Cyprus-Forum.com

[eracles]

If it hadn't been for the British Cyprus wouldn't Cyprus completely be under the Turks still? That said, I think Bananiot underestimates the amount of manipulating and power over the situation that the US and UK still have.
Bananiot may well be right that there may never be a better solution and pantheman may have the right idea when he says he would rather the status quo than be sold.
In my opinion the Greek Cypriots are stuffed not because they voted No to the Annan plan but because Turkey is more important to the US, UK, and even Greece than the Greek Cypriots. So, of our guarantors not one gives a shit about the Greek Cypriots. And probably in reality no one gives a shit about the Turkish Cypriots either. If all Turkish Cypriots left the north of Cyprus, would the status quo of the situation change? Really?

[mehmet]

If it hadn't been for the British Cyprus wouldn't Cyprus completely be under the Turks still

No. Turkey wanted partition, not to have hundreds of thousands of Greek Cypriot's under their rule.

In other respects I agree with what you ahve posted, in the scheme of things Greek Cypriots, Turkish Cypriots are not that important in the world. Turkey because of its strategic position as a bridge between Europe and Middle East, Christian and Muslim world has some importance but don't overestimate this either.

If all Turkish Cypriots left the north of Cyprus, would the status quo of the situation change?

Not much, except you will have more nationalistic people sharing the island with you who have less reason to negotiate their position away.

[MR-from-NG]

The year 2004 was immensely significant for Cyprus. It was the first time in more than 30 years that a comprehensive plan was offered to the two communities of Cyprus, Greeks and Turks, for a solution to a problem that has lasted for a very long time. The Turkish Cypriots voted in significant numbers for the proposed solution while the Greek Cypriots heeded the advice of their President and gave a resounding “no” to the Secretary General of the UN that prepared the plan. April 2004 was the month when the people of Cyprus were called upon to decide for the future of their island.

The Plan itself left many things to be desired. One could almost find reasons to vote against it in every paragraph and every clause of it. As someone said, even the proposed new flag of the unified island looked really bad. However, one needed to decide on more complex issues and really it was not about saying a simple “yes” or a simple “no”. The most important question we had to answer was: Could we hope for something better in the future and thus dismiss the proposed plan of the UN Secretary General or go for it, because the alternative would be partition and eventual accession of the occupied part of Cyprus by Turkey. President Papadopoulos had an ace under his sleeve. He called upon the Greek Cypriots to give a loud “vote” because we were only a week away from becoming a full member of the European Union. “Why vote “yes” when we can wait for another week and then ask for a better European solution” he asked the people.

The Annan Plan was a plan that was supported by the international community (UN and EU). There were many things in it that could have been better. Papadopoulos did not negotiate it with a view of making it better for the Greek Cypriots. He in fact made it worse (Annan 3 was much better than the final plan) so that he could justify the loud "no" he was asking. I suppose he sincerely believed that the EU would step in with a better plan after we joined this exclusive club. Some think that he had never the stomach for a Bizonal, Bicommunal Federation and he used the EU hand to trick the people into rejecting the plan.

Of course, in the world we live, there are no ideal solutions but options (according to the great author Stanislav Lem) especially for a tiny weenie country such as Cyprus. We have been offered some better options in the past but declined to take them, making sure that the Turks received the blame for the stalemate. This worked quite well while Denktash ruled supreme in the north. Basically, we kept the flame going for a different kind of solution that would see Cyprus becoming a unitary state once again with the majority running the country and the minority enjoying all legitimate rights. Of course we were thinking wishfully, as always, but when things did change in the north, our shortcomings were quickly exposed. The whole world now thinks that we are the community to blame and that the Turkish Cypriot community is to be rewarded for maintaining a positive and helpful stance. The victims became the guilty part and Turkey got a resolution at the UN asking her to continue her good efforts for a solution. The amazing thing is that Papadopoulos put his signature on the print.

Some questions need to be asked at this late hour, when partition of Cyprus is quite ominous: Can we climb down from the clouds and face realities? Realities that were formulated not only by Turkey but mainly because of our own incredible lust to turn the island into a part of Greece (Makarios's speeches in Panayia and elsewhere in the early 60's pay testament to the fact). Papadopoulos and his government have been in charge for almost four years. Doesn't it strike as odd that he has not made a single proposition as to how we can go about solving our problem? Does Papadopoulos give the impression that he wants a quick solution? Does anyone understand what he actually wants? Why do people not trust him? Has the whole world teamed up to conspire against us? Is it okay for us to shout "thieves" at the Anglo-Americans in such an undiplomatically resentful way? Are we offering the best service to our country by alienating ourselves from the most influential countries that control this part of the world? Is this a patriotic thing to do?

I supported the Annan Plan and voted, among others, for the Turkish army to leave Cyprus and the number of settlers to be restricted to a few thousands. I voted for the Plan because I knew fully well that it was an option that we could not afford not to take. Simitis, the Prime Minister of Greece for more than ten years, urged us to vote for the plan, along with other politicians in Greece. He knew only too well that it was the best we could do, under the circumstances.

Furthermore, even with the benefit of hindsight, if I had to choose, I would probably still choose the Annan Plan, even compared to a plan that offered a unified Cyprus, because with our mentality it is probably better if the two communities are separated, for the immediate future, into their respective geographical regions that are mutually decided. From this point of view the Plan was a masterpiece and took well into account, both our recent history and the mentality of a people with zero political culture.

Yet, what weighed even more heavily in my mind prior to the referenda was that I knew all too well that Papadopoulos will never be able to manage the "no" of the Greek Cypriot community. Klerides and Vassiliou would have done it in an elegant and a diplomatically acceptable manner. They could have easily shown the world that the Greek Cypriot community did not reject a solution but a specific plan. Papadopoulos will never be able to do this.

Remember how he cried on TV when he asked the Greek Cypriots to give a loud "no"?

A politically cultured man would have cried if he had asked his people to vote "yes".

BANANIOT

Utmost respect to Babaniot. A man of reason, a man of vision. Has passion for Cyprus and all Cypriots.

He is a realist and can see the big picture. The ones slaughtering him for his ideals and beliefs are the real idiots and losers.

Well done and my best wishes to you for the new year Bananiot.

[Issy1956]

Bananiot,
It takes courage to swimm against the tide as you do in your post and its proof that the majority is not always right. I considered the Annan plan to be the the best that could be attained at the time. It's stupid rejection sparked an orgy of development in the North that will make an eventual agreement even less acceptable to the GC's and this is something that those people who have have their heads in clouds waiting for "better deal" to come along dont consider. No one else seems to appreciate that time is not on our side and the criminal inactivity of Tpap will cost us dearly in the future.

[Sotos]

I don't think Bananiot swims against the tide. He just swims along what the Turks want. Isn't this why you like him? Because he accepts whatever you say? And what you mean that the eventual agreement will be even less acceptable to the GCs. You think that you can force us an agreement that we will not accept?? You think you can have an agreement for Cyprus that the 80% of Cypriots do not want?? Who do you think you are?

[Viewpoint]

I don't think Bananiot swims against the tide. He just swims along what the Turks want. Isn't this why you like him? Because he accepts whatever you say? And what you mean that the eventual agreement will be even less acceptable to the GCs. You think that you can force us an agreement that we will not accept?? You think you can have an agreement for Cyprus that the 80% of Cypriots do not want?? Who do you think you are?

Then hey earth to Sotos you have no agreement at all in 2007 and looks like you will not for the foreseeable, continue your current mind frame and see where it takes you absolutely nowhere but surely you are happy with this otherwise you would think of ways to find a solution other than your current politics which is to extract as many concessions out of Turkey via the EU, has this been successful over the past 3 years? Ohi

[pantheman]

The year 2004 was immensely significant for Cyprus. It was the first time in more than 30 years that a comprehensive plan was offered to the two communities of Cyprus, Greeks and Turks, for a solution to a problem that has lasted for a very long time. The Turkish Cypriots voted in significant numbers for the proposed solution while the Greek Cypriots heeded the advice of their President and gave a resounding “no” to the Secretary General of the UN that prepared the plan. April 2004 was the month when the people of Cyprus were called upon to decide for the future of their island.

The Plan itself left many things to be desired. One could almost find reasons to vote against it in every paragraph and every clause of it. As someone said, even the proposed new flag of the unified island looked really bad. However, one needed to decide on more complex issues and really it was not about saying a simple “yes” or a simple “no”. The most important question we had to answer was: Could we hope for something better in the future and thus dismiss the proposed plan of the UN Secretary General or go for it, because the alternative would be partition and eventual accession of the occupied part of Cyprus by Turkey. President Papadopoulos had an ace under his sleeve. He called upon the Greek Cypriots to give a loud “vote” because we were only a week away from becoming a full member of the European Union. “Why vote “yes” when we can wait for another week and then ask for a better European solution” he asked the people.

The Annan Plan was a plan that was supported by the international community (UN and EU). There were many things in it that could have been better. Papadopoulos did not negotiate it with a view of making it better for the Greek Cypriots. He in fact made it worse (Annan 3 was much better than the final plan) so that he could justify the loud "no" he was asking. I suppose he sincerely believed that the EU would step in with a better plan after we joined this exclusive club. Some think that he had never the stomach for a Bizonal, Bicommunal Federation and he used the EU hand to trick the people into rejecting the plan.

Of course, in the world we live, there are no ideal solutions but options (according to the great author Stanislav Lem) especially for a tiny weenie country such as Cyprus. We have been offered some better options in the past but declined to take them, making sure that the Turks received the blame for the stalemate. This worked quite well while Denktash ruled supreme in the north. Basically, we kept the flame going for a different kind of solution that would see Cyprus becoming a unitary state once again with the majority running the country and the minority enjoying all legitimate rights. Of course we were thinking wishfully, as always, but when things did change in the north, our shortcomings were quickly exposed. The whole world now thinks that we are the community to blame and that the Turkish Cypriot community is to be rewarded for maintaining a positive and helpful stance. The victims became the guilty part and Turkey got a resolution at the UN asking her to continue her good efforts for a solution. The amazing thing is that Papadopoulos put his signature on the print.

Some questions need to be asked at this late hour, when partition of Cyprus is quite ominous: Can we climb down from the clouds and face realities? Realities that were formulated not only by Turkey but mainly because of our own incredible lust to turn the island into a part of Greece (Makarios's speeches in Panayia and elsewhere in the early 60's pay testament to the fact). Papadopoulos and his government have been in charge for almost four years. Doesn't it strike as odd that he has not made a single proposition as to how we can go about solving our problem? Does Papadopoulos give the impression that he wants a quick solution? Does anyone understand what he actually wants? Why do people not trust him? Has the whole world teamed up to conspire against us? Is it okay for us to shout "thieves" at the Anglo-Americans in such an undiplomatically resentful way? Are we offering the best service to our country by alienating ourselves from the most influential countries that control this part of the world? Is this a patriotic thing to do?

I supported the Annan Plan and voted, among others, for the Turkish army to leave Cyprus and the number of settlers to be restricted to a few thousands. I voted for the Plan because I knew fully well that it was an option that we could not afford not to take. Simitis, the Prime Minister of Greece for more than ten years, urged us to vote for the plan, along with other politicians in Greece. He knew only too well that it was the best we could do, under the circumstances.

Furthermore, even with the benefit of hindsight, if I had to choose, I would probably still choose the Annan Plan, even compared to a plan that offered a unified Cyprus, because with our mentality it is probably better if the two communities are separated, for the immediate future, into their respective geographical regions that are mutually decided. From this point of view the Plan was a masterpiece and took well into account, both our recent history and the mentality of a people with zero political culture.

Yet, what weighed even more heavily in my mind prior to the referenda was that I knew all too well that Papadopoulos will never be able to manage the "no" of the Greek Cypriot community. Klerides and Vassiliou would have done it in an elegant and a diplomatically acceptable manner. They could have easily shown the world that the Greek Cypriot community did not reject a solution but a specific plan. Papadopoulos will never be able to do this.

Remember how he cried on TV when he asked the Greek Cypriots to give a loud "no"?

A politically cultured man would have cried if he had asked his people to vote "yes".

BANANIOT

Utmost respect to Babaniot. A man of reason, a man of vision. Has passion for Cyprus and all Cypriots.

He is a realist and can see the big picture. The ones slaughtering him for his ideals and beliefs are the real idiots and losers.

Well done and my best wishes to you for the new year Bananiot.

Sure you like him, for as long as he is licking your arse, why not ask him to roll over so you can do a real job on him, he would prefere that. I would go as far as saying, i can understand your reasons for wanting more for the TCs, but people like banana idiot, they make me sick. Only a coward/traitor would have voted for such a plan. Come on, what was in it for the GCs really? Voting for it just for the sake of it was suicide. No my friend the ones escaping from the looney bin are those that cast the yes vote, to sell us.

[Viewpoint]

You have voted the only plan put before the people what have you got to replace it? what have your leaders done over the past 3 years to make you so happy with their current viewpoint? Has 1 soldier left? has 1 settler left? have you got back 1 inch of land?

[miltiades]

Sourul has beat me to it , his general synopsis should be read by all , as one who has never accepted the majority / minority status of Cypriots in Cyprus find the following piece a major proof that the AP was nothing what so ever to do with unification , but partition in disguise. And the following part is PART of the agreement.

""""* The right of return of Greek Cypriots to their homes in the areas coming under the control of the Turkish Cypriot component state would be strictly limited if not, insome cases, forbidden, thus the possibility of Turkish Cypriots becoming a minority in their respective component state would not exist. ""

[Viewpoint]

Sourul has beat me to it , his general synopsis should be read by all , as one who has never accepted the majority / minority status of Cypriots in Cyprus find the following piece a major proof that the AP was nothing what so ever to do with unification , but partition in disguise. And the following part is PART of the agreement.

""""* The right of return of Greek Cypriots to their homes in the areas coming under the control of the Turkish Cypriot component state would be strictly limited if not, insome cases, forbidden, thus the possibility of Turkish Cypriots becoming a minority in their respective component state would not exist. ""

So how would you address that balance in the initial stages? cant you see the risk and concern for TCs?