Cyprus-Forum.com

[Alexandros Lordos]

Look Magikthrill, we GCs (and Greeks) keep complaining about "18% sharing 50% of the power", but I must say I disagree with this complaint on a factual basis.

In the Annan Plan, the provision actually was:

- Senate to be 50%-50% (at this point your complaint is accurate)

- Lower House to be proportional, with the smaller state having no less that 33% of the seats.

- Presidential Council to be proportional, with the smaller state having no less than 33% of the seats.

In other words, we have a mixture of equality of states and proportional representation - just like in all Federal systems.

If you wish to complain about 18% of the population having 33% of the power, that would be a more accurate complaint ... though I must admit that I would personally not share your concern - for me it is healthy to boost the TC community to having 33% of the power: They would feel more respected and therefore they would behave more constructively.

[Piratis]

Alexandre, DISI got 33% in last elections.
Lets not fool ourselves. What TCs get is not simply a boost from 18% to 33%.
What they essentially get is a veto power on everything. If for anything to be done they have to agree, isn't this an effective 50% power?

[insan]

Greece led Cyprus into the EU in order to force Turkey into solving the Cyprus Problem.

Just becaue of that? How soon they forgot the strategic importance of Cyprus, while even EU plans to use Cyprus as a naval and air base for the interests(New investment areas, petroil, underground resources) of (alliance)EU over middle east.

Everyone admits that. In that sense, yes, Greece is a fourth player, but not in the same way that Turkey is a player. Greece doesn't attempt to exert strategic control of Cyprus, though it certainly did in the past ...

Yes since Cyprus too, became one of the members of EU there's no need for Greece to exert a strategical control over Cyprus, anyhow majority of GCs share the same ideals with Greece. If Turkey too, has been a member of EU, things will be much different, you know...

This was evident in Burgenstock last April, when Turkey came to the discussions with a list of demands - most of them pertaining to Turkey's needs rather than Turkish Cypriot needs

Perhaps, that's why %65 of TCs voted "yes" to the Anan Plan and those %35 TC nationalists together with nationalist settlers voted no to the plan which mostly pertaining Turkey's needs rather than TCs. Does it seem rational to you?

whereas Greece came to Burgenstock empty handed, saying in effect "We respect the views of the GCs".

A good political tactic ... Could Greece say anything else, even if she had a different view? What do you know about what goes behind the doors when authorities of GCs and Greece visiting each other?

Why do you think it was Denktash who insisted that "the motherlands" be brought into the negotiations?

First of all Turkey and Greece are two of the relevant parties of Cyprus problem. Secondly, this is a question of power. Although I don't like his current mentality regarding Cyprus issue; what could just Denktash do amongst the ones who have 100 times more convincing methods to achieve their goal.

So that Turkey would have a chance to put forward its own demands - Denktash knew in advance that Greece would not ask for anything in particular ...

Over there or somewhere else Turkey would put forward her demands, anyhow as relevant party of the issue... As I said, as a member of EU of course, there's no need for Greece to ask anything in particular. Thta was the game... They were trying to gain time untill Cyprus has officially become a member of EU; in order to achieve the so-called European-solution to Cyprus problem...

The era in which Greece meddled into the internal affairs of Cyprus ended suddenly in 1974 - with the collapse of the Junta and everything they stood for. Since then, Greece has been trying to find a new direction and a new identity, by joining the EU and becoming a modern democratic nation.

The opposition(Threats of far right) against Makarios and the GC left wing, also control of Greek officials to a degree continued untill early 80's while terrorism exploded in Greece after the fall of Junta. As long as the right wingers were in power in South of the Cyprus; there was nothing much to worry about for Greece because in general, they share the same views. Modernization efforts of Greece has nothing to do with her intentions about Cyprus.

My concern about Turkey is that, while it is certainly a nation in transition, the army still exerts a disproportionate level of influence in Turkish politics.

They just put forward their views if the issue is oversensitive concerning the national security.

Hence, the pseudo-security concern that, somehow, a Cyprus which is not under the direct control of Turkey is a potential strategic threat to Turkey, just because it happens to be close-by ... (even if it is a perfectly peaceful and stable European Country).

Turkey should take the worst possible into consideration. Noone can know what will happen in near future or anytime in the future. The world politics have been rapidly changing. The population of world is increasing and human beings have to find new resources to feed them. Politics and life ain't easy for the countries which are located in the map, at the strategical points for the western world which once upon a time they were all colonialists... Perhaps the circumstances will drag us into a new colonialism age or a new world war or clash of the civilaziations... The existence of TCs, as a politicaly equal community in Cyprus guarantees the security of Turkey's south costs and present her an opportunity to collaborate in any "alliance" plan concerning the region which will also serve her benefits and interests as a country that has multi-functional bridges between East and West. But Hellens trying to challenge with Turkey in order to change her position in the western alliance and weaken her in the region. The aim of Hellen's ruling and leading elite is reducing the Turkish share of the cake as small as it can be and make their share as big as it can be...

[insan]

Alexandre, DISI got 33% in last elections.
Lets not fool ourselves. What TCs get is not simply a boost from 18% to 33%.
What they essentially get is a veto power on everything. If for anything to be done they have to agree, isn't this an effective 50% power?

Sharing the power 50/50 in the United Cyprus senate does not mean that TCs or GCs will have a veto power on everything... This is impossible in practice unless they go into the stupid polarizations like Hellenists and Turkists.. but sharing the power on percentage of population basis e.g %18 vs %82 means, even if you are rightful, don't expect much in favour of who have less power. Only the 50/50 representation can provide and gurantee for TCs to get their %18 share in a united Cyprus.

[Alexandros Lordos]

Piratis,

once more I think we should stay close to the facts ... the TCs do not get veto power, in the UN Plan. What they do get is qualified majorities, so that for instance a certain number of TC MPs will also have to agree before a decision is made. We are not talking about separate majorities here ... if a law is balanced and worth passing, we can expect that at least some MPs from each community will agree to it - and therefore the qualified majority clause will not act as an impediment. If a law offends the rights of one particular community, we can expect that MPs from that side will vote as a block and reject it - this is where qualified majorities come in. It is nothing like the veto powers of the 1960 constitution.

[insan]

the TCs do not get veto power, in the UN Plan. What they do get is qualified majorities, so that for instance a certain number of TC MPs will also have to agree before a decision is made. We are not talking about separate majorities here ... if a law is balanced and worth passing, we can expect that at least some MPs from each community will agree to it - and therefore the qualified majority clause will not act as an impediment. If a law offends the rights of one particular community, we can expect that MPs from that side will vote as a block and reject it - this is where qualified majorities come in. It is nothing like the veto powers of the 1960 constitution.

That is absolutely what the political equality is in the annan Plan.

[Alexandros Lordos]

Insan,

I understand it if Turkey feels insecure about totally relinquishing control of Cyprus while she herself is outside the EU - in such a case the scenario by which the EU becomes an enemy of Turkey is conceivable, though far-fetched ...

However, in last year's negotiations Turkey wouldn't even consider letting go of Cyprus, even after Turkey joins the EU. In fact, instead of conceding that the Treaty of Guarantee would someday have to go (when Turkey is a full EU member), the Generals insisted that a small number of Turkish troops should remain on the island indefinitely ...

This is what I refer to when I say that Turkish strategic thinking is outdated. Last year, Denktash and his friends fought tooth and nail to ensure that the EU will not have a say in the negotiations. Why? Isn't the EU the future of Turkey also? Shouldn't Turkey be working on building an integrated European defense policy, of which both she and Cyprus are essential parts, instead of insisting that Cyprus remain on some sort of inter-generational limbo, with "Britain, Turkey and Greece guaranteeing its sovereignty and independence"?

[Piratis]

the TCs do not get veto power

In practice they do. 1/4th or 2/5ths of the senators of each community are required + 1 out of 2 TCs in the presidential council.

Its a veto power written in a different way. In effect 10% of Cypriots can block what the other 90% wants. If we assume that the number of settlers that will stay is what is said in the Annan plan, then this 10% might very easily be mainly the settlers.

[metecyp]

Denktash and his friends fought tooth and nail to ensure that the EU will not have a say in the negotiations. Why? Isn't the EU the future of Turkey also?

There are some circles in Turkey who believe that Turkey is not going to be allowed to join to the EU or they simply do not want Turkey to join to the EU. These people do not want to let go control of the north without being 100% sure that Turkey will be in the EU. That's why some people of that type used to say "Cyprus should join to the EU only after Turkey does", although you don't hear this too often nowadays.

If we assume that the number of settlers that will stay is what is said in the Annan plan, then this 10% might very easily be mainly the settlers.

You're just being paranoid here, as usual. Unless the 90% majority will want to do something crazy, like Enosis, 10% will never try to block the majority decision. You just don't want any safeguards for TC representation. This is the bottom line.

[insan]

However, in last year's negotiations Turkey wouldn't even consider letting go of Cyprus, even after Turkey joins the EU. In fact, instead of conceding that the Treaty of Guarantee would someday have to go (when Turkey is a full EU member), the Generals insisted that a small number of Turkish troops should remain on the island indefinitely ...

I agree that the demand of the Turkish Security Council was irrational but perhaps they took the dissolving possibility of EU into consideration. Or Federation of Cyprus may leave the union...

This is what I refer to when I say that Turkish strategic thinking is outdated.

Yet, it doesn't seem to me outdated. The goings-on indicates to me that world is pregnant to give birth for a violent interest clashes in many regions of the world, in 1 to 3 years time. Particularly in East Mediterannean and Middle East.

Last year, Denktash and his friends fought tooth and nail to ensure that the EU will not have a say in the negotiations.

That was his and his friends political stance against EU. He many times clearly stated that EU is not for the interests of TCs; moreover the Turkish world. Nevertheless EU itself made a common statement that in negotiations process, it wouldn't be in a position as the guarantors are in...

Why? Isn't the EU the future of Turkey also? Shouldn't Turkey be working on building an integrated European defense policy, of which both she and Cyprus are essential parts,instead of insisting that Cyprus remain on some sort of inter-generational limbo, with "Britain, Turkey and Greece guaranteeing its sovereignty and independence"?

When Turkey has officialy become a member of EU(if ever or if until then EU exists), I'm sure many things will change while the circumstances changing. As I said a country like Turkey, has to take everything into consideration. From suspension of accession negotiations to dissolving possibility of EU...