Cyprus-Forum.com

[Issy1956]

Kifeas,
What you say is true and if Turkey ticks all the right boxes as it were and jumps through all the right hoops it may well in the fullness of time come to the standards that are expected of EU membership. Or it may not. What is certainly true is as you have indicated is that this is a process that is as long as it is tedious and complicated with many many opportunities to fail. Does Cyprus and it people have all this time to wait and do they want to take the risk of putting all their eggs into the Turkish EU basket? Everyday without a settlement is another nail in the coffin of a re-united Cyprus.

[Kikapu]

he told the EU and RoC to shove it where the sun don't shine

And you expect RoC and EU to accept this? I think EU and RoC will also tell Turkey to shove it where the sun don't shine. I think the Turks got used to get what they want but it will be a shock for them this time.

What do you think the EU and RoC is going to do, if Turkey tells them to take their EU membership offer and RoC's pathetic veto threat, to shove it where the sun don't shine. Aside from RoC running and begging the EU commisioner, pleading with them to please, please, let Turkey into the "Christian EU club", otherwise we will lose half of Cyprus!!! Have you ever seen a worse government than the RoC, that can't get anything right. Monday, they used up one of their veto points to ask the EU to demand from Turkey to open up the ports for the RoC, and after few hours later, the EU told the RoC to sit down and shut up. So the meetings went along anyway. Are the Greek Cypriots loosing faith in PappaD yet ? Well, they should.

Are you sure this is what happened on Monday? Is this what the Turkish press wrote? My information is quite different than yours, in fact the opposite, since no one said to the RoC to shut up! These are the nonsense that Mehmet A. Birand and some other Turkish reporters write in the Turkish press, and I have not seen anything like that been claimed by any of the international media. In fact, the RoC achieved the goal it aimed to achieve, which was to essentially tie the EU policy on the particular issue. It was never the intention of the RoC to veto Turkey, at least on this stage, and this became essentially totally unnecessary since the rest of the EU members agreed with the RoC to include in the opening and closing agreement of the first chapter, almost all the closures that that it wanted them to include. No one said to the RoC to shut up, and no one talks like this in the EU against another member state.

Kifeas,

I don't think I have read any Turkish newspapers in last 35 years, and I have very little contact with Turhish speaking people, aside from my family, so I get my information on the news from several sources, then form my own opinion on the subject in quetion. Being a "news junky", I usually can tell what it possible and what is not, so I don't believe most things I read, instead, I look for the information between the lines. I was hoping you were not expecting the "sit down and shut up" comment to be an official press release from the EU did you?. So, in essence, that's what ROC had ended up doing.

[despo]

[snip]

the least role than in any other international organization and body. This is also why Cyprus (RoC) manages in the end to gradually get most of what it wants and aims out of the EU decisions, simply because it moves on the basis of principles, values and legitimacy, and this is something the Turkish side fails to understand and comprehend.

What has the RoC managed to achieve as a member of the EU, Kifeas? From what I can tell, it has absolutely no support for its positions on the Cyprus problem. The RoC opening up its ports and airports to Turkish ships and planes and the EU requesting Turkey to recognise two states on Cyprus are not the same as the Cyprus problem. Do you remember before the referendum, when all the rejectionists were arguing that Turkey would never be able to join the EU as, with the RoC in the EU, it would be illegally occupying EU territory? Well, guess what, guys - the EU has not requested that Turkey remove its troops and does not consider that Turkey is illegally occupying EU territory!

In any case, even on the Protocol issue, the Papadopoulos government has little support within the EU - it was made very clear that it would be totally unacceptable for the RoC to veto Turkey's accession chapters on the basis that Turkey had not applied the Protocol, and there is an open-ended date as to when Turkey is expected to recognise the RoC. Moreover, it is very likely that the EU will support a deal whereby Turkey opens its ports and airports to the GCs, with ports and airports being opened in northern Cyprus (to use the term used within the EU) for the Turkish Cypriots to trade directly with the EU - Ollie Rehn, Commissioner for Enlargment, praised Gul's ten proposals in which he outlined such a process.

On the contrary, as regards finding a settlement to the Cyprus problem, Turkey was praised by the EU (with Tassos' signature) for the great effort it made to resolve the Cyprus issue and its support for the Annan Plan, whilst Tassos Papadopoulos was publicly called a cheat and a deceiver in the European Parliament by the very person who helped put Cyprus in the EU, Gunther Verheugen, then Commissioner for Enlargment and now Vice President of the Commission. I don't think there is any respect within the EU for Tassos Papadopoulos at all. I've certainly not seen any sign of it. Can you point to anything positive that any EU politician or citizen has said of Tassos Papadopoulos? I can't think of a single thing. Instead I'll repost (it was ignored before) what Ursula Plassnik, Foreign Minster of Austria - hardly a country that can be dismissed as "pro-Turkish" - said when Talat was elected as representative of the TCs last year. She praised Talat and implicitly criticised Tassos. What do you make of Plassnik's statement, Kifeas?

http://www.bmaa.gv.at/view.php3?f_id=80 ... rsion=text

Foreign Minister Plassnik Welcomes Election Victory of Mehmet Ali Talat
18.4.2005

Hope for resumption of dialogue between the two ethnic groups

Vienna, 18 April 2005 - Foreign Minister Ursula Plassnik welcomed the election victory of Mehmet Ali Talat, who succeeded Rauf Denktash as the leader of Turkish Cypriots, as an encouraging development: "This confirms the positive attitude of northern Cypriots towards a solution of the Cyprus issue and towards Europe, something which was already reflected in the outcome of the referendum of 24 April 2004. After all, Mehmet Ali Talat clearly advocated Europe in his former position, too, backing a peaceful solution based on the comprehensive peace plan of UN Secretary General Kofi Annan," said the Foreign Minister.

Plassnik expressed the hope that the dialogue between the two ethnic groups on the island, and thus the UN-sponsored peace process, will now be resumed: "We have high hopes that the positive signals reaching us from the north of the island will be heard by all those in leading positions on the island so that a rapprochement of the two sides will be possible again," Plassnik said.

[despo]

Despo here is another one not from GC media for you

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite? ... 2FShowFull
French President Jacques Chirac warned Turkey on Friday to respect a deal with the European Union to open its ports and airports to Cyprus, or risk stalling its bid to join the European Union.

"They have to respect their engagements," Chirac told reporters after an EU leaders summit. "Notably in the case of Cypriot merchandise arriving in their ports. If it doesn't, it will call into question its capacity to move forward toward the enlargement (of the EU)."

Yes, and Jacques Chirac also said that Cyprus should not join the EU whilst the Cyprus problem still continued. The only reason that the RoC was let in eventually was because of the Helsinki agreement, when the RoC promised it would make a sincere effort to support the UN process for a resolution to the problem. In the end, the RoC government didn't sincerely support the UN settlement effort, instead it tried to destroy it, and this is one reason why Tassos Papadopoulos has been seriously criticised and has no respect within the EU. Indeed, neither Chirac, France or any other EU state supported the RoC's argument - which the RoC eventually had to back down on - that since Turkey had not opened its ports to GC ships then Turkey's first negotiation chapter should not be opened.

In any case, Chirac doesn't really care about whether RoC ships enter Turkish ports, he just wants to create problems for Turkey and even block Turkey's entry. He couldn't care less about the Cyprus problem. Doesn't it surprise you that even though all these EU countries are being so critical of Turkey on the ports issue, not a single one ever mentions anything about the Turkish troops on Cyprus? Or that no EU member-state condemns Turkey for the continuing division of the island? Instead, they have praised Turkey for supporting the Annan Plan, and expressed deep disappointment with the Greek Cypriots for rejecting it.

So, Sotos, the reason the Cyprus Weekly articles you post are propaganda are because they distort the actual picture of what is really going on in order to delude the people and promote a simplistic ideological position. All EU member states made it clear to the RoC that it would be totally unacceptable to veto Turkey's accession chapters just for the ports issue. So, the RoC failed there. The EU has not asked Turkey to remove its troops from Cyprus. The EU has made it very clear that the UN is the organisation within which a settlement to the Cyprus problem will be found, and that it supports Kofi Annan's efforts in this direction. The EU wants to start direct trade with the Turkish Cypriots. The European Parliament now has a TC contact group which recently visited northern Cyprus and where the MEP Mechtild Rothe, who was previously a strong supporter of GC positions and even went on the "Women Walk Home" marches, spoke about how inhuman the TCs isolation is and how it has to end. The EU has made no issues relating to the Cyprus problem (constitution, troops, displaced, property) a condition for Turkey joining the EU. Most recently, the Europan Court of Human Rights has accepted the establishment of a Turkish-Cypriot Property Commission to deal with the cases of GCs seeking the return of their property. And I could go on and on with many more examples of how the EU and other European and international organisations do not support the Papadopoulos government's position since the referendum of April 2004.

So, you see, Sotos, the actual real picture is much bigger than the one painted by the propaganda of the Cyprus Weekly.

[despo]

No matter how much Turkey may want to join there are those within the EU that do not ever see them inside and will eventually thwart their membership. When that happens even the dumb Turks will realise that they have to revise their game plan. What then for Cyprus?
The only hope to counteract this is the USA putting pressure on the EU to accept Turkey but even the power of the US has its limits.

Issy, what is the Greek-Cypriot game plan if the dumb Turks don't get into the EU? I thought the whole anti-Annan strategy was to get a "better" settlement through the EU as Turkey tried to join. If Turkey doesn't have an EU accession process, then how is Papadopoulos's game plan going to work?

In any case, it's a bit dumb to say that it's US pressure or British manipulation that opened up Turkey's accession process. There are 25 countries in the EU, if they didn't want Turkey to join they should have just said so months ago. And let's not forget, no one really wanted Cyprus in the EU other than Greece, and they only accepted the RoC because they thought this would help lead to a settlement. In the end, Papadopoulos did all he could to destroy that possibility. Which is why the EU praises Turkey for supporting the UN settlement and expresses its disappointment in the GCs for rejecting it.

[Kikapu]

Despo,

Your last 3 posts are excellent, in bringing the actual reality of the whole Cyprus v EU v Turkey to the "head in the sand" crowd. Those that followed, the likes of PappaD and others to reject a stepping stone to a settlement with the Annan Plan, threw away a golden opportunity, instead, they were looking for the "magic bullet" to kill off the occupation by Turkey through the EU, and return the whole island under the control of the ROC. Another example of PappaD's miscalculations. Please continue to enlighten us with more information as you get them.

[miltiades]

Despo wrote " And let's not forget, no one really wanted Cyprus in the EU other than Greece "
Are you really stating that all other EU member states lined up against Cyprus becoming a member ?
You are not by any chance a newly qualified lawyer are you?
Just to get things right the EU PRAISED Turkish Cypriots , not Turkey , and expressed , not expresses , a distinct difference where expresses indicates a continual level of praise .
The majority of Cypriots , whether influenced by their government or not rejected the plan based on the referendum result. I only wish that the approvers of the plan would graciously accept the result as just that . The majority won.

[despo]

Despo wrote " And let's not forget, no one really wanted Cyprus in the EU other than Greece "
Are you really stating that all other EU member states lined up against Cyprus becoming a member ?
You are not by any chance a newly qualified lawyer are you?
Just to get things right the EU PRAISED Turkish Cypriots , not Turkey , and expressed , not expresses , a distinct difference where expresses indicates a continual level of praise .
The majority of Cypriots , whether influenced by their government or not rejected the plan based on the referendum result. I only wish that the approvers of the plan would graciously accept the result as just that . The majority won.

Miltiades, you're right, the EU did praise the TCs for supporting the Annan Plan. But you are wrong when you say it did not praise Turkey as well - with Tassos' and Karamanlis's signatures. There was an EU Council statement commending Turkey for supporting UN efforts to resolve the Cyprus problem in 2004. And all EU Council or anything else statements relating to Turkey's "obligations" for membership all state that Turkey should continue to support UN efforts for a settlement. In other words, the EU does not feel it is its job to negotiate a settlement. I have the EU Council statement commending Turkey for supporting the UN effort in 2004 on my old computer. I shall find it some time and post it.

Basically, the EU supported the Annan Plan, and it wanted the United Cyprus Republic that would have emerged from the UN settlement to join. They wanted a united island, united by a UN settlement to join, and the reason they accepted Cyprus as a candidate country was because they believed that Cyprus's EU accession process would have created the right conditions for such a settlement. It did, but the GCs misguidedly rejected the settlement. This is why the then EU Enlargment Commissioner, who worked so hard to prepare Cyprus to join the EU, said he felt "cheated" (his exact word) by Tassos Papadopoulos. This is why the EU has not set as a condition for Turkey's EU membership - despite what the GCs who rejected the UN settlement believed would happen - the settlement of the Cyprus issue, nor anything related to troops or property.

Again, you're right Miltiades. The EU does praise the TCs for supporting the Annan Plan. Because the EU fully supported the Annan Plan, and still fully supports a UN negotiated settlement based on the Annan Plan. And it still wants to start up direct trade with the TCs, but has to get around the problem of "bureaucracy" as it dismisses the Papadopoulos government's blocking of these EU policies.

[miltiades]

Despo it appears to me that having made up your mind that the Anna plan was the only solution that would lead Cyprus into becoming a united Island once again , you are steadfastly refusing to examine the main reasons the overwhelming majority rejected it. Here is a general synopsis.
You also state that the EU praised the T/Cs for approving the plan .Of course it did no one is denying the fact the T/Cs as well as Turkey accepted the plan because it was to their advantage and to the detriment of the other side.
The Plan did not include a settlement regarding the repatriation of Turkish settlers living on Greek Cypriot owned land in the 'Northern Cyprus', while after 19 years, the possibility of abolishing the derogation of 5% of Greeks and Turkish citizens who could settle in Cyprus, is obvious, and the danger of a permanent mass settling of Cyprus by Turkey is visible.
The Plan did not deal in full with the demilitarisation of the de facto 'TRNC', and Greek Cypriots felt they had no reason to believe Turkish promises concerning the withdrawal of troops.
Many Greek Cypriots interpreted the Right of Return policy as to be seriously flawed, meaning only 20% of Greek Cypriot refugees would be able to return over a time frame of 25 years, whereas Turkish Cypriots would have had full right of return.
Turkish Cypriots would have gained all the basic demands it made, from the first day of the implementation of the solution. To be exact, 24 hours after the holding of the referendum. In contrast, everything that the Greek Cypriots were aspiring to achieve, would have postponed without guarantees and depend upon the good will of Turkey to fulfil the obligations it undertakes. They are also subject to the precondition that all would have gone well.
The return of the Turkish occupied land will take place in the period between three and a half months and three and a half years from the moment the solution is signed with no guarantees whatsoever that this shall be implemented. The Cypriot-Greek proposal of placing these areas under the control of the UN Peace Keeping Force and not the Turkish army has been rejected.
The Plan did not address the issue of the British Sovereign Base Areas (SBAs) on the island, although parts of the SBAs would be transferred to the governments of the two consituent states.
The functional weaknesses of the Plan endanger, inter alia, the smooth activity and participation of Cyprus, with one voice, in the European Union. While the Greek Cypriots have with many sacrifices achieved Cyprus accession to the European Union, the Greek Cypriots could very easily be led to the neutralization of the accession until the adoption of all necessary federal and regional legal measures or the loss of the benefits of the accession or the facing of obstacles in Cyprus participation in the Economic and Monetary Union and other European institutions.
The Economy of Cyprus would have been separate with the plan. There will be no common monetary, fiscal policy and no investments by Greek Cypriot businesses shall be allowed in the Turkish Cypriot constituent state.

[despo]

Yes, Miltiades, I absolutely do believe that acceptance of the UN Plan was the only solution that would have led to the unification of Cyprus. Over two years on - and despite the delusions of GCs that the EU would wave a magic wand and everything would be alright - we have absolutely no prospect in sight for any kind of settlement whatsover. Division of the island is becoming entrenched, the two communities are even less interested in rapprochment as a result of the bitterness caused by the destruction of the last UN efforts, the ECHR has accepted a TC committee will solve the property issue, the economy of northern Cyprus is developing and becoming even more independent. The UN has repeatedly said it sees no prospect for talks for a long time (clearly indicating the Papadopoulos government as the problem). So, yeah, I do feel that was an opportunity that was deliberately and stupidly destroyed by the delusions that the EU would "give" us something "better."

As for your "analysis" of the Annan Plan, you are simply wrong and just repeating slogans you have heard without studying or thinking about the issue in any depth. The idea that the Annan Plan gave the Turks what they "wanted" is just ridiculous. Please tell me why Rauf Denktash and the Grey Wolves rejected it because it would supposedly lead to the destruction of the Turkish Cypriots then (interestingly, the same paranoid argument put across by GC rejectionists, just swapping over the word "Turks" for "Greeks").

The plan included repatriation of most Turkish settlers. Even the Papadopoulos government has accepted that some will remain. Some of these people have lived there almost their entire lives. You are living in cloud cuckoo land if you think the UN was going to uproot all of them. More to the point, even if they were all to leave, it would take a long time to move them, build new housing in Turkey for them, integrate them there, etc. Rejection of Annan has just resulted in more settlers coming, and the more time that goes by the more entrenched they become there.

Can you please tell me now, how today, a settlement is going to be achieved that will remove all settlers (some of whom may have been born and lived of the island for over 30 years now)? When and how is this plan that you envisage to remove the settlers by going to happen? How will it be achieved? And, when are Turkish troops going to leave? Guess what - despite all the rubbish said by rejectionists before the referendum, that Turkey would be illegally occupying EU territory and so therefore wouldn't be able to join the EU until it removed all its troops, the EU doesn't agree with that. The EU has not asked Turkey to remove a single soldier before it can enter the EU.

The stuff you have written about demilitarisation, the time frame of return etc. is just wrong. Please tell me now when are GC (and TC) displaced actually going to return (if they really want to that is)? I can see no one returning now. Please tell me how GC displaced are now going to return? Where is this wonderful settlement that rejection of the Annan Plan was going to bring? When exactly are GC displaced going to start returning?

In any case, if the Annan Plan had been accepted, a large number of GC displaced would already have the right to return. Today no one has anything, and there is no prospect of anything on the horizon. And, as time goes by, it becomes more difficult, not only in political terms but in practical terms too.

A settlement plan doesn't have to address the issue of the British Sovereign Base Areas, and it is not in any of the UN resolutions that this issue has to be dealt with. Like it or not, this is considered sovereign British terriory, it is outside of the Cyprus issue. The 50% of that territory that would have been given up to the Greek Cypriot constituent state was a bonus. It is more likely that the bases will be dealt with by a united Cyprus, because the TCs don't like them either. This will involve demilitarisation of the island of Greek, Turkish and Cypriot forces, with Cyprus perhaps eventually joining NATO or the EU force, which doesn't exist yet though.

Please tell me how, now, today as things are this wonderful settlement that you fantasise about, which is going to remove the Sovereign British Bases from Cyprus, is going to be achieved? When will we see this settlement?

As for the stuff about the economy, an independent Irish study found that the Annan Plan would not only have united the Cypriot economy, it would have led to great economic development throughout the whole island. Of course, the rejectionists politicians and media didn't want you to hear about independent studies, they wanted to feed you crap so the GCs would reject the UN plan and then "get" a "better" deal within the EU. How???? What we actually have the EU doing today is trying to get the GCs and TCs to trade directly with each other across the Green Line to unite the economy (and it's the GCs who aren't enthusiastic about this method of uniting the island's economy), and seek to lift the isolation of the TCs and start direct trade with them. And, the other funny thing, is that the GCs are ever so desperate to start direct trade with Turkey! Yes, once Turkey opens its ports and airports to Greek Cypriot ships and planes we're going to send all our produce to them! And Turkey will be offloading its own lovely produce at Limassol port! What a great achievement on the part of the rejectionist Papadopoulos government!

Please tell us, how is this wonderful settlement is going to come about, whereby Cyprus will be united in every single way, the economy as well.

Come on, tell us, where is this new settlement? When are we going to see it? What's it going to contain? Is it going to be better than the Annan Plan? Where is the settlement to the Cyprus problem?!?