Cyprus-Forum.com

[Piratis]

Can I just interject something here. In a "Majority rule" concept, it is not the number of people of the same ethnicity that makes that ethnic group rule over another one, that happens to be 4 times smaller (TC's), but rather which Political Party has the "Majority" to rule. GC's are 80%, but they may have 5 main political parties, and the TC's who are 20% may have 2 main political parties. Well, if no one party gets majority of the votes over 50%, then it will be a coalition government, which may include Political Parties from both ethnic groups to form a Government. So in essence, both communities will rule together over the Majority and the Minority ethnic groups. The bigger concern is, can the political processes be fair to all of the citizens, rather than favouring one over another. Our problems does come down to "Fear" and "Trust" of the other ethnic group.

Kikapu, I perfectly agree with you. When we talk about majority this means a government elected by the majority of Cypriot citizens. For example a government formed by the 40% of GCs and the 100% of TCs would be more than 50% and the government of choice of most Cypriots, even if most GCs would not prefer it.

When you add parties into this story things can be even more different. For example Papadopulos party has 16%, yet with the various alliances Papadopoulos is the president and not one of the leaders of the 2 big parties.

To all this you should add that TCs will should have a guaranteed proportional representation in the government (with ministers etc), and I have even proposed that 1 every 5 presidents could be a TC, so TCs will be guaranteed that they will not get anything less than what they deserve. Such measures can continue for as long as the TCs mistrust the GCs.

We don't want to take away even 1 gram from what T|Cs deserve, but at the same time we expect the same treatment and respect, and not the "we won the war and now we demand to gain on your loss" approach.

Only with democracy and human rights and treating all people equally regardless of their ethnic background we can build a strong united Cyprus and lasting peace. Without this elements what we will continue having will be 2 conflicting groups, we will witness a new bloodshed with every swing in the balance of power, and in the end all Cypriots will be losers.

[zan]

One part of the Cypriot nation has democratically chosen to go their own way due to circumstances exerted on them by a hostile majority. They are looking forward to Independence and the right to govern them selves. They will never give up the right to do so and are grateful to you for defining democracy but are unsympathetic to your need to sully their name in order for you to get your point across.

Point well made Zan. The problems begin when in striving for independence this minority denies part of the majority some of their basic human rights. We do not begrudge your right to autonomy but if it means we are marginalised because of this then a middle road must be sought. Remember the majority also democratically chose to take a particular path (Union with Greece) before realising (perhaps too late) that this road might deny the minority some of their basic rights. That path was not taken. I believe the only way forward without marginalising either one community or the other is the middle road. This can be the only way forward in a situation where the two communities ideal desires conflict so much with each other.

Absolutely agree with you Alexis. The point at which I presume we differ is the perception we hold on defining the middle of the road. Some one once said to me that the only thing we cannot defeat is stupidity and my definition of middle of the road is based around that assumption. If I could be certain that the stupidity would not destroy the hope and lives of an entire nation then I would side with the unificationists'. I however can only see the rights of any one involved to be settled in financial terms. Any other way imo would be a complete disaster and would mean years and years more of this rubbish we are going through today. I do have hopes though that in the future Cyprus will become one again with two successful mature parties being able to talk from a position of strength and nesseccity.

[Piratis]

The point at which I presume we differ is the perception we hold on defining the middle of the road.

Personally I believe that such thing as "middle of the road" can not exist on such kind of things. If I say 100 and you say 200, then theoretically the middle of the road is 150. However then I can say 0, which would mean the middle of the road between my 0 and your 200 is 100 (which coincidentally is exactly what I wanted). Would I then be considered "compromising" for agreeing on 100?

A middle of the road could be achieved if both sides were making claims within specific limits. If the demands can be unlimited then the "middle of the road" could be anywhere. Therefore "middle of the road" doesn't mean fair. It just means that the one who demands the most is supposed to take the most.

I however can only see the rights of any one involved to be settled in financial terms.

Financial terms in what way? You can always buy and sell property within a country, but that property always stays within the country. So it is not a problem if some property is transferred in a legal way from one citizen to another. However no country will give its own land to another country.

In the Aegean there are some tiny uninhabited island rocks, that their value from a property point of view is minimal. Do you think Turkey would sell to Greece (or vice versa) those island rocks even for a price multiple times their property market value? Of course no. In fact some years ago Greece and Turkey almost had a war over such an island rock.

Now if no other country is willing to give up even a rock, to be asking Greek Cypriots to give up the land were they have 3500 of history on it! Totally impossible.

Solutions can not come with ethnic cleanings. Many things happened in the past, but if we are going to find a true permanent solution, then we have to stop making the mistakes and crimes of the past and finally create something based on the universal principles highlighted in my initial post. We are not the only ones who had trouble between us. As the article states:

These elements define the fundamental elements of all modern democracies, no matter how varied in history, culture, and economy. Despite their enormous differences as nations and societies, the essential elements of constitutional government--majority rule coupled with individual and minority rights, and the rule of law--can be found in Canada and Costa Rica, France and Botswana, Japan and India.

[zan]

Financial terms in what way? You can always buy and sell property within a country, but that property always stays within the country. So it is not a problem if some property is transferred in a legal way from one citizen to another. However no country will give its own land to another country.


I am not asking for one country to give to another. You keep adding Turkey in the equation when I have made no reference to them. What I am asking for a compromise on is my country. A piece of my country so that this conflict can end. You are not selling to some one from the outside. The financial terms are for this alone so that the people that are left out of pocket can get what they are due. This will go a long way to helping these people from both sides. What I am asking for is for the GC majority to say enough is enough lets get on with building the island up even if it is in two parts and hope for a better future. I am more than prepared to show Turkey the door and have the same relationship with them as you do with Greece.

[Piratis]

What I am asking for a compromise on is my country.

Ok, so what you are saying is that if a group of Turkish citizens asked for a piece of Turkey just for themselves, while at the same time ethnically cleanse from that area everybody else, then Turkey, or any other country would agree for this? What you demand from us would be considered a joke in any country of the world. Such things just don't happen.

Zan, we have 3500 years of History in places like Kerinia, Famagusta, and all parts of Cyprus. Giving up our country for money, which is what you are asking from us, is called treason. You need to understand that we will not betray our country.

If on the other hand for you such thing would be acceptable, and you insist that GCs and TCs can not live together, then we would be more than glad to pay you triple the property values of what you own to end the occupation and then take that money and go buy homes in Turkey or Spain or anywhere. If it is not just about money for you either then I am sure you understand me when I say that our country is not for sale and you will not insist with such arguments.

[zan]

I wondered how long it would take for you to get back to your old rhetoric. You know I actually typed in a part about how nice it was to actually talk to you in a civilised way for a change (give or take a few comments) but I deleted it. Seems I was right to.

How old are you Piratis. Are you 3500 years old or are you afraid that your ancestors will come back and haunt you if you give up a little bit of land. What is your main worry about this time scale that you choose to bandy around like it meant something. Most on this board talk about a settlement , you ask for complete surrender. Make no mistake that that is what you are asking for. You are standing on a hill in full view daring someone to shoot you (metaphorically speaking that is). The subject of this thread was democracy. If you want to encompass the whole aspect of the word you have to take into account what is fair to all. Uprooting once again a displaces populace is not fair. Sure it has been done before but that does not excuse you wanting to do it again. You have proven time and again that you do not care one little bit about the plight of the Turkish Cypriot and you have only your agenda on your mind and it is making you sound ridiculous and counterproductive. Take a step back. You will not break if you bend a little. You are not the keeper of GC pride. You have taken it upon your self to be the protector, judge and government spokesperson for the RoC when you have no real authority to do so. Show some respect for the people you are talking to and stop dictating your demands and you might just strike up some better response.

[Viewpoint]

Piratis

So what are you saying here is that Russians and Koreans are "bad" and therefore they can not administer human rights? Or that the systems in countries like N.Korea is democratic only in theory and not in practice, and that just labeling a system "democratic" does not necessarily mean that it is?

If you mean the first, then you must admit it is a racist approach. If you mean the second, then I totally agree with you. I wouldn't want to live in a Korean "democracy", or in a Turkish "democracy" or in an Annan plan kind of "democracy" either.

I am referring to the second example you give and this is what I and many many TC believe a GC dominated run state would provide. That's why there has to be a mechanism where one community will not dominate or hinder the other.

I want a true democratic system and the principles are defined in the document I posted above. Only a constitution that will enforce those principles will be democratic, not just taking some racist system based on Apartheid of South Africa and label it "democratic".

This of course works in your favor as you are numerically larger and will take the necessary step to exclude the TCs from running our country, thus providing a GC administered democracy and human rights based on your kin of not only the past 32 years but also the Ottoman era. This is to high a risk to take for us unless were are shown that we are wrong by actions not words. It is too much like leaping into the dark at the mercy of the GC community which is something we wish to avoid at all costs.

[Viewpoint]

Kikapu

GC's are 80%, but they may have 5 main political parties, and the TC's who are 20% may have 2 main political parties. Well, if no one party gets majority of the votes over 50%, then it will be a coalition government, which may include Political Parties from both ethnic groups to form a Government. So in essence, both communities will rule together over the Majority and the Minority ethnic groups. The bigger concern is, can the political processes be fair to all of the citizens, rather than favouring one over another.

I disagree, this would only work if the was trust between the 2 communities and seeing we have absolutely none of that the formula used above will allow the GC parties to rule forever not allowing TCs a look in..

You would be left at the mercy of GC parties with 80% of the vote that would rather join forces than a TC party into government, again you would be left at the mercy of GCs who have been not been the best of allies in the past don't forget it was with just this mentality that GCs tried to exploit the majority rule pushing us to one side in order to turn an independent Cyprus into Greece. The risk is just to high when all you have to go on is our past and no goodwill or inclination to prove us wrong by actions and not words.

[andri_cy]

I wonder if anyone else sees, that in a lot of threads that start in the Cyprob section, a lot of people have stopped contributing and all you see is 2-3 usual people. I wonder if it is because the same crap is being recycled on both sides and we are making no headway. Just a thought: Maybe we should quit with the old stuff that everyone knows and most of us accept and throw some real ideas out there. Talking about what happened 3500 years ago wont help.

[Viewpoint]

Good idea but it will always come down to the same basic issues fear and trust. Unless you eliminate these you will not make any progress.