Nice to see you here mate
Welcome
Rightful Demnds of GCs
by Alexandros Lordos » Mon Nov 29, 2004 10:35 pm
I will see what I can do about a download link ... in the mean time, here follows the executive summary of the study:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Can the Cyprus Problem be Solved?
Understanding the Greek Cypriot response to the UN Peace Plan for Cyprus
An evidence-based study, by Alexandros Lordos
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to explore the attitudes underlying the negative response of the Greek Cypriot community in the 24th April referendum, and beyond that to explore the possibility of improvements to the UN Plan, such as would extract a strong “Yes” by the Greek Cypriots in a future second referendum.
Methodology
For the purposes of this study, 1000 Greek Cypriots were surveyed by telephone interview. The sample was selected according to the rules of random stratified sampling, so as to be representative of the Greek Cypriot population as a whole. The data was analysed using advanced statistical software (the SPSS package), while special use was made of the Cluster Analysis technique, in order to discern specific sub-groups with particular sets of beliefs about the UN Plan.
Question 1: Do the Greek-Cypriots accept Federation?
Only a minority of Greek Cypriots - about 23% - resist the prospect of a Federal Solution to the Cyprus Problem. Everyone else accepts Federation, but as a painful compromise which they are willing to tolerate, rather than as an ideal: For most Greek Cypriots, the ideal solution would be a Unitary State, while a Two-State solution would be totally unacceptable.
The “Greek nationalists” amongst the Greek Cypriots, also seem to support the prospect of a Federal Solution, just as much as those with a more Cypriot-oriented sense of identity, probably because they are comforted by the prospect of a Greek-Cypriot constituent state in which Greeks will permanently form the majority.
Question 2: Have the Greek-Cypriots understood the UN Plan?
The majority of Greek Cypriots - about 60% - report “quite high” or “extremely high” awareness of the UN Plan. Only 5% of Greek Cypriots admit to not knowing the Plan at all. Men, the middle-aged (35-54), and the well-educated report a better knowledge of the Plan than women, the young and the old, and the less educated. Amongst those who know the Plan “extremely well” the “No” vote still forms a majority. This finding refutes the argument that with greater understanding of the UN Plan the Greek-Cypriots would have voted “Yes”.
Furthermore, the study shows that Greek-Cypriots largely made up their own minds as to their vote in the referendum, and were not unduly influenced by their leaders: Amongst the segment of the population which kept equal distances from the leaders of both the “Yes” camp and the “No” camp, in order to form an objective view of the Plan, 76% still voted “No” in the 24th April referendum.
Question 3: Which improvements to the UN Plan do the Greek-Cypriots demand?
In this study, it becomes evident that different segments of the population have different sets of demands as to the possibility of improvements in the UN Plan. The Greek Cypriots can be sub-divided into six groups, of which two groups accept the Plan as it is and four groups demand improvements:
1. The first group is composed of those who find the UN Plan satisfactory as it is. This group considers the Plan fair and balanced, and does not think that any possible changes would be helpful. However, this group only makes up 5% of the population.
2. The second group is composed of those who find the UN Plan tolerable as a compromise. These people would have preferred to see many improvements made to the Plan, but they are willing to set their demands aside for the sake of reaching an agreement. This group makes up 19% of the population.
3. The third group is composed of those who would like to see improvements in the Chapters of Security and Guarantees. This group demands that a totally new security system is devised, one that is not based on Greek and Turkish intervention rights or the medium-term presence of Greek and Turkish troops on the island. Furthermore, they require enforceable guarantees that all sides will adhere to the agreement, and also such clauses in the constitution as would ensure that the new Federal State is the legal successor state to the Republic of Cyprus. This group makes up 14% of the population, and if their demands were satisfied the “Yes” vote would rise from 24% to about 38%.
4. The fourth group is composed of those who would like to see improvements in resettlement rights of displaced Greek Cypriots. The demand here is not for more territory to be returned under Greek-Cypriot administration, but rather that the Turkish-Cypriot constituent state should become more welcoming to Greek-Cypriots who might wish to relocate to within its borders. In this context, this group demands that a greater proportion of each refugee’s property is returned to him, not just “one third with various exception clauses attached”. Furthermore, it is demanded that the responsibility for the education of Greek-Cypriots residing in the North is transferred to an appropriate Federal department, rather than it being under the purview of the Turkish Cypriot administration, and also that a permanent ceiling is set to the influx of Turkish nationals into Cyprus – presumably because Greek-Cypriots in the North would feel uncomfortable residing amongst an ever increasing Turkish (as opposed to Turkish-Cypriot) population. This group makes up 21% of the population, and if their demands were satisfied along with the demands of the previous group, the “Yes” vote would rise to about 59%.
(It should be noted that a corollary demand of this group, is for “Turkey to contribute financially for the compensation of refugees who will not have their property returned”)
5. The fifth group is composed of those who would like to see improvements that would render the solution more “European”. By the term European, this group means: a) No restrictions to the exercise of Basic Freedoms, and b) A better organised and more functional Economy. As to the first sense, this group disputes amendments made to later versions of the Annan Plan in order to satisfy Turkish-Cypriot demands for bizonality and political equality, such as the permanent limit to the number of Greek-Cypriots who may attain the citizenship of the Turkish-Cypriot constituent state. As to the second sense, this group demands that the central Federal state be granted more oversight and control in Economic, Financial and Trade affairs, than currently provided for in the Plan. This group makes up 16% of the population, and, while it is understandable that this group’s demands cannot be fully satisfied, a partial satisfaction of their demands when it comes to Economic affairs could raise the overall “Yes” vote to, perhaps, 65%.
6. The sixth group is composed of those who insist that the UN Plan should be buried. To this group the fundamental constitutional equilibrium of the Annan Plan is totally unacceptable, especially when it comes to decision making mechanisms and power-sharing arrangements. This group makes up 25% of the population, and their negative vote in a second referendum can be predicted with some certainty.
It should be noted here that, as well as the specific demands which each group expressed, three demands were so widespread as to deserve separate mention. These are:
• That the withdrawal of Turkish troops should take place much sooner than currently provided for in the UN Plan. (Demanded by 76% of Greek-Cypriots)
• That more settlers should leave the island than currently provided for in the UN Plan. (Demanded by 75% of Greek-Cypriots)
• That the cost of operating the Federal state should be divided more equitably, so that Greek-Cypriots do not end up having to shoulder 90% of its cost. (Demanded by 73% of Greek-Cypriots)
These three particular demands have such strong and widely based support amongst the Greek-Cypriot population, it is doubtful that any Plan which fails to take them into account could possibly be approved in a second referendum.
Question 4: Are the Greek-Cypriots ready for a Solution Now?
To this question, the answer is quite straight-forward: About 70% of Greek-Cypriots strongly prefer that a new round of negotiations leading to a comprehensive settlement should begin as soon as possible – preferably, before Turkey is granted a date for EU accession negotiations. Clearly, this preference is indicative of intense mistrust towards Turkey, as Greek Cypriots doubt whether a Turkey that has “nothing to gain in return” would allow the reunification of Cyprus. This strong preference for a Solution before Turkey is given the green light from Europe, might well translate into overwhelming public support for a veto against Turkey’s commencement of accession negotiations this December, if no steps are taken in the mean time to promote the comprehensive settlement of the Cyprus Problem.
Conclusion
A comprehensive settlement of the Cyprus Problem on the basis of the UN Plan, is still a strong possibility: With only a small number of important improvements made to the UN Plan, large segments of the Greek-Cypriot population would choose to vote “Yes” in a second referendum, leading to an approval of the revised Plan by as much as 65% of the Greek Cypriots.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Can the Cyprus Problem be Solved?
Understanding the Greek Cypriot response to the UN Peace Plan for Cyprus
An evidence-based study, by Alexandros Lordos
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to explore the attitudes underlying the negative response of the Greek Cypriot community in the 24th April referendum, and beyond that to explore the possibility of improvements to the UN Plan, such as would extract a strong “Yes” by the Greek Cypriots in a future second referendum.
Methodology
For the purposes of this study, 1000 Greek Cypriots were surveyed by telephone interview. The sample was selected according to the rules of random stratified sampling, so as to be representative of the Greek Cypriot population as a whole. The data was analysed using advanced statistical software (the SPSS package), while special use was made of the Cluster Analysis technique, in order to discern specific sub-groups with particular sets of beliefs about the UN Plan.
Question 1: Do the Greek-Cypriots accept Federation?
Only a minority of Greek Cypriots - about 23% - resist the prospect of a Federal Solution to the Cyprus Problem. Everyone else accepts Federation, but as a painful compromise which they are willing to tolerate, rather than as an ideal: For most Greek Cypriots, the ideal solution would be a Unitary State, while a Two-State solution would be totally unacceptable.
The “Greek nationalists” amongst the Greek Cypriots, also seem to support the prospect of a Federal Solution, just as much as those with a more Cypriot-oriented sense of identity, probably because they are comforted by the prospect of a Greek-Cypriot constituent state in which Greeks will permanently form the majority.
Question 2: Have the Greek-Cypriots understood the UN Plan?
The majority of Greek Cypriots - about 60% - report “quite high” or “extremely high” awareness of the UN Plan. Only 5% of Greek Cypriots admit to not knowing the Plan at all. Men, the middle-aged (35-54), and the well-educated report a better knowledge of the Plan than women, the young and the old, and the less educated. Amongst those who know the Plan “extremely well” the “No” vote still forms a majority. This finding refutes the argument that with greater understanding of the UN Plan the Greek-Cypriots would have voted “Yes”.
Furthermore, the study shows that Greek-Cypriots largely made up their own minds as to their vote in the referendum, and were not unduly influenced by their leaders: Amongst the segment of the population which kept equal distances from the leaders of both the “Yes” camp and the “No” camp, in order to form an objective view of the Plan, 76% still voted “No” in the 24th April referendum.
Question 3: Which improvements to the UN Plan do the Greek-Cypriots demand?
In this study, it becomes evident that different segments of the population have different sets of demands as to the possibility of improvements in the UN Plan. The Greek Cypriots can be sub-divided into six groups, of which two groups accept the Plan as it is and four groups demand improvements:
1. The first group is composed of those who find the UN Plan satisfactory as it is. This group considers the Plan fair and balanced, and does not think that any possible changes would be helpful. However, this group only makes up 5% of the population.
2. The second group is composed of those who find the UN Plan tolerable as a compromise. These people would have preferred to see many improvements made to the Plan, but they are willing to set their demands aside for the sake of reaching an agreement. This group makes up 19% of the population.
3. The third group is composed of those who would like to see improvements in the Chapters of Security and Guarantees. This group demands that a totally new security system is devised, one that is not based on Greek and Turkish intervention rights or the medium-term presence of Greek and Turkish troops on the island. Furthermore, they require enforceable guarantees that all sides will adhere to the agreement, and also such clauses in the constitution as would ensure that the new Federal State is the legal successor state to the Republic of Cyprus. This group makes up 14% of the population, and if their demands were satisfied the “Yes” vote would rise from 24% to about 38%.
4. The fourth group is composed of those who would like to see improvements in resettlement rights of displaced Greek Cypriots. The demand here is not for more territory to be returned under Greek-Cypriot administration, but rather that the Turkish-Cypriot constituent state should become more welcoming to Greek-Cypriots who might wish to relocate to within its borders. In this context, this group demands that a greater proportion of each refugee’s property is returned to him, not just “one third with various exception clauses attached”. Furthermore, it is demanded that the responsibility for the education of Greek-Cypriots residing in the North is transferred to an appropriate Federal department, rather than it being under the purview of the Turkish Cypriot administration, and also that a permanent ceiling is set to the influx of Turkish nationals into Cyprus – presumably because Greek-Cypriots in the North would feel uncomfortable residing amongst an ever increasing Turkish (as opposed to Turkish-Cypriot) population. This group makes up 21% of the population, and if their demands were satisfied along with the demands of the previous group, the “Yes” vote would rise to about 59%.
(It should be noted that a corollary demand of this group, is for “Turkey to contribute financially for the compensation of refugees who will not have their property returned”)
5. The fifth group is composed of those who would like to see improvements that would render the solution more “European”. By the term European, this group means: a) No restrictions to the exercise of Basic Freedoms, and b) A better organised and more functional Economy. As to the first sense, this group disputes amendments made to later versions of the Annan Plan in order to satisfy Turkish-Cypriot demands for bizonality and political equality, such as the permanent limit to the number of Greek-Cypriots who may attain the citizenship of the Turkish-Cypriot constituent state. As to the second sense, this group demands that the central Federal state be granted more oversight and control in Economic, Financial and Trade affairs, than currently provided for in the Plan. This group makes up 16% of the population, and, while it is understandable that this group’s demands cannot be fully satisfied, a partial satisfaction of their demands when it comes to Economic affairs could raise the overall “Yes” vote to, perhaps, 65%.
6. The sixth group is composed of those who insist that the UN Plan should be buried. To this group the fundamental constitutional equilibrium of the Annan Plan is totally unacceptable, especially when it comes to decision making mechanisms and power-sharing arrangements. This group makes up 25% of the population, and their negative vote in a second referendum can be predicted with some certainty.
It should be noted here that, as well as the specific demands which each group expressed, three demands were so widespread as to deserve separate mention. These are:
• That the withdrawal of Turkish troops should take place much sooner than currently provided for in the UN Plan. (Demanded by 76% of Greek-Cypriots)
• That more settlers should leave the island than currently provided for in the UN Plan. (Demanded by 75% of Greek-Cypriots)
• That the cost of operating the Federal state should be divided more equitably, so that Greek-Cypriots do not end up having to shoulder 90% of its cost. (Demanded by 73% of Greek-Cypriots)
These three particular demands have such strong and widely based support amongst the Greek-Cypriot population, it is doubtful that any Plan which fails to take them into account could possibly be approved in a second referendum.
Question 4: Are the Greek-Cypriots ready for a Solution Now?
To this question, the answer is quite straight-forward: About 70% of Greek-Cypriots strongly prefer that a new round of negotiations leading to a comprehensive settlement should begin as soon as possible – preferably, before Turkey is granted a date for EU accession negotiations. Clearly, this preference is indicative of intense mistrust towards Turkey, as Greek Cypriots doubt whether a Turkey that has “nothing to gain in return” would allow the reunification of Cyprus. This strong preference for a Solution before Turkey is given the green light from Europe, might well translate into overwhelming public support for a veto against Turkey’s commencement of accession negotiations this December, if no steps are taken in the mean time to promote the comprehensive settlement of the Cyprus Problem.
Conclusion
A comprehensive settlement of the Cyprus Problem on the basis of the UN Plan, is still a strong possibility: With only a small number of important improvements made to the UN Plan, large segments of the Greek-Cypriot population would choose to vote “Yes” in a second referendum, leading to an approval of the revised Plan by as much as 65% of the Greek Cypriots.
Last edited by Alexandros Lordos on Mon Nov 29, 2004 11:15 pm, edited 3 times in total.
- Alexandros Lordos
- Contributor
- Posts: 987
- Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2004 8:41 pm
by Alexandros Lordos » Mon Nov 29, 2004 10:59 pm
MicAtCyp, i repeat: Read my work, and feel free to judge me on that. I will not tolerate personal attacks based on who my family is, because this is only one step away from racism.
- Alexandros Lordos
- Contributor
- Posts: 987
- Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2004 8:41 pm
by -mikkie2- » Tue Nov 30, 2004 2:35 am
Alexandros,
Although I found your study interesting there is one area which is wholly deficinet in your study and that is what the refugees think.
The biggest mis-selling of the plan was the right of return of refugees in the areas under TC control. Perhaps the following article in Politis will enlighten you.
http://www.cyprusmedianet.com/EN/article/30194
I would confidently predict that very few GC's will be able to return home. I have long thought this and this article effectively confirms my initial worries.
For me, the refugees MUST be given the choice to return or not, both GC and TC. Some will want to, others will not. On that basis an exchange or compensation should be arranged but the key thing for me is that people MUST be given the choice. In the plan, the original owners of the land come last in the pecking order. This is neither right, nor fair. The refugees have a better chance of using the courts than to rely on the Annan plan to give them fair recourse.
In addition to your three points which the GC's find crucial should be added a fourth, because your assumption here is that 167000 or so GC refugees, that is approx 25% of the population, would not mind coming at the bottom of the pile when it comes to sorting out the property issue. And who will be paying the compensation undr the Annan plan? The GC's themselves! This is a fundamental aspect of the solution which your study overlooks. I would predict that according to your thesis it won't be 65% that would be saying yes but you would be lucky to get 50%.
A resounding yes it will not be!
Although I found your study interesting there is one area which is wholly deficinet in your study and that is what the refugees think.
The biggest mis-selling of the plan was the right of return of refugees in the areas under TC control. Perhaps the following article in Politis will enlighten you.
http://www.cyprusmedianet.com/EN/article/30194
I would confidently predict that very few GC's will be able to return home. I have long thought this and this article effectively confirms my initial worries.
For me, the refugees MUST be given the choice to return or not, both GC and TC. Some will want to, others will not. On that basis an exchange or compensation should be arranged but the key thing for me is that people MUST be given the choice. In the plan, the original owners of the land come last in the pecking order. This is neither right, nor fair. The refugees have a better chance of using the courts than to rely on the Annan plan to give them fair recourse.
In addition to your three points which the GC's find crucial should be added a fourth, because your assumption here is that 167000 or so GC refugees, that is approx 25% of the population, would not mind coming at the bottom of the pile when it comes to sorting out the property issue. And who will be paying the compensation undr the Annan plan? The GC's themselves! This is a fundamental aspect of the solution which your study overlooks. I would predict that according to your thesis it won't be 65% that would be saying yes but you would be lucky to get 50%.
A resounding yes it will not be!
- -mikkie2-
- Regular Contributor
- Posts: 1298
- Joined: Tue Sep 21, 2004 12:11 am
by pantelis » Tue Nov 30, 2004 3:58 am
http://www.tech4peace.org/nqcontent.cfm?a_id=4579
Mr. Lorde,
Where can we read your 102 page study? Is it on the WEB?
Mr. Lorde,
Where can we read your 102 page study? Is it on the WEB?
- pantelis
- Contributor
- Posts: 391
- Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2004 2:41 am
- Location: USA
by Othellos » Tue Nov 30, 2004 10:05 am
Hi O.
Nice to see you here mate
Hello insan, it is also nice to see you. Looking forward into reading your thoughtful and constructive input in this forum
MicAtCyp, i repeat: Read my work, and feel free to judge me on that. I will not tolerate personal attacks based on who my family is, because this is only one step away from racism.
MicAtCyp, you are not being fair to Alexandros who - unlike you or me - is paticipating in the forum with his real name. If you have any criticism or comments that are related to his work (and Alexandros himself has already asked you to do this) please post so we can all read and comment upon. Other than that I suggest that you keep your own biased criticism to yourself because it has nothing to do with the ongoing discussion.
Alexandre, I too am looking forward to reading your input in this forum and please, do not let any rude or biased comments discourage you from participating in the discussion.
Best regards,
O.
- Othellos
- Contributor
- Posts: 291
- Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 6:52 pm
by Alexandros Lordos » Tue Nov 30, 2004 10:14 am
mikkie2,
my results are not my own views - they are the views of 1,000 Greek Cypriots that were surveyed. The study does confirm the importance of Property Rights, which is extremely important to a large majority of Greek Cypriots, however not quite as important to as many people as Troops Withdrawal and Settlers.
Having said that, a solution that does not pay greater respect to Property rights would not pass the 50% Yes mark - in fact, it would not even pass the 40% Yes mark. My figure of 65% Yes, is only in the case where Property Rights are more fully respected (and also if the Economy is made more functional).
I would agree with you, and with Vasos Georgiou who wrote the Politis article, that in the minds of most Greek Cypriots the right to return under TC administration is not really present in the current version of the Annan Plan. In fact, when I was presenting my study to GC and TC Politicians, they openly admitted that the Annan Plan was never really designed to encourage settlement of GC in the TC constituent state, and that a number of disincentives were deliberately put in place (such as the long timetables) to discourage people from moving!
The question I put to a bicommunal audience where I presented my study was, "Do we seek an ethnically pure bizonality, or a welcoming bizonality?" If we insist on the first of these two, the GC "No" will not change to "Yes" (and this is a statistically based conclusion, it is not my own view).
Speaking personally, I dont understand this obsession in the Plan to keep the two communities as separate as possible - in my experience TC's and GC'c tend to become good friends wherever they meet, and they would have no problem living together as neighbors, work colleagues etc. I read in Politis yesterday that the Americans are willing to consider renegotating the Plan (as if it is their call to make ...) but only opening the chapters of Security, Guarantees, Settlers and the Economy. What is it that is so taboo about refugee rights?
my results are not my own views - they are the views of 1,000 Greek Cypriots that were surveyed. The study does confirm the importance of Property Rights, which is extremely important to a large majority of Greek Cypriots, however not quite as important to as many people as Troops Withdrawal and Settlers.
Having said that, a solution that does not pay greater respect to Property rights would not pass the 50% Yes mark - in fact, it would not even pass the 40% Yes mark. My figure of 65% Yes, is only in the case where Property Rights are more fully respected (and also if the Economy is made more functional).
I would agree with you, and with Vasos Georgiou who wrote the Politis article, that in the minds of most Greek Cypriots the right to return under TC administration is not really present in the current version of the Annan Plan. In fact, when I was presenting my study to GC and TC Politicians, they openly admitted that the Annan Plan was never really designed to encourage settlement of GC in the TC constituent state, and that a number of disincentives were deliberately put in place (such as the long timetables) to discourage people from moving!
The question I put to a bicommunal audience where I presented my study was, "Do we seek an ethnically pure bizonality, or a welcoming bizonality?" If we insist on the first of these two, the GC "No" will not change to "Yes" (and this is a statistically based conclusion, it is not my own view).
Speaking personally, I dont understand this obsession in the Plan to keep the two communities as separate as possible - in my experience TC's and GC'c tend to become good friends wherever they meet, and they would have no problem living together as neighbors, work colleagues etc. I read in Politis yesterday that the Americans are willing to consider renegotating the Plan (as if it is their call to make ...) but only opening the chapters of Security, Guarantees, Settlers and the Economy. What is it that is so taboo about refugee rights?
Last edited by Alexandros Lordos on Tue Nov 30, 2004 10:32 am, edited 1 time in total.
- Alexandros Lordos
- Contributor
- Posts: 987
- Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2004 8:41 pm
by Alexandros Lordos » Tue Nov 30, 2004 10:21 am
Here follows a list of the 10 most widely demanded changes to the UN Plan (I copy-pasted this from my study):
Request for Change % of GC who consider it essential
1 The withdrawal of Turkish troops to take place much sooner than provided for in the current version of the Plan 76%
2 Turkey should contribute financially for the compensation of refugees who will not have their property returned 75%
3 A greater number of settlers should leave Cyprus than currently provided for in the Plan 75%
4 The cost of operation of the Federal state to be divided more equitably, so that Greek Cypriots do not end up having to shoulder 90% of the cost 73%
5 Provide international guarantees that the solution will be implemented, including serious consequences for the side that will violate provisions of the agreement 72%
6 Ensure that the new state is the legal successor state to the Republic of Cyprus 66%
7 Define absolute limits to the influx of Turkish citizens in Cyprus, in such a way as to secure the long term demographic balance on the island 64%
8 A greater proportion of each refugee’s property that lies in areas belonging to the other constituent state should be returned to its rightful owners than currently provided for in the plan. 63%
9 Guarantor powers should not have the right of unilateral intervention 61%
10 Eventual withdrawal of the Turkish and Greek contingents of 650 and 950 men respectively 58%
Request for Change % of GC who consider it essential
1 The withdrawal of Turkish troops to take place much sooner than provided for in the current version of the Plan 76%
2 Turkey should contribute financially for the compensation of refugees who will not have their property returned 75%
3 A greater number of settlers should leave Cyprus than currently provided for in the Plan 75%
4 The cost of operation of the Federal state to be divided more equitably, so that Greek Cypriots do not end up having to shoulder 90% of the cost 73%
5 Provide international guarantees that the solution will be implemented, including serious consequences for the side that will violate provisions of the agreement 72%
6 Ensure that the new state is the legal successor state to the Republic of Cyprus 66%
7 Define absolute limits to the influx of Turkish citizens in Cyprus, in such a way as to secure the long term demographic balance on the island 64%
8 A greater proportion of each refugee’s property that lies in areas belonging to the other constituent state should be returned to its rightful owners than currently provided for in the plan. 63%
9 Guarantor powers should not have the right of unilateral intervention 61%
10 Eventual withdrawal of the Turkish and Greek contingents of 650 and 950 men respectively 58%
- Alexandros Lordos
- Contributor
- Posts: 987
- Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2004 8:41 pm
by erolz » Tue Nov 30, 2004 11:13 am
Firstly appologies for not replying to the various posts aimed at myself. I have not been very well the last couple of days (stomach bug). I will try and 'catch up'
Secondly welcome to the forums Alexandros.
For me there is a real difference between accepting a federal based system 'reluctantly' and as a result of 'pressure' and another thing to accept that TC have a RIGHT to some form of self determination in their own (shared) country. From earlier discussions my impression is that Piratis believes that any such federal structure is a 'gift' from GC to TC and only given because they have no choice and under duress. This is born out in Alexandros' study as well.
My fear is that we have been here before. I fear that if the majority of GC really believe that a federal solution is unjust and unfair but they are willing to accept it to get a settlement , that once a settlement is in place there may then be moves to 'rescind' that which has been 'gifted' to the TC community.
Secondly welcome to the forums Alexandros.
MicAtCyp in http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.p ... c&start=10 wrote:
"Erol, I think we discussed this issue exhaustively in the past, and every GC member in this forum agreed with you on the extend of that degree of "political equality".
I don't think Piratis disagrees with that given the fact that he accepts a federal system in Cyprus.
Piratis though, me and the majority of the GCs disagree how this "degree of equality" was translated in the Anan Plan and I think this is what he is stressing in his posts. "
For me there is a real difference between accepting a federal based system 'reluctantly' and as a result of 'pressure' and another thing to accept that TC have a RIGHT to some form of self determination in their own (shared) country. From earlier discussions my impression is that Piratis believes that any such federal structure is a 'gift' from GC to TC and only given because they have no choice and under duress. This is born out in Alexandros' study as well.
Alexandros Lordos wrote:Question 1: Do the Greek-Cypriots accept Federation?
Only a minority of Greek Cypriots - about 23% - resist the prospect of a Federal Solution to the Cyprus Problem. Everyone else accepts Federation, but as a painful compromise which they are willing to tolerate, rather than as an ideal: For most Greek Cypriots, the ideal solution would be a Unitary State, while a Two-State solution would be totally unacceptable.
My fear is that we have been here before. I fear that if the majority of GC really believe that a federal solution is unjust and unfair but they are willing to accept it to get a settlement , that once a settlement is in place there may then be moves to 'rescind' that which has been 'gifted' to the TC community.
- erolz
- Regular Contributor
- Posts: 2414
- Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 5:00 pm
- Location: Girne / Kyrenia
Return to Cyprus Problem Solution Proposals
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests
© 2002 - 2015 Cyprus-Forum.com
