 plus 3 treaties ").

We have to accept that the reconstruction of the constitutional situation of 1960 is impossible. Thus, the territorial separation and the establishment of a Turkish Cypriot Republic is the only realistic alternative to guarantee human rights and the right of self determination to the Turkish population.

[Agios Amvrosios]

Turkish Cypriots make up 35/40% of Island and have a rapid birth growth.

Re Lala you will be lucky if there are 40,000 to 50,000 turkish Cypriots in Cyprus today . If turkish Cypriots make up more than 10% of the total population of cyprus I'll donate both my kidneys.

[Leonidas]

Turkish Cypriots make up 35/40% of Island and have a rapid birth growth.

Re Lala you will be lucky if there are 40,000 to 50,000 turkish Cypriots in Cyprus today . If turkish Cypriots make up more than 10% of the total population of cyprus I'll donate both my kidneys.

I thought it was both of your nuts LOL

[Alexandros Lordos]

Cypriot,

I am afraid that for now at least, the UN tends to take the attitude that Piratis has expounded - that they will negotiate only with the elected representatives of the two sides. Selecting such a drafting committee as you describe would be an unthinkable breach of UN practices - at least that's what they told me in person when I presented them with an idea similar to yours.

Having said that, if a civil society initiative to draft such a revised plan goes ahead, with the tacit approval of the leaders but also with the understanding that its results cannot be binding to the negotiators, then I am sure politicians on both sides as well as the EU/Security Council Countries/UN will make extensive use of the results.

Tony,

I am quite confident that no one knows the shortcomings of my surveys as well as I do

Having said that, I think you are basing your criticism on just one particular question of the very first survey conducted in September 2004 - the question about whether they would prefer unitary state, BBF or partition. That question ofcourse is asked in nearly every opinion poll, and it was not the defining point of my own survey. But anyhow, this is how I would analyse the results of that question: Greek Cypriots would unreservedly want a Unitary State, they are tentative about a BBF, while they strongly oppose by tradition a two state solution. Whether a solution can be achieved on the basis of a BBF depends on whether this tentativeness can be overcome, with such BBF terms that will conform to GC concerns while not being unacceptable to TCs.

This, precisely, was the purpose of the second bicommunal survey of May 2005, which you may not have read yet, where different very specific interpretations of BBF were tested with the public of both sides. It would seem to me that the issue that GCs are most ambivalent in a BBF are residence rights - not really power sharing, which is mostly a concern of the politicians and the upper middle class. GCs are wondering how it will be possible for them to live in Kyrenia etc. if it is under TC administration, and this is one of the reason GCs want a stronger federal state so that when they live in the north they will feel they are under the umbrella of the federal government rather than of the Turkish Cypriot authorities.

Beyond that, GCs had a couple of issues with an "annan-type" plan that have nothing to do with how federal or devolved it is. Namely, security and settlers. From testing in the most recent survey of May 2005, it seems these are the two attributes of the Annan Plan that the GCs reject most robustly, and this rejection does not decrease if minor adjustments to these two aspects of the plan are made. In security and settlers, the GCs require a radically new approach if they will accept a future BBF plan.

[Tony-4497]

Alexandros

I don't think that we are in disagreement here.

Like I said, GCs understand and accept a BBF as an arrangement where we essentially live under the RoC, albeit some regional autonomy is given to the TC sector, and where the federal RoC govermnent has sovereignty which OVERRIDES that of the local TC sector/state. This is not a political irrelevance but a very real issue as this will determine whether people will be able to return to their homes.

If the federal RoC does not have sovereignty over the TC local authority/state, it would be a piece of cake for the Turks to ensure no refugees go back - just send 10 grey wolves to burn down the house of 1-2 GCs and you're done!! The sovereign TC state police will say "we tried to find who did it but we can't".. and that's it.. all GCs are out, and they get to keep 30% of Cyprus as a pure Turkish state while being partners in the south.

Unfortunately for us, the concept of "BBF with political equality" means that in any such solution the federal state's sovereignty will NOT override that of the TC state. The safety/security concerns do not arise only because of Turkey's "rights" i.e. troops and intervention rights (these are just the obvious ones and I take it as a given that any future plan will not include these). Those concerns are MAINLY about sovereignty in its practical sense i.e. who runs the state? who is the authority I answer to in my daily life (i.e. police, courts/constitution, town authorities, government departments etc)? ALL of these things will be Turkish in the TC state..

Also, as I said, the issue of "land for sovereignty" is not addressed anywhere in those polls.