Cyprus-Forum.com

by **Bananiot** » Mon Dec 27, 2004 4:33 pm

it appears to me we had a cushy job when we could blame everything on the intransigence of Turkey and Denktash. What is your answer pantelis?

by **brother** » Mon Dec 27, 2004 9:29 pm

That answer might be a long time in the coming.

by **boulio** » Mon Dec 27, 2004 10:33 pm

i have real problem with something,turkey keeps claiming that they are for the annan plan and that a solution should be based on a UN sponcered plan,however why do they ignore all the security council resolutions that are against them since the 1974 "peace operation"?

as for the ROC rejecting the annan plan Dektash HAS rejected i believe 7 peace iniciatives going back to the Makakrios-dektash meetings and rejected all five versions of the annan plan,so i think the ROC still has a ways to go to be put in the same category of dektash and his masters in Ankara.

by **erolz** » Tue Dec 28, 2004 1:23 am

boulio wrote:i have real problem with something,turkey keeps claiming that they are for the annan plan and that a solution should be based on a UN sponcered plan,however why do they ignore all the security council resolutions that are against them since the 1974 "peace operation"?

Why did Makarios ignore UN resolutions (mainly to not import arms but others as well) way before 74? Why do countless countries ignore UN resolutions? There is no contradiction in supporting a UN brokered SETTLEMENT and ignoring UN resolutions that mandate a total capitulation.

boulio wrote:as for the ROC rejecting the annan plan Dektash HAS rejected i believe 7 peace iniciatives going back to the Makakrios-dektash meetings and rejected all five versions of the annan plan,so i think the ROC still has a ways to go to be put in the same category of dektash and his masters in Ankara.

If you really believe that all previous settlment plans were rejected solely by the TC side then you really need to go and find some better sources for your history. The fact is that both sides have rejected previous settlement plans at various times and at various points. In contemporary terms it is the GC side which is generally seen as the ones reluctant to agree a settlement (on anything less than their maximal aims of old). Papadopolus _says_ he wants a settlement, but offers no initatives, does not define what amendments he wants to the Annan plan and talks of his '64 opportunites' to veto Turkish EU accsession.

by **-mikkie2-** » Tue Dec 28, 2004 1:44 am

And just like Turkey vetoes Cyprus constantly when it wants to join organisations such as the OECD and even NATO. Cyprus has not vetoed Turkey!

Turkey has been vetoing Cyprus for 40 years and thus stopping it from joining important organisations.

I don't feel an inch of sympathy for the position Turkey finds herself in at the moment. Its about time Turkey had REAL pressure to find a solution in Cyprus.

by **boulio** » Tue Dec 28, 2004 3:51 am

erolz these are for turkey,can you please post the ones against the republic of cyprus:

http://kypros.org/CyprusPanel/cyprus/UN.html

If you really believe that all previous settlment plans were rejected solely by the TC side then you really need to go and find some better sources for your history. The fact is that both sides have rejected previous settlement plans at various times and at various points. In contemporary terms it is the GC side which is generally seen as the ones reluctant to agree a settlement (on anything less than their maximal aims of old). Papadopolus _says_ he wants a settlement, but offers no initatives, does not define what amendments he wants to the Annan plan and talks of his '64 opportunites' to veto Turkish EU accsession.

really thats why the roc ports and airports are opened?

by **pantelis** » Tue Dec 28, 2004 4:31 am

boulio'

Question: Considering that United Nations reflects the power structure of post World War II, do you have hope that it will be a true peacemaking body or are you cynical?

Answer: There are plenty of reasons for being cynical about the United Nations. There are all kinds of corruption. I could give you a long story from just my own experience, which is pretty bizarre. But the main problem with the United Nations is that it can do only what the great powers will allow it to do. And the "great powers" means primarily us. So if the United States puts a limit and says &q

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:9B ... e%22&hl=en

by **erolz** » Tue Dec 28, 2004 4:59 am

boulio wrote:erolz these are for turkey,can you please post the ones against the republic of cyprus:

http://kypros.org/CyprusPanel/cyprus/UN.html

Yep thats the list of UN resolutions re Cyprus AFTER 1974.

Try looking up some from 10 years before that from 186 in 64. Kinda strange isn't it that the UN sent a peace keeping force here 10 years before the start of the cyprus problem. Now that's forward planning!

by **boulio** » Tue Dec 28, 2004 5:08 am

can you please post them im sure you have them handy,seriously please post them.i just never have seen them and when i put in un resolutions on my search engine i get these.

by **erolz** » Tue Dec 28, 2004 5:19 am

boulio wrote:can you please post them im sure you have them handy,seriously please post them.i just never have seen them and when i put in un resolutions on my search engine i get these.

The resolution numbers are here

http://www.unficyp.org/Resolutions/res_ ... _64-69.htm

unfortunately the links are broken but once you have the res number you can seacrh for it at www.un.org

Cyprus-Forum.com

Why Cyprus did not use the VETO

Who is online