Cyprus-Forum.com

[sadik]

Serdar is currently getting about 10% of the votes. He usually is the only one making these kinds of comments. His vision is not shared by many. Turkish Cypriots in general view a federation as the final destination, not as a stepping stone.

Unfortunately Denctash views are shared by UBP. The 2 parties together have more than 35%.

However what is the most important is that this view is apparently the view shared by the military regime in Turkey. This is why "solutions" such as the Annan plan are designed to lead to official partition. The Turkish military regime (which also controls the TC leadership) does not allow for any plan that could lead to a truly united Cyprus.

And a question:

When you say "Turkish Cypriots in general view a federation as the final destination", do they realize what federation means? Or they think that federation is something like what the Annan plan proposed, which has nothing to do with a true federation?

Would TCs, for example, accept a USA kind of federation in Cyprus, were they would have control of one of the 2 states since they would be the majority, but in the country as a whole they would have the power that proportionately belongs to them and not the 50%?

Personally I am still not convinced that TCs would accept a federation as it exists in other federal countries (USA, Russia etc - Switzerland is a confederation) but they have been made to believe that federation is just a loose association of two separate states. (something like the relationship between EU countries).

General understanding is having a federation based on the political equality of two communities. However there might be a thousand ways how this may be implemented. It's difficult to say what will be accepted in the end. The demands of the political leadership are usually more strict than what's acceptable for the general public. The minimum requirement for a solution to be accepted by Turkish Cypriots is the support of the CTP (Talat's party) for the solution, since CTP is the only political force that can embark into such a campaign.

[Strahd]

Serdar is currently getting about 10% of the votes. He usually is the only one making these kinds of comments. His vision is not shared by many. Turkish Cypriots in general view a federation as the final destination, not as a stepping stone.

Unfortunately Denctash views are shared by UBP. The 2 parties together have more than 35%.

However what is the most important is that this view is apparently the view shared by the military regime in Turkey. This is why "solutions" such as the Annan plan are designed to lead to official partition. The Turkish military regime (which also controls the TC leadership) does not allow for any plan that could lead to a truly united Cyprus.

And a question:

When you say "Turkish Cypriots in general view a federation as the final destination", do they realize what federation means? Or they think that federation is something like what the Annan plan proposed, which has nothing to do with a true federation?

Would TCs, for example, accept a USA kind of federation in Cyprus, were they would have control of one of the 2 states since they would be the majority, but in the country as a whole they would have the power that proportionately belongs to them and not the 50%?

Personally I am still not convinced that TCs would accept a federation as it exists in other federal countries (USA, Russia etc - Switzerland is a confederation) but they have been made to believe that federation is just a loose association of two separate states. (something like the relationship between EU countries).

General understanding is having a federation based on the political equality of two communities. However there might be a thousand ways how this may be implemented. It's difficult to say what will be accepted in the end. The demands of the political leadership are usually more strict than what's acceptable for the general public. The minimum requirement for a solution to be accepted by Turkish Cypriots is the support of the CTP (Talat's party) for the solution, since CTP is the only political force that can embark into such a campaign.

Political equality of two communities were one represents max the 20% of the total population of the federation is an apartheid and not a democratic solution.

What you say is one vote of a TC would count as 4 GC votes... well do you see this as fair?

[Piratis]

General understanding is having a federation based on the political equality of two communities. However there might be a thousand ways how this may be implemented. It's difficult to say what will be accepted in the end. The demands of the political leadership are usually more strict than what's acceptable for the general public. The minimum requirement for a solution to be accepted by Turkish Cypriots is the support of the CTP (Talat's party) for the solution, since CTP is the only political force that can embark into such a campaign.

OK, so tell me which of the two is closer to what TCs expect to be the relationship between the two states in Cyprus and the central government:

1) The relationship between Texas and California and the relationship of those states to Washington DC. This means that each state has its own governor handles many of their internal affairs, but the whole country belongs to all Americans as a whole and to elect a president each state has a voting power depending on its population.

OR

2) The relationship between Spain and Portugal and the relationship of each of those states to Brussels. This means that each state is mostly independent but part of a union, were their own land belongs first to them and then to any foreigners (as other EU citizens are considered) and were the presidency rotates regardless of the population of each state.

From my understanding so far is that the kind of "union" that TCs want is more of the second kind than the first. They do not accept that the whole Cyprus belongs equally to all Cypriots and that the power they should be (in most cases) shared in a proportionate way.

Also another question:

If official partition was possible and legal, how many TCs would reject it? If a "union" that would be forced on us was problematic, don't you see more TCs sharing Serdars opinion about following the Czechoslovakian model of partition? Do you think TCs would be willing to make sacrifices and be patient in order to achieve unity if official partition was an available alternative for them?

[JustAnAmerican]

There will be some form of partition. A federated republic, a loosely held union, somethin. It may look like a combination of both. The Annan plan will be the basis of technical talks, BUT no side is allowed to refer to it as the Annan plan.

And if you fail to compromise again ...... put up the borders, get out your passports because it will be obvious that there is no solution.

[Piratis]

And if you fail to compromise again ...... put up the borders, get out your passports because it will be obvious that there is no solution.

Are you threatening us?

[Alexis]

Quote:
There will be some form of partition. A federated republic, a loosely held union, somethin. It may look like a combination of both. The Annan plan will be the basis of technical talks, BUT no side is allowed to refer to it as the Annan plan.

And if you fail to compromise again ...... put up the borders, get out your passports because it will be obvious that there is no solution.

Are you threatening us?

I don't think it is a threat, more of a kind of show of arrogance along the lines of 'I know what's good for you so do what I say'. Of course we need to show compromise, but so does the other side and that is the point of negotiations. How can we say that something 'will be' before the negotiations have started. I agree that the Annan Plan has enough in it which both sides agree to form a 'basis' for talks, but the issues on which the sides disagree need to be actually 'dealt' with this time rather than filled in at the last moment hoping that the public would back them.

[Piratis]

I think its a threat expressed with the usual arrogance. What he is telling us is that we have to compromise and accept a form of partition otherwise they will force it on us anyways.

[MR-from-NG]

I think its a threat expressed with the usual arrogance. What he is telling us is that we have to compromise and accept a form of partition otherwise they will force it on us anyways.

Well worked out Sherlock.

[Kifeas]

There will be some form of partition. A federated republic, a loosely held union, somethin. It may look like a combination of both. The Annan plan will be the basis of technical talks, BUT no side is allowed to refer to it as the Annan plan.

And if you fail to compromise again ...... put up the borders, get out your passports because it will be obvious that there is no solution.

Yes, there will be no solution through political means, if the above approach is taken. However, there can always be a solution on the basis of legal, international court means. Furthermore, the international diplomatic warfare between Cyprus and Turkey will continue indefinitely, until a time will come when this warfare will become literal. Turkey has on its side the US, and this is taken for granted by us, already. Cyprus on the other hand, will, either voluntarily or involuntarily, drag the EU on its side. It is impossible for the EU or any of its member states to recognise or concede to the recognition of a separate entity in the north, and consequently it is also impossible for the UN SC to authorise any such resolution. The occupied north will most likely become recognised by the US alone, and some other satellite countries, but at the same time the door of the EU will be indefinitely closed for Turkey.

In 20 or 30 or 50 or 100 years down the road, any time we will be fully ready and fully capable and as soon as we catch Turkey to be absorbed with some other internal or external difficulty, we will cease the opportunity to solve the problem in the same way that it was created by Turkey in 1974.

JustanAmerican, G/Cs do have a very-very long history in Cyprus! In the whole of it! In every corner of it! Every corner of Cyprus carries an inseparable part of our history, our cultural identity and our very existentialist consciousness. We cannot trade them away with anything! We cannot sell our history! Any solution to the Cyprus problem should take this fact into consideration! No long-term solution can ever be possible if it ignores the above reality, unless you plan to exterminate us to the last one! There is no sane Greek Cypriot that can afford or has the guts to put his signature onto a paper that will trade away any or all of the above. Not even if you threaten us with an atomic bomb! This doesn’t mean that we are against the rights and existence of the T/Cs in this country. The two are not mutually exclusive!

Therefore, tell your government that with such approaches like the above -if indeed they have something like that in their minds, will never solve the problem in any way whatsoever! They will make things much worse! If this is what they only know or have in mind, it is better if they stay out of this problem!

[MR-from-NG]

In 20 or 30 or 50 or 100 years down the road, any time we will be fully ready and fully capable and as soon as we catch Turkey to be absorbed with some other internal or external difficulty, we will cease the opportunity to solve the problem in the same way that it was created by Turkey in 1974.

Kifeas,

Are you a stand-up comedian, if not you have the potential.