Cyprus-Forum.com

[-mikkie2-]

Any solution that imposes a property settlement will not be acceptable by the GC's. People that are disposessed MUST have the right to decide what to do with their land or property as part of the solution and that includes the TC's as well.

The key to any solution is the status of the settlers because the more that leave, the less land will be affected and the more people that will be able to return IF THEY WANT TO.

What the TC's have to ask themselves is are they using the settlers in order to further their aims? If that is so, what happens after a solution? Will you be happy to have more settlers than TC's? If, as what seems a common consencous, that most TC's don't really like or want the settlers, don't you think that will cause problems for the whole of Cyprus later on?

To me this is a fundamental aspect. The more that go (using a humane basis of doing so) then the better for all of us.

So Insan, I would say to you that in your proposed solution, the GC and TC refugees MUST be able to have the right to return to thier old homes. There should be no assumptions or arguments about this. After that, I for one would accept a limit of residency for GC's for a period of time in order to allow for things to stabilise and in order to stop a flood of 'new' GC's going north (unless a buyer is buying GC property), and until such time as the economic levels throught the island achieve some kind of parity.

Of course, a major omission in your propsed solution is the economy and how it will function. To my mind Cyprus is small and it can not afford to have two separate economic entities. We need 1 central bank with a common economic policy for the whole island, with the two federal states working together. This is the only way in my mind for forging a trully unified Cyprus because it means all Cypriots will have to work together for the common good.

[insan]

mikkie, I agree with what you put forward in your above post. I also stressed the same things so many times before... but what about the political rights of GC residents of TC constituent state and political rights of TCs of the federal state?

Would a model of political structure as I mentioned in this thread be fair, viable and encourage the colloboration of two communities or not?

[-mikkie2-]

Any person that chooses to live in a particular federal state will be contributing economically and socially to that state and as such they should have the same rights as anybody else. There should be guaranteed representation at the federal state level for each respective community. This can be such that the dominant community in each state has the majority representation.

[insan]

Any person that chooses to live in a particular federal state will be contributing economically and socially to that state and as such they should have the same rights as anybody else. There should be guaranteed representation at the federal state level for each respective community. This can be such that the dominant community in each state has the majority representation.

Hmmm... you mean, "you can rule your little brother but I'm the father and therefore I rule you all..." Although it seems to me this is an impossible dream; I also don't think you'll ever give up insisting to be the sole ruler of Cyprus.


Let's see which interest clashes and conflicts will lead us this mentality and what damage it will cause to each community. The horizon is obviously seen. "The visible village needs no pilot..."

[-mikkie2-]

I also don't think you'll ever give up insisting to be the sole ruler of Cyprus.

So we are back to your 'conspiracy' theory again.

I would like to know how you seem to deduce from what I said that I want us to be the sole ruler of Cyprus!

[Alexandros Lordos]

A question to Piratis:

Since almost all Federal systems try to strike a balance between equality of states/communities and equality of individuals (ie a senate where states are equal and a lower house of proportional representaion), can I take it that you generally consider federations to be unfair and unacceptable?

And is what you are seeking for Cyprus (as acceptable rather than ideal) a type of bizonal-bicommunal unitary state? (ie the central government to be elected proportionately without any regard to internal citizenship, and the two zones to be more like municipal districts rather than component states?)

Sorry to be bringing all these legal/constitutional terms into the discussion, but I am just trying to make sure that we all understand what each other is saying ...

[insan]

I would like to know how you seem to deduce from what I said that I want us to be the sole ruler of Cyprus!

mikkie, I asked you a direct question whether a model of political structure as I mentioned in this thread would be fair, viable and encourage the colloboration of two communities or not and you replied with something cannot be interpreted any different than what I said in my previous post...

[michalis5354]

Since you ask my opinion ,I do not think that such structure will be viable nor will be able to function for a day!There should only be one Parliament at a Federal level and being able to enforce laws to the whole island. The Central government should be strong enough to exercise FULL control over both GC and TC regions as to avoid any likelihood of both regions breaking away.

These key elements above are very crucial to promote unity and not division!

GC and TC regions may choose to have their own municipality or other administrative laws as considered appropriate but nevertheless these laws should be inferior to those issued from the Top. Control of the whole country should be exercised from the TOP - the central government - and not the other way around.

If Turkish cypriots want a pure TC region then they should return a % of land otherwise they should accept an equivalent % of GCs to return to their original home lets say appr. 30%( I am refering to the %s of the UN plan). So that the solution is fairer to all parties concerned.

Regarding the settlers , my opinion is that the more they stay the less the TC rights will be in the long term.

[insan]

Since you ask my opinion ,I do not think that such structure will be viable.There should only be one Parliament at a Federal level and being able to enforce laws to the whole island.

Two parliaments are not an obstacle not to be able to enforce laws to the whole Island.

All Bills will originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments.

The Central government should be strong enough to exercise FULL control over both GC and TC regions as to avoid any likelihood of both regions breaking away.

Is 50/50 power sharing something that weakens the central government? If so, can you tell me how 50/50 power sharing weakens the authority of Central Government?

These key elements above are very crucial to promote unity and not division!

OK!

GC and TC regions may choose to have their own municipality or other administrative laws as considered appropriate but nevertheless these laws should be inferior to those issued from the Top. Control of the whole country should be exercised from the TOP - the central government - and not the other way around.

The central governments of the federative sysytems are only responsible of the matters specifically defined in the constitution as their responsibilities. All other affairs which are not specifically defined in the constitution as the responsibilities of Central State; are the responsibilities of the constituent states. The legislature and judiciary of the constituent states can excersize their rights and responsibilities according to their internal laws and methods as long as do not contradict with the laws of Federal State.

If Turkish cypriots want a pure TC region then they should return a % of land otherwise they should accept an equivalent % of GCs to return to their original home lets say appr. 25-30%( I am refering to the %s of the UN plan). So that the solution is fairer to all parties concerned.

As you know TCs approved to live together with some 40 thousands GCs in their constituent state, as long as the number of GC residence of TC constituent state couldn't have been exceeded about the 1/5 of the TC residents of TC constituent state. UN plan suggesting %21 until Turkey becomes a full member of EU. And I think %21 is appropriate because it is nearly the same percentage TCs constitute in Federal State.

Regarding the settlers , my opinion is that the more they stay the less the TC rights will be in the long term.

I couldn't quite understand what you meant here....

[Piratis]

A question to Piratis:

Since almost all Federal systems try to strike a balance between equality of states/communities and equality of individuals (ie a senate where states are equal and a lower house of proportional representaion), can I take it that you generally consider federations to be unfair and unacceptable?

No. What is unacceptable is the Annan plan. The Annan plan is not a Federation, but something between loose confederation and association of two mainly independent states. Also the Annan plan doesn't have this balance you refer to.
In the US, what they have are US citizens only. These citizens are free to move anywhere they like, and become residents of any state they want. Do you know any state that says "We allow only up to 20% of Blacks to move here"?

I am not saying that restrictions of settlement can not apply to Cyprus. But if they do, then we should find a different way to achieve this balance that you refer to, otherwise we create first class and second class citizens.

Federation is acceptable, I said it, and I repeat it. What is not acceptable is inequality between people.
If you read my "main principles for solution" you will see that what I propose there is a federation that keeps this balance.

Many people argue that because we do not accept their version of bi-communal, bi-zonal federation, it means we do not accept such thing at all. First of all, they should rename their "version" as a bi-communal, bi-zonal loose confederation.
Secondly, for each thing there can be many versions, and rejecting some of them doesn't mean you can not accept some others.