Cyprus-Forum.com

[Viewpoint]

Because of the past and the current demands to turn us into a minority in our own country under the majority rule of GCs.

You are 18%. Isn't 18% a minority?

Then take 18% "equal" participation in the goverment. Thats ok? Or the way you realize minority/majority changes depending on what suits you better?

You are correct numerically we are the minority but we are an equal partner the fact that we are shorter than you does make us any less a partner on this island. When you start treating us like one then we will show the flexiblity and compromise you are looking for as long as our community is not put at risk of being exploited or dominated by GCs.

Could you explain what you mean with the clause "we are an equal partner"? Because if this is correct then we agree, yes you are an equal partner, a copatriot, regardless if you are TC or GC... you have the same chances, same voting power, same economic power... then you will be an equal partner... do you agree with this?

The 2 communites are equal partners and should share the running of the country. Under the BBF solution there will 2 equal states north and south bound together by a federal structure to ensure the running of the country as a whole. I believe you are referring to a unitary type of solution where one man gets one vote, the problem there is that because we are numerically smaller we will not be as effective as we want to be in our country due to the imbalance and therefore we will end up being ruled by GCs in a GC state. Your idea is more on the individuals having equal rights where as my arguement is related to the 2 communities being equal partners.

[yoyoyo]

But why see us as GC and not just Cypriots, this my question!!!!!!!You always say GC would create aq GC state. The whoe point of this topic is to change this mentality and start thinking as one rather than GC and TC JUST CYPRIOTS Are or we not both from cyprus?????

VIVA CYPRUS

[Kikapu]

But why see us as GC and not just Cypriots, this my question!!!!!!!You always say GC would create aq GC state. The whoe point of this topic is to change this mentality and start thinking as one rather than GC and TC JUST CYPRIOTS Are or we not both from cyprus?????

VIVA CYPRUS

Yoyoyo,

What you're saying is the way it should be, it should have been, but it has never been. Under almost all Democracies, that has been the rule. But unfortunately Cyprus has not had a chance to experience life under these rules, so it does not have the track record to keep it going in the future. I'm not saying we can't start having one from now, but the only problem is, that so much has happened in the past 43 years, this method of "one man one vote" system of government will not be given a chance to succeed, so the only other option I can see of having a "United" Cyprus is to propose a 50-50 system of government, or the other option is to remain as is now, or a "partition". Somehow to me, a "United" Cyprus even under circumstances is better than what we have now, or a "partition". I'm sure if the GC's were the minority, they too, would want the same.

[Viewpoint]

You are like 46 years to late to expect everyone to see themselves as just Cypriots regardless of their ethnic origins but initially you have to establish a framework by which both communities are equal and work together for the better of a united Cyprus. The Cypriot idea will only develop in time as people start to value the individual rather than if he is GC or TC.

But in the interim safety valves and compromise are necessary to show that no one commnity has the intention of dominating the other. Thats why political equality is a must for the majority of TCs.

[Kikapu]

is to propose them equal voice and partnership in running the country

Kikapu, I will re-post you here the words of a Turkish Cypriot journalist which I agree:

The main problem concerning `reunification` of the island for the mainstream Turkish Cypriot media is that it is subconsciously based on `two separate entities coming together`, not seeing that this is a remnant of `Taksim` policies… The focus is on `Bizonality` and with this, the `legitimization` of `the results of 1974`… No one is contesting that any future cooperation of our communities should be based on multiculturalism, rather than on the `hegemony` of the Greek Cypriot community in all fields… But how `bizonality` is perceived is a big problem because deep down, the ideology of `Taksim` is still there and has not been wiped out from the subconscious thinking of `duality` and `separatism` from the minds of some mainstream Turkish Cypriot journalists.

Therefore each TC will be equal to each GCs, and we would be more than glad to have provisions that would make it required that TCs will participate proportionately in running this country in all sectors.

However "partnership" between two separate entities means that we have TWO entities not ONE entity which means partition and not unification. (otherwise we could also say that we are "unified" with Estonia or Portugal simply because we are partners within EU)

If you do not accept that Turkish Cypriots are part of the one Cypriot people it means you do not accept unity, but you instead want separation, duality, and partition.

In order to avoid a "partition" as you see it, perhaps a 50-50 form of government is the best way to go, despite being out of the norm with most other Democracies. I also know your position very well on this matter, so as it is in a game of chess, when the "king" is cornered and cannot move without being in-check, it becomes a "stale mate", which could either mean a "draw" or "no winners". In our case, I see it as both sides as "losers".

[Strahd]

is to propose them equal voice and partnership in running the country

Kikapu, I will re-post you here the words of a Turkish Cypriot journalist which I agree:

The main problem concerning `reunification` of the island for the mainstream Turkish Cypriot media is that it is subconsciously based on `two separate entities coming together`, not seeing that this is a remnant of `Taksim` policies… The focus is on `Bizonality` and with this, the `legitimization` of `the results of 1974`… No one is contesting that any future cooperation of our communities should be based on multiculturalism, rather than on the `hegemony` of the Greek Cypriot community in all fields… But how `bizonality` is perceived is a big problem because deep down, the ideology of `Taksim` is still there and has not been wiped out from the subconscious thinking of `duality` and `separatism` from the minds of some mainstream Turkish Cypriot journalists.

Therefore each TC will be equal to each GCs, and we would be more than glad to have provisions that would make it required that TCs will participate proportionately in running this country in all sectors.

However "partnership" between two separate entities means that we have TWO entities not ONE entity which means partition and not unification. (otherwise we could also say that we are "unified" with Estonia or Portugal simply because we are partners within EU)

If you do not accept that Turkish Cypriots are part of the one Cypriot people it means you do not accept unity, but you instead want separation, duality, and partition.

In order to avoid a "partition" as you see it, perhaps a 50-50 form of government is the best way to go, despite being out of the norm with most other Democracies. I also know your position very well on this matter, so as it is in a game of chess, when the "king" is cornered and cannot move without being in-check, it becomes a "stale mate", which could either mean a "draw" or "no winners". In our case, I see it as both sides as "losers".

I cannot understand how do you expect that 700,000 people are going to agree to share 50-50 with 150,000!!!!! Who the F@k do you think you are??? Are you the children of a differnet god, are you some kind of higher power????

If you continue to support the above what you will get is what you really have now... a bannana republic and Popey for president

[Pyrpolizer]

Just for a second imagine:
The Turkish army goes away, all armies disolve.The pseudo disolves.All settlers go.The TCs live like any other Cypriot e.g. like the Cypriot Armenians yet the all public servants in the areas where they live are TCs. They have some MPs some ministers etc. The property issue is arranged in a fair way without anyone living in the streets.
The standard of living of TCs boosts 4 times in a year.

What’s the problem?

[Viewpoint]

is to propose them equal voice and partnership in running the country

Kikapu, I will re-post you here the words of a Turkish Cypriot journalist which I agree:

The main problem concerning `reunification` of the island for the mainstream Turkish Cypriot media is that it is subconsciously based on `two separate entities coming together`, not seeing that this is a remnant of `Taksim` policies… The focus is on `Bizonality` and with this, the `legitimization` of `the results of 1974`… No one is contesting that any future cooperation of our communities should be based on multiculturalism, rather than on the `hegemony` of the Greek Cypriot community in all fields… But how `bizonality` is perceived is a big problem because deep down, the ideology of `Taksim` is still there and has not been wiped out from the subconscious thinking of `duality` and `separatism` from the minds of some mainstream Turkish Cypriot journalists.

Therefore each TC will be equal to each GCs, and we would be more than glad to have provisions that would make it required that TCs will participate proportionately in running this country in all sectors.

However "partnership" between two separate entities means that we have TWO entities not ONE entity which means partition and not unification. (otherwise we could also say that we are "unified" with Estonia or Portugal simply because we are partners within EU)

If you do not accept that Turkish Cypriots are part of the one Cypriot people it means you do not accept unity, but you instead want separation, duality, and partition.

In order to avoid a "partition" as you see it, perhaps a 50-50 form of government is the best way to go, despite being out of the norm with most other Democracies. I also know your position very well on this matter, so as it is in a game of chess, when the "king" is cornered and cannot move without being in-check, it becomes a "stale mate", which could either mean a "draw" or "no winners". In our case, I see it as both sides as "losers".

I cannot understand how do you expect that 700,000 people are going to agree to share 50-50 with 150,000!!!!! Who the F@k do you think you are??? Are you the children of a differnet god, are you some kind of higher power????

If you continue to support the above what you will get is what you really have now... a bannana republic and Popey for president

No problem, the sun will still come up, (unless you have yet again lodged a compliant with the ECHR (God Dept) who have ruled in your favor to stop the sun rising:lol: ) the shish kebabs will still be on the mangal, nothing will change and life will go on as it has been doing for the last 32 years......

[Kifeas]

In order to avoid a "partition" as you see it, perhaps a 50-50 form of government is the best way to go, despite being out of the norm with most other Democracies.

Kikapu, is the so called “50:50 government” your own idea or term for a solution, or is it also the demand of the TC community?

How do you define a 50:50 government? Does it mean that if we have a cabinet of ministers, 5 will be TCs and 5 will be GCs? Will we also have two presidents, one TC and one GC? Will all the civil servants of the government be employed on a 50:50 basis? Will the parliament have 50% of TCs and 50% of TCs? How do you understand such a 50:50 government?

[yoyoyo]

Now that you mention shish kebab i am hungry