Cyprus-Forum.com

[Saint Jimmy]

Got a question, people...
The President of the Republic of Cyprus is also the Representative of the Greek Cypriot Community in the negotiations. As President, he is (or claims to be - whatever, don't get stuck there) President of all Cypriots, implying both Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots. As negotiator, he looks after the interests of his side (or "side" - again, whatever!), meaning the Greek Cypriots. How are these compatible?!?!?

The above question is the reason why I'm not yet sure as to whether I should be supporting what is (actually, what I think is) President Papadopoulos's strategy on the Cyprus problem or not: as a Greek Cypriot, I should be supporting his strategy of a long-term negotiation process for a solution, because it's pretty obvious that if Turkey signs the Expansion Protocol, things change on the scale. That would be a huge success for my Representative, my negotiator. But the President of the Republic (the same person!) who claims to be looking after the interests of both communities should be pushing for a solution as soon as possible, because the status quo is rather unfavourable for Turkish Cypriots.

I guess the question comes down to this: what is he? President or Representative? And what should he be?

[brother]

Basicly he is biased to the gc side and he has NEVER represented the TC community, also remember he is a EOKA man.

[tcypriot]

Papadopulos is the leader of the Greek Cypriot Community and nothing more. No one can represent the Turkish Cypriot Nation without its own will.We did not elect papadopullos, you did, so he's your leader and representative.Also just as the TC brother mentioned , it'd be very strange if an ex-terrorist like papadopulos who was one of the planners of the Turkish Cypriot Genocide, would defend the Turkish Cypriot Nation's rights..

[boulio]

actually papadopoulos is the president of the republic of cyprus.

[Alasya]

I have observed that over the years more and more news agencies like the CNN, CBC, BBC, France-Inter, are referring to Papadoc as the Greek Cypriot leader or the president of the Greek Cypriots. The World is finally recognizing how fake the RoC is, and how it is nothing more than a G?C defacto state.

[Piratis]

The World is finally recognizing how fake the RoC is, and how it is nothing more than a G?C defacto state.

Wishful thinking.

RoC (and not some GC defacto state) just entered the EU in May. Maybe you missed this "detail"?

Papadopoulos is the president of Cyprus. If you ask me, the president of RoC should not be the negotiator.

[Othellos]

The World is finally recognizing how fake the RoC is, and how it is nothing more than a G?C defacto state.

The word "fake" does not describe the actual situation: the RoC being an internationally recognised country with part of its territory under foreign (Turkish) military occupation. And as for the "world", this extends beyond the above stated news agencies (CNN, CBC etc).

O.

[Saint Jimmy]

Yeah, I know guys!

I didn't mean to say that he IS your leader (he is not, you did not elect him!). What I meant was that the GC argumentation on the Cyprus problem is based on the principle of the 1960 treaties still being in effect, and violated by Turkey. So, as the treaties state that the President of the Republic of Cyprus (which is how our government is internationally recognized) is the President of the entire Cypriot people, both GC and TC, the President (in this case, Papadopoulos) is supposed to be looking after both the people's interest.
Once again, I am not (NOT) saying that that's the way it is, I'm just pointing out the paradox: the GC side argues (via its President) that we are still governed by the 1960 Constitution, which is still valid, and at the same time the President, elected under that very Constitution, represents only his own community in intercommunal talks! Does that undermine one of his two capacities? I would say he is cutting back on being President in favour of being a GC negotiator.

[MicAtCyp]

St Jimmy,
According to the 1960 constitution it is incompatible for the President of the RoC to be the negotiator, because presumably he should bring the two communities into an agreement. However the problem was not just between the communities it was also a problem of Invasion and occupation. Despite these facts there were indeed thoughts in the past that the President should appoint a negotiator. One of the obstacle (despite the fact that this way the problem would just appear to be bi-communal) was that Denktash would do the same, giving the impression in the end that we have 2 presidents each one with his own negotiator.

Frankly speaking in any case the result would still be the same. A big ZERO.

[Saint Jimmy]

Mic,
I see. That makes a lot of sense.

Hmmm... I wonder... To what extent should we be worried about what Denktash's choices would've been if we stuck to the Constitution...
I mean, "by the book", the President (whichever one) should've appointed a negotiator, right? But we didn't, cause it would've caused a series of reactions that would lead to the risk of others believing that we have different governments in Cyprus. So, to avoid this risk of 'false impressions', we jeopardized the solution itself???

Because I fail to see how it'd have been worse if we presented the Cyprus problem as a bicommunal problem... That would've illustrated the point: Turkey and her army have no place in a bi-communal dispute!!!
Right?
Am I missing something?