Cyprus-Forum.com

[Piratis]

Piratis I understand where you are comingfrom but the real issues doesnt lie in the number of MPS from each side it is the power they have. You can have 90GCs and only 10TCs but if 5TCs vote are required on every decision you can seee the influence the TCs will have. You can have 50GCs and 50TCs but deision cna be passed with 49 votes, do you see the difference?

For me people should be equal. 1 TC = 1 GC. The same way you do not accept if I will have more chances or more power than you, I do not accept it either.

So we have to wait 20 years for a TC president a lot can happen in that time, how you feel if you had to wait 20years for a president you can trust.

You can have the first president if you wish. No problem with that.
Beyond that, you need to accept that Cyprus is one country and you will have GC president as well, either you like it or not.

There has to be a balance that will ensure no domiantion of one community over the other.

Domination never. But Cyprus should act as one with democratic procedures. The balance is that TCs will have guaranteed proportional representation and veto power on certain important issues. Asking that TCs should have 50% power and veto power on all isues is not a balance, but instead you want everything.

The power alloted to each community is more important than the split of members in ruling body.

I agree. And this is why the power should be proportional as well.

When did we have the first opportunity to rule ourselves? thats what i referred to as a disaster.

We never had such opportunity. Even our constidution was forced from outsiders, not to mention their armies that never left.

The 18% maybe a numerical minority but dont forget we are equal partners and decision effecting our community negatively should be influenced by TCs.

TCs will influence all decisions. They can also have veto power on things that TCs could be affected in a different way than GCs. (e.g. religion and language)

If the başance is in favor of GCs 8 to 2 and they only need 6 votes to get decision through then I call that a GC state run by GCs and we TCs are just tokens to make up the numbers and falsely display to the world that TCs are not excluded from the running of their own country.

We are all just tokens that all together make up one country. Why should your token count 4.5 times more than mine?

Can we not control to the extent to protect our community from the 82% majority taking decsions on oue behalf that would have a negative impact on us? is this really asking for to much?

Can I ask the same? That the government that was chosen democratically can not take decisions on my behalf?
You either accept that you are part of one united Cyprus or you don't. I already told you that TCs can have things like guaranteed proportional representation, veto powers on certain issues etc.
If what you want is to run your own business by yourselves then what you do not support one unified country.

Actually I have absolutely no problem if you run your own business just by yourselves. However our land falls within our business, not within yours. So if you want to run your own business alone, then you can take the villages that are exclusively TC and declare them independent. You can even build a wall around them if you want. No problem. But our land does not fall within your business.

[Protagorianos]

In an effort to provide an adequate comment to the dialogue of 'Pyrpolizer' and 'Viewpoint' vis-a-vis the representation of the TC's and GC's on the island I beleive that one should first regress to the issue of trust. Indeed the Cyprus problem's solution necessitates considerations of the distrust that is felt in both communities as a result of a long estrangment due to partition (one could add here the institutionalization of nationalist education contributing to the creation of social and psychological structures that portray each side with bleak colors). Now, if we do accept the fact that there exists distrust amongst the two communities then maintaining arguments about 'representation' should take account of that. I think that if one side does not at present feel its interests being represented by the other then beyond the democratic fashion with which the decision was taken the decision itself might indeed prove to be if not unjust towards the other, creative of schisms in the very process of trying to create a society defined by solidarity. Here ofcourse, in Cyprus, we are in the very beginning (if that) of trying to acheive a society. I beleive then that what we should consider is how we can achieve a constitution that seeks to ameliorate the divisions in society.
Having said that what should be taken in consideration is that 'democracy' is a very very big concept to claim to have had it exhausted by claiming that it merely means one person equals one vote. If indeed that was the case pure and simple then we can imagine various scenarios of majority tyranny. The same goes ofcourse for minorities. We can imagine of minorities (say rich white men in the US, minority of Russian residents in Soviet republics using the leverage of Russia) taking advantage of their power and institutionalizing decisions that are to the detriment of a majority.
In Cyprus we have as I aforementioned, the problem of lack of trust.
This lack of trust exists due to - I think - ofsome real reasons. In both communities there exist people that fear each other and some others who defined as nationalists would try to create disadvantages for the other.

The questions then remain: "Can you build a society withour trust characterizing the perception of the communities that comprise it?"; "How can we built trust between the two communities so as in the near future to establish such social bonds that make for the discrimination of one as TC or GC ineffective?".
Think, for example of the 'Affirmative action' programs in the US. African Americans post Civil Right Act were given certain advantages over the White Americans in order to acheive an amelioration of the educative, economic and overall social divide in society. This was done in light of a lack of representation of African Americans in governmental posts or financial institutions. A similar thought can be entertained in our case. If the creation of a Cypriot society defined by solidarity is our goal could we try to empathize with each other in order to ameliorate the low level of trust between us so as to feel represented by those in power regardless of one's language/ethnic background? Here ofcourse step in questions of representation. Given the psychological structures that exist as barriers to the consideration of all of us by all as Cypriots could we assume - at least at present - that we would pursue and arrive at decisions that are good for both communities? Or better, are the two Cypriot communities ready to take decisions regardless of one's ethnic origin? Unfortunately I think that the conception of all of us as Cypriots is something that we have to build. As such, at present we have think of transitionary measures to that effect. How slow we want to make that transition is something to discuss; but always in light of the sensitivities that define us now and the community we want ourselves to become.

[Pyrpolizer]

Protagorianos,

Imo real trust will start be builted only after a solution.

i cant disagree with the above, (even though Turkey had a Kurdish President) so whats the problem? Is it a few percentage points relating to the size of TC district? Let the politicians bang it out at the table, and let tcs and gcs get on with building new freindship bridges.

Like I said to Protagorianos, we first need to have the solution.Otherwise it’s like putting the horse behind the cab.
So the problem is to find/work out the solution itself .

[Protagorianos]

The parameters of the solution, i.e. the constituion which will be put in effect comrpising the very solution, has to reflect the realities on the ground. The paragraphs whihc I have written above comprise an argument for the kind of solution/constituion - or better, for the kind of realities, goals and aspirations the solution/constitution has to entail, reflect upon, consider. Indeed real trust, if that means realizing that we both enjoy the same Thing (to speak Lacanian) i.e. we both are Cypriots, will arrive after the instance of the solution. Nevertheless the solution has to contain, reflect the realities at present while having in mind what we aspire to be.

[Protagorianos]

Oh and a reply to the relatively appliccable metaphor that you (Pyrpolizer) used. The horse has to be trained and grow enough to be able to carry the cart that we want it to...Voukefalas had to stop being scared of its shadow before it was ridden. And another....to speak Aristotelian....the pot i.e. amforeas, has to be molded properly and in time in order, when it hardens, to fit the job (i.e. contain water and be able to pour it appropriately) we want to do.

[miltiades]

Protagorianos .
You are not making any sense at all . Your English is abysmal , you are not coherent in what you are trying to say , it seems to me that you are translating from Greek to English word for word and it doesn't make any sense.
WHAT DOES TTHIS MEAN ?
"" in order to acheive an amelioration of the educative, economic and overall social divide ""
HOW ABOUT THIS , WHAT THE HELL DOES IT MEAN ?
""Indeed the Cyprus problem's solution necessitates considerations of the distrust that is felt in both communities as a result of a long estrangment due to partition (one could add here the institutionalization of nationalist education contributing to the creation of social and psychological structures that portray each side with bleak colors).""
You sound just like Apolonios , Socrates , Vortos , , why are you doing this ? Are you a Taliban ??? !!

[Bananiot]

Miltiades, hold your horses. I found the post to be well thought of and quite well written. The two sentences you chose to make your point make perfect sense to me.

My question to Protagorianos is this: What do you mean that the solution should take into account the realities?

[miltiades]

Bananiot , you know who this guy is surely.
And are you sure you understand what this guy is saying , take onother look >
"
The questions then remain: "Can you build a society withour trust characterizing the perception of the communities that comprise it?";

[Protagorianos]

Dear Militades,

If the language I use is rather difficult for you to understand I apologize. To clarify: No, I am not translating from Greek but rather I try to write in a manner that pays respect both to the complexity of the language we are using to communicate and the very complexity of the issue we are discussing. If on the other hand if what I worte contains errors ascribe to the speed which I transcribed my thoughts).
My question that you have quoted above if somewhat congested attempts to say the following "Is it possible for a society to be built when those communities that are said to comprise it perceive each other (their perception of their respective other) with distrust? No, I am not a Taleban and I find grosely inappropriate and disrespectful to attempt to attempt to mock me by using the names of people who we are at the very least our intellectual superiors. To elaborate I have to add that upon ruminating on your rather imbecilic reference to the philosophers (by virtue of your attempt to even put them in very same sentence as the Taleban or Vortos (at least tentatively) in the manner in which you did you do show characteristics that testify to your potential ignorance of the following "Pas Ellin ouk esti filosofos ouk esti Ellin". I thank you for your attention.

[Protagorianos]

To Bananiot

The realities which I am referring to are not to be confused with the realities that are mentioned by Denktas. In any case though his kind of reality is somehting we have to take into account as well...yet this is not what I was refering to. The realities which I am making reference to are beyond those of the material level [i.e. that some of the illegaly transported people from Turkey are to remain on the island given their having been married with TC's (as well as their children) is I beleive unavoidable and if I would begin to think it unhumanitarian] yet are intimately connected with it. To clarify: I am referring to the social structures that now define both the Greek Cypriot and the Turkish Cypriot psychology. We (now I speak for GCs for whom I can express a relatively informed opinion) have been educated in institutions that if not sometimes parochial and racist are extremely nationalist. OUr history has been written in the same fashion as Ppaprigopoullos did in the 1850's and for this reason we, our identities. have been structured in a way that perceives the other as the cause of all or most of our worries; the other is evil, barbarian et cetera et cetera. Now given that we have a society that is characterized by this psychosocial reality we have to reflect on this and try to acheive a solution that considers this...we are aiming towards a unified country with Cypriot citizens. We do not yet have that...we have GC's who in their relative majority see themselves as Greeks par excellance and we have TC's (or better people that live in the North and under occupation) that do not feel Cypriots. Feeling or identifying and acting as a Cypriot is the prerogative for having a society which is called Cypriot. The latter being my and dare I say 'our' goal wil take time to manifest and it would be I think very problematic not to consider the structures that I refer to above (products of history themselves) and rush into the creation of a constitution we are not ready for yet. That is a consitution that will, for example, allow Turkish or Greek troops to be stationed on the island and that will attempt to abolish the principles of bi-zonality and bi-community definitive of the federal republic that (at least in its principles) the previous UN drafted plan refers to.