Cyprus-Forum.com

[Bananiot]

You are beginning to sound like a real fruit Piratis. You take the words of a journalist (Birand) for granted and you choose to ignore the words of hardened politicians, such as R. Denktash, who thanked God the Greek Cypriots said "no" and thus saved his creation.

In case you did not understand the first time, in the early 60's, Sampson, Papadopoulos, Yiorgatzis and Lissarides acted in unison to implement the Plan of the Organisation, under the auspices of His Beautitude and thus laid the foundation for the distruction of Cyprus. While we are at it, you might as well learn that the 1960 constitution was imposed on us by EOKA, who started a war for enosis and finally capitulated under the weight of their amateuristic mistakes and crimes and accepted a solution that they hoped they would use to their advantage in order to bring enosis through the window.

By the way, here is another example of how things are done in a banana republic. At 10:00 hours the Foreign Minister announces that there is NO WAY we can accept renegotiation of the conclusions of the EU report prepared by the Foreign Ministers. At 12:00 noon, the President declares that "of course WE WOULD renegotiate the report". The FM backpeddles and endorses what the President said. Am I being too harsh on the banana republics?

[DT.]

Bananiot...how can you be a refugee with no property in the north? Just curious.

[alexISS]

The Greek government supported the Annan plan, so did the DISY party if I'm not wrong. I also remember a poll conducted in Greece showed that the Greek public opinion was very slightly against the plan. Even AKEL that made Papadopoulos President was not negative to the plan, again, correct me if I'm wrong. What would have happened if Papadopoulos was not in power then? From what I've seen, Greek Cypriots are strongly attached to the parties they vote for (even football teams are "linked" to political parties). If Anastasiades or Clerides was president, would he be able to convince the public to accept the plan? I really think he would. True unification of Cyprus can only come if the people of the two communities want to unify. Even an unfair plan would be enough, it would bring GCs and TCs closer and they would get the chance to find out if they feel comfortable living together. If they do, the plan can be amended. If not, separation will be inevitable anyway and the wrongs of the plan won't matter anymore.

[DT.]

It would make absolutely no difference Alexiss. Disy lost a hell of a lot of support after they went positive to the annan plan and Akel lost a lot when they became negative to the plan. People who had been on different ends of the political spectrum found themselves agreeing with the opposite party and confusion reigned for a while.

Greece supported the plan after a hell of a lot of pressure, they would not come out one way or the other until the very last mement when a reluctant PM told the world he thinks ts a positive plan.

Fact was the only way of getting it approved was to keep the contents of it a secret from the public. It was a bad plan, the gaps where filled by Annan by heavily leaning towards Turkey's views (not the TC's...Turkeys)..ALL of Turkey's views.

Once again I ask.....what did the Turkish side conceed in the neogitations of the Annan Plan.....This is the 7th time I ask this question with no response on this forum.

[DT.]

regarding your point of an amendment later on to improve it..

1) There were no gaurantees Turkey would fulfill the long-term complicated plan of freeing up the small percentage of land given back to our refugees.
2) There were no gaurantees that the turkish troops would be removed over the long term plan proposed and reduced to the size under the annan plan.

If by some strange shock of the universe turkey backs up what was signed (not like the EU protocol recently where Turkey uniltareally decided a EU agreement should be interpreted in a different way whether the EU likes it or not.)

THEN put all your faith that the minute a GC says

"listen guys, this isn;t working. We can't have an economy this small ran by 2 institutions. We can't agree on whether we're going to follow UN resolution xx to sanction Azerbajan because the TC minsters won't allow it. We haven't had any return of refugees in the TC state and we're running as 2 different countries with 1000's of settlers coming in from the north in an uncontrolled fashion....We can't drill for oil because the annan plan said we need Turkey's involvement when it comes to the islands continental shelf.....Can we do anything to improve on this?"

The turkish reaction will be thus

"Its 63 all over again!!! Its the 13 constitutional points again!! Taksim Taksim."

Only this time after taksim, you are left with TC state and GC state. 2 countries, no refugee homes, no united island, one little Greece and one little Turkey.

[alexISS]

It would make absolutely no difference Alexiss. Disy lost a hell of a lot of support after they went positive to the annan plan and Akel lost a lot when they became negative to the plan. People who had been on different ends of the political spectrum found themselves agreeing with the opposite party and confusion reigned for a while.

I believe that mess was caused by Papadopoulos himself, by going against the party that brought him to power and by manipulating the GCs strong emotional charge

Greece supported the plan after a hell of a lot of pressure, they would not come out one way or the other until the very last mement when a reluctant PM told the world he thinks ts a positive plan.

Actually the Greek government tried to not directly oppose the Cypriot Government's decision, that was the only pressure. Besides, both parties supported the plan.

Fact was the only way of getting it approved was to keep the contents of it a secret from the public. It was a bad plan, the gaps where filled by Annan by heavily leaning towards Turkey's views (not the TC's...Turkeys)..ALL of Turkey's views.

Maybe, maybe not. What I'm saying is that it doesn't really matter, as long as it was indeed a form of reunification. In the outside world, Cyprus would be viewed as a single country. Inside, true unification would be for the people to decide anyway.

Once again I ask.....what did the Turkish side conceed in the neogitations of the Annan Plan.....This is the 7th time I ask this question with no response on this forum.

Abandoning the dream of a (legal) Turkish state in Cyprus would be considered a huge defeat of Turkey a few years ago. While things have changed thanks to the EU, Turkey and TCs still consider it a big thing and a major concession

[alexISS]

regarding your point of an amendment later on to improve it..

1) There were no gaurantees Turkey would fulfill the long-term complicated plan of freeing up the small percentage of land given back to our refugees.
2) There were no gaurantees that the turkish troops would be removed over the long term plan proposed and reduced to the size under the annan plan.

If by some strange shock of the universe turkey backs up what was signed (not like the EU protocol recently where Turkey uniltareally decided a EU agreement should be interpreted in a different way whether the EU likes it or not.)

THEN put all your faith that the minute a GC says

"listen guys, this isn;t working. We can't have an economy this small ran by 2 institutions. We can't agree on whether we're going to follow UN resolution xx to sanction Azerbajan because the TC minsters won't allow it. We haven't had any return of refugees in the TC state and we're running as 2 different countries with 1000's of settlers coming in from the north in an uncontrolled fashion....We can't drill for oil because the annan plan said we need Turkey's involvement when it comes to the islands continental shelf.....Can we do anything to improve on this?"

The turkish reaction will be thus

"Its 63 all over again!!! Its the 13 constitutional points again!! Taksim Taksim."

Only this time after taksim, you are left with TC state and GC state. 2 countries, no refugee homes, no united island, one little Greece and one little Turkey.

Those amendments wouldn't be proposed to Turkey, it would be an internal issue of the new Cyprus Republic. If the people would agree on them, Turkey, Greece, Britain and the UN would have no say on the matter

[DT.]

Alexiss, with respet you cannot have the Turkish side excusing the invasion as an intervention by a gaurantor power until constitutional order was re-established therefor fully within her powers to do so.

They can't go the other way as well and state that official statehood was the objective and still hang onto the old argument.

[DT.]

regarding your point of an amendment later on to improve it..

1) There were no gaurantees Turkey would fulfill the long-term complicated plan of freeing up the small percentage of land given back to our refugees.
2) There were no gaurantees that the turkish troops would be removed over the long term plan proposed and reduced to the size under the annan plan.

If by some strange shock of the universe turkey backs up what was signed (not like the EU protocol recently where Turkey uniltareally decided a EU agreement should be interpreted in a different way whether the EU likes it or not.)

THEN put all your faith that the minute a GC says

"listen guys, this isn;t working. We can't have an economy this small ran by 2 institutions. We can't agree on whether we're going to follow UN resolution xx to sanction Azerbajan because the TC minsters won't allow it. We haven't had any return of refugees in the TC state and we're running as 2 different countries with 1000's of settlers coming in from the north in an uncontrolled fashion....We can't drill for oil because the annan plan said we need Turkey's involvement when it comes to the islands continental shelf.....Can we do anything to improve on this?"

The turkish reaction will be thus

"Its 63 all over again!!! Its the 13 constitutional points again!! Taksim Taksim."

Only this time after taksim, you are left with TC state and GC state. 2 countries, no refugee homes, no united island, one little Greece and one little Turkey.

Those amendments wouldn't be proposed to Turkey, it would be an internal issue of the new Cyprus Republic. If the people would agree on them, Turkey, Greece, Britain and the UN would have no say on the matter

How can they have no say on the matter when the treaty of gaurantee by the 3 states was not only included in the annan plan but also reinforced???

[Pyrpolizer]

@Murataga and Zan,

So you basically want partition, i.e a part of Cyprus to belong to you, be administred by you, and you want that be agreed with the GCs.This would be possible if the now occupied areas 37% of the land belonged to you. As you know almost 90% of the privately owned lands in that area belongs to GCs.
So what you want is not something the Gcs would ever accept.

The equivalent of what you want looked from the GC side would be every GC refugee to go back to his lands and the TCs move to their villages as they were before. All settlers to go away, and you just be citizens with individual rights only, i.e no political power beyond what you can get via your own 18% voting power. Which in most cases would just count for nothing other than just regulating which among the GCs gets the power.

Both the above are impossible. So there comes the question how you can have an area in which you will be ruled by yourselves and have your political power count for youselves. The answer is through a Federal system in which the GCs will still have a say concerning the areas they will handle over to you for administration. This cannot be done by just allowing say 10% GCs to go back to their villages. So you have to accept the idea that you will not be living alone in the area that will be handled to you.More over that the GCs will be having political power in your own component state (on component state level) that will regulate your own affairs.
As for property owneship even if all TC properties left behind are exchanged with equal GC properties the GCs will still hold ownership of most properties in your component state.( Unless of course we do some tricks as per Anan Plan where the GCs would lose 2/3rds)

So these are the realities both you and the GCs have to swallow to have a peaceful solution.
I said before the solution is going to be BITTER both for you and for us. I wonder if your leaders ever told you that… For your information they told us that hundreds of times, however I am not sure many GC people understood why. I am curious if your leaders told you that even once.