boulio in case you have been living in a cave for 40 years, the 1960 Cyprus Republic failed. If you are serious about a solution, you should look at what has been negotiated recently-the Annan plan.
There is no mention (in the UN, EU, NATO, or even within Northern and Southern Cyprus or in Greece or Turkey) of returning to the 1960 set-up.
A poll about bizonality
by Alexandros Lordos » Tue Dec 28, 2004 4:47 am
Alasya, would you care to share here what you know about the Belgian case? ... is Belgium bizonal-bicommunal, with limits to settlement etc.? How is power shared?
I admit I don't have a clue ...
Look forward to hearing from you, and ... HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYONE!
I admit I don't have a clue ...
Look forward to hearing from you, and ... HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYONE!
- Alexandros Lordos
- Contributor
- Posts: 987
- Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2004 8:41 pm
by Alasya » Tue Dec 28, 2004 5:08 am
Hey Chief!
I`m just informing you that "no separation of territory" is not a solution.
Have you learnt any lessons from Cyprus 1963-74?
Between 1963 and 1974, Greek forces in collaboration with Greek-Cypriots in Cyprus drove out Turkish-Cypriots with whom they had been coexisting for 500 years, forcing them to either leave the country if they were lucky or to live in inhumane conditions in enclaves, were over-crowding and malnutrition was their lot. The Turkish-Cypriot population once 1/3 of the islands population and over-represented in its wealth was greatly reduced in population as tens of thousands left the island. Western leaders, the three guarantor nations and the UN failed to prevent it or to stop the impending acts of genocide in Tokni, Sandallaris, Attilar, Muratag, Omorphita, and Kophinou. Meanwhile Greek forces (permitted by the Cyprus government) were guided by local Greek Cypriots (neighbours of the Turkish-Cypriots) to which house was T/C owned and which was not. T/C Houses were then destroyed (after being looted of course). Mass killings, torture, disapearences, sexual abuses against women and children, arbitrary executions, destruction of houses, religious and historical heritage, acts of degradation and humiliation, violence of all kinds and forced evictions and detentions was how Turkish-Cypriots lived in this period. Systematic efforts were made by Greek Cypriots to kill any remaining T/C (those too old to get out of bed or those too late to leave) and to destroy every Muslim School, Mosque, Library, Business and any symbol of Islamic culture. In fact the destruction of symbols of Islamic or Ottoman culture was one of the main aims of the Greek Cypriots.
Now do you understand why Turkish-Cypriots want a separation of territory?
I`m just informing you that "no separation of territory" is not a solution.
Have you learnt any lessons from Cyprus 1963-74?
Between 1963 and 1974, Greek forces in collaboration with Greek-Cypriots in Cyprus drove out Turkish-Cypriots with whom they had been coexisting for 500 years, forcing them to either leave the country if they were lucky or to live in inhumane conditions in enclaves, were over-crowding and malnutrition was their lot. The Turkish-Cypriot population once 1/3 of the islands population and over-represented in its wealth was greatly reduced in population as tens of thousands left the island. Western leaders, the three guarantor nations and the UN failed to prevent it or to stop the impending acts of genocide in Tokni, Sandallaris, Attilar, Muratag, Omorphita, and Kophinou. Meanwhile Greek forces (permitted by the Cyprus government) were guided by local Greek Cypriots (neighbours of the Turkish-Cypriots) to which house was T/C owned and which was not. T/C Houses were then destroyed (after being looted of course). Mass killings, torture, disapearences, sexual abuses against women and children, arbitrary executions, destruction of houses, religious and historical heritage, acts of degradation and humiliation, violence of all kinds and forced evictions and detentions was how Turkish-Cypriots lived in this period. Systematic efforts were made by Greek Cypriots to kill any remaining T/C (those too old to get out of bed or those too late to leave) and to destroy every Muslim School, Mosque, Library, Business and any symbol of Islamic culture. In fact the destruction of symbols of Islamic or Ottoman culture was one of the main aims of the Greek Cypriots.
Now do you understand why Turkish-Cypriots want a separation of territory?
-
Alasya - Member
- Posts: 136
- Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 8:42 pm
- Location: Quebec City, CANADA
by boulio » Tue Dec 28, 2004 5:12 am
relax buddy,we can be here all night arguing the 1963-1974 sitution i can post a million articles concerning the t/c self imposed exile,youwill say to protect themselves and i will say dektash and the tmt forces them and you will say eoka did it and grivas,so please give it a rest.
- boulio
- Regular Contributor
- Posts: 2575
- Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 6:45 am
by erolz » Tue Dec 28, 2004 5:26 am
boulio wrote:relax buddy,we can be here all night arguing the 1963-1974 sitution i can post a million articles concerning the t/c self imposed exile,youwill say to protect themselves and i will say dektash and the tmt forces them and you will say eoka did it and grivas,so please give it a rest.
You can post as many articles and say what you like. It will not change the facts of what happened in that period.
However I would be interested to see any 'article' by anyone other than a GC / Greek that makes the claim that TC went into 'self imposed' exile. After all if there is a million out there, one should not be too hard to come by?
- erolz
- Regular Contributor
- Posts: 2414
- Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 5:00 pm
- Location: Girne / Kyrenia
by Alasya » Tue Dec 28, 2004 6:07 am
Alexandros
Belgium has a separation of territory based on language. Why language and not ethnicity? Because the idea was to create a unitary state of Belgians and not two states,one Walloon (french-speaking) and one Flemish. Language differences were far easier to deal with than ethnic differences. All you had to do was learn each others language (in a bilingual state) and then understanding would be less difficult to achieve than with the nationalistic ideas created by ethnic or religious differences.
However, in Belgium bilinguilism is only really the case in Brussels and most parts of Flanders, as the French-speakers practically refuse to learn Dutch out of protest, while most Flemish (who account for 60% of Belgians) speak French. There is a certain pettiness and arrogance among the French-speakers to learn Dutch, but this I believe will not be an issue in Cyprus, where people are even now learning each others language out of interest.
There is no restriction to where you can live in Belgium, but settlement in each compoenent state is not so common. Partly because, you must be able to speak the language of the component state to a good working knowledge to be able to find work there and communicate with ones neighbours. Bilinguilism anywhere is rarely 50/50. While a minority may speak both languages fluently, perhaps those working for the federal govt, a greater number will speak one better than the other. There are also some people who are just not very good linguists.
Belgians who are not as warm and hospitable as the hot-blooded Cypriots display a tendancy to sometimes (out of my personal experience) refuse to speech the language of the other Belgian, out of protest. I remember seeing a Flemish guy ignored by Walloons when he dared to ask for directions in his own language. Eventually the poor guy just gave up and left the cafe after being made to wait. Again, I dont think Cyprus would have this problem, Turkish-Cypriots seem only too happy to speak Greek and I m sure G/C would be happy to speak Turkish, I hope.
Moving onto law, the Belgian state can certainly teach us some realities. There are many Turkish-Cypriots (my own community) who believe that the Annan plan will create two states, allowing for a comfortable continuation of the status quo but with the full benefits of the EU. This is not the case. Once within the EU, EU law will prevail not state law. If one component state in Cyprus decided to preserve derogations from the acquis communautaire then the European parliament could put sanctions on that component state alone.
We have seen this happen already in Belgium, when the European parliament expressed concern over an unconstitutional bill passed by the Walloon parliament and threatened to veto the whole of Belgium unless it was changed by legislators of the Belgian federal parliament. However the federalists of Belgium argued strongly that the responsibilities lied with the component Walloon parliament and not the federal government in Brussels, they claimed the issue in question was not in the remit of federal govt, but of state govt. So the European parliament put sanctions only on the Walloon component state and not on the rest of Belgium. This could happen to the Turkish-Cypriot component state if it stuck to its guns over permenent derogations to the acquis communautaire (the right to settle etc).
Now we are writing a EU constituition it will be interesting to see how much more power will be devolved from the nation states to Brussels.
There is also a whole big discussion on the powers of federal govt vs state govt. In Belgiums case there is a certain ambiguety here, compoenent states have enough autonomy but ultimately its the federal govt that has the last say.
Lastly the Belgium state was created artificially by external powers, basically a piece of Northern France and an area called Flanders which was part of the Netherlands were sandwiched together in 1830 to create Belgium, a term coined by foreign powers after an ancient celtic tribe that lived in the area thousands of years earlier. Back in 1830 nobody even knew what Belgian was. The Belgian monarchy too comes from Germany`s Saxe coburg family was made the head of this new state.
Today Belgium survives as a unitary state and its people mostly identify themselves as Belgians, its royal family are loved, and so the million dollar question is why cant Cyprus a country were Greek and TUrkish speakers have been naturally living together for 500 years cannot achieve the same?
It all boils down to education. Belgium educates its citizens as Belgians and is not afraid to defend and preserve Belgium, even if it means shutting down far-right political parties that seek to succeed one portion of the state or teaching its kids to call themselves Belgians. Belgian symbols such as the flag, national anthem and royal crest are scattered everywhere to remind people of who they are. The fact that its there is evidence that it worked.
Belgium has a separation of territory based on language. Why language and not ethnicity? Because the idea was to create a unitary state of Belgians and not two states,one Walloon (french-speaking) and one Flemish. Language differences were far easier to deal with than ethnic differences. All you had to do was learn each others language (in a bilingual state) and then understanding would be less difficult to achieve than with the nationalistic ideas created by ethnic or religious differences.
However, in Belgium bilinguilism is only really the case in Brussels and most parts of Flanders, as the French-speakers practically refuse to learn Dutch out of protest, while most Flemish (who account for 60% of Belgians) speak French. There is a certain pettiness and arrogance among the French-speakers to learn Dutch, but this I believe will not be an issue in Cyprus, where people are even now learning each others language out of interest.
There is no restriction to where you can live in Belgium, but settlement in each compoenent state is not so common. Partly because, you must be able to speak the language of the component state to a good working knowledge to be able to find work there and communicate with ones neighbours. Bilinguilism anywhere is rarely 50/50. While a minority may speak both languages fluently, perhaps those working for the federal govt, a greater number will speak one better than the other. There are also some people who are just not very good linguists.
Belgians who are not as warm and hospitable as the hot-blooded Cypriots display a tendancy to sometimes (out of my personal experience) refuse to speech the language of the other Belgian, out of protest. I remember seeing a Flemish guy ignored by Walloons when he dared to ask for directions in his own language. Eventually the poor guy just gave up and left the cafe after being made to wait. Again, I dont think Cyprus would have this problem, Turkish-Cypriots seem only too happy to speak Greek and I m sure G/C would be happy to speak Turkish, I hope.
Moving onto law, the Belgian state can certainly teach us some realities. There are many Turkish-Cypriots (my own community) who believe that the Annan plan will create two states, allowing for a comfortable continuation of the status quo but with the full benefits of the EU. This is not the case. Once within the EU, EU law will prevail not state law. If one component state in Cyprus decided to preserve derogations from the acquis communautaire then the European parliament could put sanctions on that component state alone.
We have seen this happen already in Belgium, when the European parliament expressed concern over an unconstitutional bill passed by the Walloon parliament and threatened to veto the whole of Belgium unless it was changed by legislators of the Belgian federal parliament. However the federalists of Belgium argued strongly that the responsibilities lied with the component Walloon parliament and not the federal government in Brussels, they claimed the issue in question was not in the remit of federal govt, but of state govt. So the European parliament put sanctions only on the Walloon component state and not on the rest of Belgium. This could happen to the Turkish-Cypriot component state if it stuck to its guns over permenent derogations to the acquis communautaire (the right to settle etc).
Now we are writing a EU constituition it will be interesting to see how much more power will be devolved from the nation states to Brussels.
There is also a whole big discussion on the powers of federal govt vs state govt. In Belgiums case there is a certain ambiguety here, compoenent states have enough autonomy but ultimately its the federal govt that has the last say.
Lastly the Belgium state was created artificially by external powers, basically a piece of Northern France and an area called Flanders which was part of the Netherlands were sandwiched together in 1830 to create Belgium, a term coined by foreign powers after an ancient celtic tribe that lived in the area thousands of years earlier. Back in 1830 nobody even knew what Belgian was. The Belgian monarchy too comes from Germany`s Saxe coburg family was made the head of this new state.
Today Belgium survives as a unitary state and its people mostly identify themselves as Belgians, its royal family are loved, and so the million dollar question is why cant Cyprus a country were Greek and TUrkish speakers have been naturally living together for 500 years cannot achieve the same?
It all boils down to education. Belgium educates its citizens as Belgians and is not afraid to defend and preserve Belgium, even if it means shutting down far-right political parties that seek to succeed one portion of the state or teaching its kids to call themselves Belgians. Belgian symbols such as the flag, national anthem and royal crest are scattered everywhere to remind people of who they are. The fact that its there is evidence that it worked.
-
Alasya - Member
- Posts: 136
- Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 8:42 pm
- Location: Quebec City, CANADA
Return to Cyprus Problem Solution Proposals
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests
© 2002 - 2015 Cyprus-Forum.com
