Cyprus-Forum.com

[Piratis]

TCs and GCs are equal as people, as individuals. But no, the 18%, can not have equal power with the 82%. This is simply not democratic.

And of course we are going to insist on it. A solution that will give to the 18% a 50% power is simply a bad solution, which is worst than no solution.

As I said many times, it is all about balance of power. Today you are the powerful ones, you can insist to whatever unfair and undemocratic thing you feel like. Meanwhile we will make sure that you pay as heavy cost for this injustice as possible, until we will have enough power to stop this injustice against us.

[Bananiot]

Did you know that Papadopoulos's strategy is slowly but surely begining to surface?

Analysts believe that he, like Piratis (sic), understands that as the balance of power stands today, he cannot achieve anything better than the A plan, which is anathema to him. Thus, he puts the cyprob on hold for as long as is needed for things to change in our favour. This may happen just before Turkey is ready to be accessed to the EU. This will probably happen in 12-15 years when Turkey will need to solve the problem.

By then, there will be no more GC land to be handed back. The settlers will number 300 000 or even more, the international efforts to lift the isolation of the TC would have succeeded long time ago and the affluency of our compatriots would be such that they will no longer be interested in a solution at least with the same ferocity as we witnessed over the last 2 years.

Under these conditions the A plan would appear like an oasis compared to a possible new plan in 12-15 years. Of course, this is not news. It has been our sad story repeated time and time again, over the decades. The longer the solution takes to arrive, the more painful it will be.

In the meantime, one needs to explain to the residents of Famagusta and Morphou, what has happened to the better, european solution they were promised ...

[Piratis]

Bananiot, you say this because for you the Anan plan was good, or at least ok.

Is it so hard to understand that for the majority of GCs the Anan plan is not acceptable?

You say that after some years what we will get will be worst. Maybe. But it is like telling us that we should accept to be shot with 100 bullets today, because if we wait they will shout us with 200 tomorrow. 100 or 200 or 500, doesn't really matter, because we will be dead from the first 10.

So yes, we should wait and try to change the balance of power to favor us more than today, so we can at least manage to escape just seriously wounded, but alive. Accepting the Anan plan equates to suicide, and obviously we were not willing to do that.

[erolz]

TCs and GCs are equal as people, as individuals. But no, the 18%, can not have equal power with the 82%. This is simply not democratic.

So we go round and round.

You refuse to accept that the TC are A people- as a group and as defined in the various charters on human rights. Thus you deny our human rights as A people (plural as a group).

And of course we are going to insist on it. A solution that will give to the 18% a 50% power is simply a bad solution, which is worst than no solution.

A solution based on the equailty of the two communites as seperate peoples and based on the concept of respect of our rights as seperate peoples could work, if both sides were willing to make it work (just as the EU works). You were not willing to make it work in 1960 and you are still not willing to make it work now.

As I said many times, it is all about balance of power. Today you are the powerful ones, you can insist to whatever unfair and undemocratic thing you feel like. Meanwhile we will make sure that you pay as heavy cost for this injustice as possible, until we will have enough power to stop this injustice against us.

And in 1960 the TC were the powerful ones? The original consitution accepted the concept of a TC people (and a GC people) within Cyprus - as evidenced by the provisions for our rights to self determination as a people in the consitituion. This acceptance in the orginal consitution was not based on power - it was based on having made and won the argument that TC were a people in their own right and thus should have the human rights associatied with a people. The GC agreed this then, but only because they believed that having agreed it they could use their power of greater numbers to reverse and remove those rights from TC after having accepted them. Your insistance today that the TC are not A people is just a continuation of this policy that has blighted Cyprus since it's independance. It is a continuation of the spirit of the Akritas plan. It is a continuation of the ideas that led to Turkish intevention and the Islands partition and it is a continuation of injustice against us that pre date injustice against you and it is the root cause of the ultimate use of power and force against GC that happend in 74.

Until the majority of GC are willing to accept that the TC are a people just as the GC are a people, with the same rights as a people then there is no chance for unity on the island. The acceptance and granting of human rights to TC as indivduals means nothing if first you deny their rights as a group, as a people.[/quote]

[MicAtCyp]

By then, there will be no more GC land to be handed back. The settlers will number 300 000 or even more, the international efforts to lift the isolation of the TC would have succeeded long time ago and the affluency of our compatriots would be such that they will no longer be interested in a solution at least with the same ferocity as we witnessed over the last 2 years.

And I can equally claim that there is no Gc land left already, and I can also claim that all that land plus compensation for the loss of use is returnable on first claim to the legal owners according to the EU aquis. And I can also claim that the maximum number of settlers that could exist is already there, like I can claim that the efforts of the international illegal crooks will not have any result than a BIIIIG ZERO I hope you will not reply that I can beleive anything I like on my own peril, because I can give the same answer back to you too.

Furthermore if you cannot see that as from 1st of May 2004 the course of events is not the same as it was before and that there is actually a reversal, that will intensify even more after December, then I would say you ‘ve been patient for 30 years stay patient for another 2, and you will see.

My friend cant you just understand that even the Anan Plan came up simply because of that 1st May date? What makes you think that the 1st of May date has nothing to do with reversing what was going on for 30 years?And how can you predict the future situation based on the a past trendline of different variables? And its not only the first of May.It is also the December date for Turkey.

PS. If by any chance Turkey will not get a date in December, then not only us the GCs but also the TCs should all go together to the monastery of Apostolos Andreas and thank God because the GCs said OXI. Because Ertogan will fall, and the Generals would pull back everything and we would propably have war.

[MicAtCyp]

The issue remains the same all the way back to 1960
You deny that TC have a 'right' to self representation as a 'people' and portray any degree of autonomy that you offered then or offer now to TC as being a 'gift' and 'compromise' and an act of GC benevolence.

I think we already presented our views that the communities don't have a self determination right. However for the sake of discussion lets accept that both the TCs and the GCs can be defined as "separate nation people" according to the definition required to have self determination rights.

So for the sake of discussion we assume the TC are a different nation, and can decide what they will do.Remember we are now in the 60s. Then what? Should they declare any mixed village around cyprus a half town of a state? Which state anyway, what are its boundaries?Should they declare any non mixed village a part of that state? Should they all move to one side of Cyprus through buying-selling-massive moving on a compulsory basis until they form boundaries for a state of their own?Or should they demand 30-40-50% of the Political power of Cyprus, and the other group of self determinators the GCs should be oblidged to offer them whatever they demanded? Explain me these Erol and then lets go to todays situation.***

Now we are in 2004:Turkey invaded in 1974.Took by force and illegally holds 37% of the land and 70% of Cyprus Economy of 1974, threw out of their homes and lands 200K GCs, practiced an ethnic cleansing, etc etc.Presumably -for the sake of discussion-the TCs are a separate nation of people and have self determination rights so they want their own separate state. On whose land? Land that belongs to them or that belongs to someone else?And why those who own that land should accept an exchange if they don't want to.And suppose they do accept that exchange where do we end up? To perhaps 18% of the land of Cyprus belonging to the TCs and the rest to the GCs correct?

So we will then have two completely separate states one consisting of 18% of the geographical area of Cyprus and another of 82% each one minding its own bussiness. Is this what you Erol are aiming at? If yes then say it clearly. For your information there are many GCs and TCs that would looove to see such a solution.They are called Enosists and Taksimists.

And one last thing.Suppose this is the final solution.Are you sure the TC state can survive economically?If not to which should it get attached to survive?The GC state? And what if the GC state does not want to, shouldn’t Turkey be its only alternative? And since it would have no other option than to attach to the Adana Province of Turkey how many TCs would stand the degrading of their Standard of living after getting mixed with the Adana mainlanders?And how many TCs would remain after that in Cyprus?And in the end since all of them will emmigrate what happened to their original "self determination right" we started discussing about on the first place.

PS*** If you manage to convince me then we may propose the same thing to the black people of USA.You know they are about 20% of the population there a very similar case like ours.

[erolz]

I think we already presented our views that the communities don't have a self determination right.

You have presented those views and to me they remain they core problem then and now. Under your theisis that there are not two seperate peoples but just a single unifed cypriot people (that is clearly nothing but a fictional idea not represented by any realites back in the 60s or now) GC get every right that they would have as a seperate people by dint of their numerical superiority AND they get a right to dominate the TC people by the same means. Under my thesis each community would have its rights as a people equally respected. This is why we fear GC domination, because by insiting that there is and can only be a single cypriot people you also insist on a right to dominate through numbers the TC people in cyprus. Any autonomy or self determination you then give TC is a gift and a sign of the benevloence of the GC and not a basic fundamental right of the TC people.

So for the sake of discussion we assume the TC are a different nation, and can decide what they will do.Remember we are now in the 60s. Then what? Should they declare any mixed village around cyprus a half town of a state? Which state anyway, what are its boundaries?Should they declare any non mixed village a part of that state? Should they all move to one side of Cyprus through buying-selling-massive moving on a compulsory basis until they form boundaries for a state of their own?Or should they demand 30-40-50% of the Political power of Cyprus, and the other group of self determinators the GCs should be oblidged to offer them whatever they demanded? Explain me these Erol and then lets go to todays situation.***

I am not arguing that the TC were or are or should be a seperate nation - just that we are a seperate and distinct peoples. There is a big difference. If you could accept this (in your heart) then a solution becomes possible. We then have two distinct peoples living in a single geographical Island who both respect each others rights as a 'people'. In such a senario a single nation can be built that accpets these ideas and involves a degree of give and take on both sides. This is what the 1960 constitution represented. The problem was the GC administration accepted a settlement based on such ideas but never accepted the equality of the two peoples in their heart. They accepted it on the baisis that they could force a reversal of this acceptance through numerical superiority which is what they tried to do.

Just because you accept that the TC are a people that does not mean that there has to be two seperate nations at all. There could have been a unifed single nation that encorporated the two seperate peoples as peoples and acknowledged their rights as peoples. What it required however was an acceptance of the equality of these two seperate peoples in GC and TC hearts and a will to make a unifed state work on this basis. Unfortunately there was no such acceptance or such a will to make it work. In reality is was this insistance that the TC were not a people but just a minority in cyprus that has lead to a de facto situation of two seperate nations today and it is this continued inistance of this that keeps Cyprus from being united imo.

So we will then have two completely separate states one consisting of 18% of the geographical area of Cyprus and another of 82% each one minding its own bussiness. Is this what you Erol are aiming at? If yes then say it clearly.

No this is not what I am aming at. My whole point is that the current situation (ignoring the %) is the result of your refusal to accept that the TC are a 'people' in Cyprus back in the 60's and still today. Until you are willing to accept the equality and rights of TC as a people (in your heart) as partners in a united Cyprus you simply re inforce the current status quo, just as such refusal in the past lead to the physical seperation of the two peoples in the first place.

PS*** If you manage to convince me then we may propose the same thing to the black people of USA.You know they are about 20% of the population there a very similar case like ours.

If you read the 'learned opinions' in the link I posted before about this complex issue of defining what a 'people' means and represents it is clear that there are two basic approaches. One seeks to define a people based on a set of criteria and the other on the basis of 'all people within a state'. So where a single unifed (sovreign) state existed before the introduction of a minority people it is appropriate to use the 'single state' approach imo. This is why I do not believe african or black americans are a 'people' in terms of human rights definitions or the ethnic groups that exist in the UK for another example. However where the existance of these peoples pre dates the existance of the state then it is ludicrous to me to argue that the 'single state' approach is the appropriate one. In such a case the only appropriate appraoch to establish if a group is a 'people' or not is the 'criteria list' approach. I would also point out that one of the 'criteria' in this approach is 'numbers' - which is why I maintain the TC are a 'people' within Cyprus but the marionites or other ehtnic groups that represent less than 1% of the population are not. It is also worth pointing out that in the USA those ethinc groups that pre date the state of the USA (namely indigenous indians) are recognised as a people and have significant sovreignty and self determination as a result of this right (which is a much more relevant comparrsion to the USA and cyprus than Piratis' constant 'bleating' that a federation should be like it is in the USA - a nonsense because the USA does not contain seperate peoples that pre date the state and where it does they are granted appropriate rights).

I see no fairness, or logic or justification in your assertion that the TC are not a people within Cyprus - based on the 'single state' argument. All I see is convience and a demand and insistance for a right of GC to dominate TC in cyprus.

PS I would also add this same logic and reasoning is why I believe the Kurds should be recognised as a people and treated accordingly. They pre date the formation of the states in which they live - thus should be judged not on the 'single state' approach but on the 'criteria list' approach (which they clearly meet). I believe that for the same reasons that Turkey supports the rights of a TC people in Cyprus they should also support the rights of a Kurdish people in Turkey (and elsewhere). I condem this incosistency in Turkish policy (just as I condem incosistnecy elsewhere).

[Piratis]

It is also worth pointing out that in the USA those ethinc groups that pre date the state of the USA (namely indigenous indians) are recognised as a people and have significant sovreignty and self determination as a result of this right (which is a much more relevant comparrsion to the USA and cyprus than Piratis' constant 'bleating' that a federation should be like it is in the USA - a nonsense because the USA does not contain seperate peoples that pre date the state and where it does they are granted appropriate rights).

1)Many ethnic groups pre date the United States formation.
2)if you want comparable self determination with what the native americans get in the US then absolutely no problem. Agreed?

[erolz]

2)if you want comparable self determination with what the native americans get in the US then absolutely no problem. Agreed?

No what I want is the necessary respect for indivduals and for 'peoples' in Cyprus - because that to me is the only hope for a united future. I am not interested in your 'barganing' or the approach of ' hah - they have made a bad deal - lets accept it quickly and we will win'. What I am interested in is creating an environment where the two seperate peoples in Cyprus can live togeahter in peace and work over time towards building a single Cypriot people from these two seperate components. The whole approach of 'balance of power' or 'bargaining from strenght' and of 'getting something over the other' is an anethma to me and totaly alien to the way my mind works.

[Bananiot]

Are you serious MicAtCyp? You predict war if Turkey does not get a date in December but war is a very ... serious thing and when you mingle it with joint praying at Ap. Andreas, one wonders whether you are in anectodal form or not.

Previously you wrote about priests and bankers and temporary, at least, coincidence of their interests with the interests of the GC community. You asked for patience for another few months but now you claim that two years should be needed before ... before what?

You seem to be resting your hope on legalistic issues, just like Papadopoulos, but problems are never solved like this. Look at history.

What do you think Papadopoulos will do in December? Will he excersise veto for Turkey or turn the green light for Turkey to get a date? What is the position of priests and bankers on this? How much clout do our sorry priests pack outside Cyprus? And the bankers? Can they resist the wishes of the only superpower on earth?