Cyprus-Forum.com

[Piratis]

I might sound a bit cynical on this, but someone must say it: we must always include the possibility that the fedral solution is simply another step towards separation which was always the main thrust of Turkish policy on Cyprus.

You don't need to say the obvious Nikita. Somebody should be stupid not to realize what you said above.

For me it is all about land distribution. If TCs control more land than their population percentage then what you say will happen with mathematical certainty since partition will suit them better. This is why I will never accept any solution that divides Cyprus (call it federation, confederation, association, partition, whatever) unless we are satisfied with the land distribution.

[denizaksulu]

Piratis,

You invited comments on a solution based on one state, two national assemblies, three governments, bicommunal. Along with the legal majority qualification for areas were inhabited formerly by GC majority.

I might sound a bit cynical on this, but someone must say it: we must always include the possibility that the fedral solution is simply another step towards separation which was always the main thrust of Turkish policy on Cyprus. What if in the future the federated northern state finds, or makes, an excuse to break away from the federation? That possibility must be included in our plans until circumstances prove the other sides good faith.

My priorities would include a statement at constititutional level that the Turkish community gives up all claims to territory of the ISLAND of Cyprus beyond their allocattion through the federal solution. Any third party guarantees they seek cover only their federal state (component state call it what you will). Sovereign base areas burden the Greek federal state and Britain talks only to the Greek side re the bases. Britain cannot be a founding member of the federal state with rights in perpetuity over part of the island. If and when the bases leave their land reverts to the Greek state.

My preference is for unitary, contiguous territory and not bits and pieces spread all over.

Territorial allocations must take into account length of coastline (major resource in tourism), defensible borders, geographical features, property ownership and population proportions.

The EU aquis and human rights will apply with some exceptions (at least initially) since the insistence of communal security and the bicommunal/bizonal nature of the state make this necessary. There have been similar deviations from EU laws before. So each side will have its political rights on its own territory only. Residence will be allowed in the "other" federal state but not voting etc. So there would be no worries that Greeks would swamp the Turkish state by moving or having a second home there, and vice versa.

The overriding consideration for me is one of security, for both communities, true independence by keeping foreign influence to a minimum, prevention of future territorial conflict due to ambiguities, not allowing one community to hamper the other's progress, fostering benign and beneficial competition where cooperation is not possible. Providing a feeling to all that the compromise, though painful, is fair.

I am ruthless on the issue of settlers. They LEAVE. There are plenty of diaspora Cypriots who can be tempted to return if either side wants to increase its population. It is idiotic to negotiate for rights of illegal settlers when Cyprus has one third of its nationals living overseas! I would even be willing to grant overseas Turkish Cypriots voting rights without residence on the island rather than accept settler rights. Any consideration about the humanitarian aspect of settler expulsion is Turkey's problem.

Dear Nikitas
I felt very encouraged by your post , in particular this one. I had contemplated writing you a nice response, till I read your next post.
maybe its something I have been guilty of in the past, and then only as a response, reflecting on past misdeeds. Everytime a 'good' post appears it is usually followed by another past 'misdeed'. I appreciate you did not go as far back as 1571, but lets try and go forward in this.

Your post I find (current one) very fair and balanced , but that is my opinion only - for what its worth.
Regards
DenizAksulu

[Nikitas]

Denizaktsulu,

Apologies for the second post, but sometimes it is hard not to be drawn into these useless walks down (bad) memory lane! Like I said, I was born inside the walls of Nicosia and that old Cyprus obstinacy is still there and shows through sometimes.

Good that my post, following on Piratis' post, and those of othersA will lead to some constructive argument.

By the way, I know from the words Akdeniz and Karadeniz, that Deniz means sea, what does that Aktsulu stand for?

[denizaksulu]

Denizaktsulu,

Apologies for the second post, but sometimes it is hard not to be drawn into these useless walks down (bad) memory lane! Like I said, I was born inside the walls of Nicosia and that old Cyprus obstinacy is still there and shows through sometimes.

Good that my post, following on Piratis' post, and those of othersA will lead to some constructive argument.

By the way, I know from the words Akdeniz and Karadeniz, that Deniz means sea, what does that Aktsulu stand for?

I have been asked that so many times. The name deniz, you have that right. The second part is AKSU, which is the TC name given to my village at the time close to the Independence. Its a nice name but I find names are best with their original names. They retain their identity better. The ending merely states that I am from that village. The real name is Anglissidhes/Anglisiya (ancient=Ellisides, Latin/Greek?). I use it only as a nom de guerre (...PAX)
Regards
DA

[humanist]

well who thought that this post would create so much fuss ........ or ..... have we lost sight again

[Get Real!]

U.N. Secretary General`s report S/6426 of June 1965
"104. The Turkish Cypriot population has continued to be subject to hardships of various kinds, some of them enormous. These include restrictions on the freedom of movement of civilians, economic restrictions, the unavailability of some essential public services, and the sufferings of refugees."

Murataga's woes continue...

Here's the actual piece in S/6426...

104.The Turkish Cypriot population has continued
to be subject to hardships of various kinds, some of them
onerous. These include restrictions on the freedom of movement of
civilians, economic restrictions, the unavailability of some
essential public services, and the sufferings of refugees.
UNFICYP efforts toward a return to normal conditions have been
designed, among other things, to help in doing away with these
disabilities, affecting one section of the country's population,
and to enable ordinary Cypriots to go about their lawful pursuits
and live their normal lives without fear of violence or
discrimination.

Murataga has changed the word onerous which is just another word for “arduous” or “tedious” into enormous!!!

[Murataga]

U.N. Secretary General`s report S/6426 of June 1965
"104. The Turkish Cypriot population has continued to be subject to hardships of various kinds, some of them enormous. These include restrictions on the freedom of movement of civilians, economic restrictions, the unavailability of some essential public services, and the sufferings of refugees."

Murataga's woes continue...

Here's the actual piece in S/6426...

104.The Turkish Cypriot population has continued
to be subject to hardships of various kinds, some of them
onerous. These include restrictions on the freedom of movement of
civilians, economic restrictions, the unavailability of some
essential public services, and the sufferings of refugees.
UNFICYP efforts toward a return to normal conditions have been
designed, among other things, to help in doing away with these
disabilities, affecting one section of the country's population,
and to enable ordinary Cypriots to go about their lawful pursuits
and live their normal lives without fear of violence or
discrimination.

Murataga has changed the word onerous which is just another word for “arduous” or “tedious” into enormous!!!

You gotta be kidding me

Oh by the way... I haven`t done any changes from the original report or during typing them here, at least not intentionally. Perhaps what you are writing has been misquoted, I don`t know, because according to your criteria it is not the full and originallly provided SG report. But even at that let`s assume that it was my mistake. Here is “onerous” for you:

definition from webster: difficult to endure
synonym from webster: oppressive

But even putting this aside, SOME of the diffuclties are even elaborated so propagandists like you can`t pervert on words:

...restrictions on the freedom of movement of
civilians, economic restrictions, the unavailability of some
essential public services, and the sufferings of refugees

Here is what I had for you before you ran off :

You mean supplied like this - from opinionated GC resources masked as U.N. documents?

Ok, well thanks to Erol I now have a copy of United Nations Operation in Cyprus document S/6426 from which I quote these relevant sections…

INTRODUCTION

1.I have the honour to submit to the Security
Council this report on the United Nations Operation in Cyprus,
covering developments from 11 March to 10 June 1965, and bringing
up to date the record of United Nations activities under the
mandate laid down by the Security Council in its resolution of 4
March 1964 and subsequently extended (see chapter 1,section B).

III. ACTIVITIES TOWARD A RETURN TO NORMAL CONDITIONS

106.The Turkish Cypriot leaders have adhered to
rigid stand against any measures which might involve having
members of the two communities live and work together, or which
might place Turkish Cypriots in situations where they would have
to acknowledge the authority of Government agents. Indeed, since
the Turkish Cypriot leadership is committed to physical and
geographical separation of the communities as a political goal,
it is not likely to encourage activities by Turkish Cypriots
which may be interpreted as demonstrating the merits of an
alternative policy. The result has been a seemingly deliberate
policy of self-segregation by the Turkish Cypriots. The
Government contends that the hardships suffered by the Turkish
Cypriot population are the direct result of the leadership's
self-isolation policy, imposed by force on the rank and file. The
Turkish Cypriots assert that these hardships are designed by the
Government to pressure the Turkish community into submission and
to destroy politically and that Turkish Cypriots are at one in
their determination to resist.

Sorry Murataga, you fought hard and well but this battle is also over.

Apparently we are having a difficult time in communicating here. So I`ll help you find your own way out of this:

1) Where and when did I ever claim your quote to be false although at no point until erolz posted it here you had the original/complete SG report ?

2) Did I not consider your quote to be factual at all times and explained to you what it meant, to which you have still made no reply?

3) Did you, until erolz posted it here have the original/complete report ? And although you did not, did/do you ask me to make quotes if I can only provide the original whole SG report?

4) Is what you just posted above and what erolz provided, NOT SCANNED FROM THE ORIGINAL + NOT COMPLETE + AND ONLY IN DIGITAL TYPING (WHICH COULD BE PREPARED BY ANYONE WITH A KEYBOARD), hence according to the criteria you are putting ahead of me is unqualified ?

There is no fighting, there is only you humiliating yourself but take your time because I am really enjoying it

Planning to provide any explanation ? Or better yet planning to adress what you yourself have started to quote now, which was what I had quoted to begin with and you called it, let me see...

Funny how all the above pieces you’ve “quoted” are written in GARBAGE English and some don’t even make sense. These are NOT parts of any UN reports like you claim Murataga but manufactured crap.

Anyone who has ever read a UN report would’ve noticed the strong command of English and IMPARTIAL style with which it is written unlike your junk!

So what gives? Why are you so shameless?

So right back at you:

So what gives? Why are you so shameless?

[erolz]

When the same report says directly the following then your interpretations are not needed. You have been doing then what you are doing now, and what you have been doing since the 50s. As if there is any doubt about what your aim is.

It is not an interpretation to know that ingnoring ones own consitutional court rulings is illegal. It is not interpretation to know that ignoring ones own constitution is illegal. It is not interpretation to know that setting up armed bands of ethnic thugs used to kill and intimidate innocent TC is illegal. It is not interpretation to know that Clerides demands to unilateral non negotiable changes to the agreed consitution in favour of GC and to the detrmiment of TC, before he would 'allow' TC to take up their legal government positions, was illegal. They were all clearly illegal - but that does not matter if illegalites benefit GC. Illegality only matters if GC lose, then it is the single and only important thing.

You do not ask the reequired questions, if your goal is objective understanding of what occured and why, as to WHY the TC leadership pursued such a policy and more importantly WHY it was able to gain so much support from it from ordianary TC. You do not ask this question because it involves looking at YOUR communites actions and responsibilites. So you just do not do it. You do not ask what effect on support for seperation amongst ordianary TC the GC communities pursuist of the ethnic divisive and exculding objective of enosis had. You do not ask what role the post 60's GC leaderships refusal to implement that which had previously agreed had. What effect the illegal refusal to abide by consituional court rulings had. What affect appointing a vicious racist thug like Yiorjardis to the interior ministry had. What effect his romaing bands of ethnic killers had. What effect driving TC from their homes at gunpoint and burning the hoes after they left had. The reason you ignore all of these questions is that you have no interest in objective understanding , only in propaganda.

If you had any complaints then why you didn't take RoC to international courts? Why there are no UN resolutions or anything of that sort placing the blame on the GCs as you do? (in the same way that UN declared your pseudo state as legally invalid)

There was no 'international court' that had jusrisdiction and could stop your leaderships illegalites. Your leadership knew this. They knew that the only thing that could ultimatley stop their illegalites was Turkey. If you think the TC community could have challenged and stopped these illegalites at the ECHR at that time it just shows you know nothing of the history of the ECHR.

Apparently Erolz you want to be the Judge, but sorry you are not. You can have any opinion you want, but you can not decide what is legal and what is not based on your own interpretations.

But Clerides in 65 could be Judge and just decide

14.The Government position was that certain
provisions of the constitution which conferred a special status
on the Turkish Cypriot community could no longer be considered as
being in effect;

and

Finally,
Mr.Clerides stated that unless the Turkish Cypriot members
accepted the conditions laid down by him, he found it pointless
to supply to them copies of the pending bills.­

and

However, since the Government
had stated that it no longer recognized Dr. Kuchuk in his capacity as
Vice-President, this latter provision of the constitution was
inapplicable in practice.­

and

He [clerides] made
it plain that, unless agreement was reached on these matters, he
would not permit the Turkish Cypriot members to attend the House.
Mr.Clerides also stated that the constitutional provisions
concerning promulgation of the laws by the President and the
Vice-President were no longer applicable. He subsequently stated
that in his opinion the Turkish Cypriot members had no legal
standing any more in the House.­

It is because the GC leadership showed its DETERMINATION to do as it liked with NO REGARD for legality in its pursuit of illegaly removing the TC communites rights that those TC elements that wanted division as a politcal ideal were able to gain so much support from ordianry TC.

Having acted in the most clearly illegal was the GC leadership was then rewarded for it's illegalites and violence and aggression by the international community with 'recognition'. It was rewarded with such because it was expedient to the world powers at the time to do so, not because such was just or legal. This is clear. So havin gained a massive advantage through the use of illegality and the rewarding of such by the international community placing self interest and expediency pefore justic and international leglaity, you now lecture the TC about ignoring legality and seeking to gain back what was stolen from it , by the SAME meathods - the use of powerful states willingness to place their own self interests before internaional legality and justice.

If you want a solution based on purely legality then you have to address ALL the illegalites, not just ours. If you want to try and keep what you stole illegaly from us and was allowed to steal by powerful states putting their own self interests before legality , then do not expect us to use the SAME meathods.

[Murataga]

When the same report says directly the following then your interpretations are not needed. You have been doing then what you are doing now, and what you have been doing since the 50s. As if there is any doubt about what your aim is.

It is not an interpretation to know that ingnoring ones own consitutional court rulings is illegal. It is not interpretation to know that ignoring ones own constitution is illegal. It is not interpretation to know that setting up armed bands of ethnic thugs used to kill and intimidate innocent TC is illegal. It is not interpretation to know that Clerides demands to unilateral non negotiable changes to the agreed consitution in favour of GC and to the detrmiment of TC, before he would 'allow' TC to take up their legal government positions, was illegal. They were all clearly illegal - but that does not matter if illegalites benefit GC. Illegality only matters if GC lose, then it is the single and only important thing.

You do not ask the reequired questions, if your goal is objective understanding of what occured and why, as to WHY the TC leadership pursued such a policy and more importantly WHY it was able to gain so much support from it from ordianary TC. You do not ask this question because it involves looking at YOUR communites actions and responsibilites. So you just do not do it. You do not ask what effect on support for seperation amongst ordianary TC the GC communities pursuist of the ethnic divisive and exculding objective of enosis had. You do not ask what role the post 60's GC leaderships refusal to implement that which had previously agreed had. What effect the illegal refusal to abide by consituional court rulings had. What affect appointing a vicious racist thug like Yiorjardis to the interior ministry had. What effect his romaing bands of ethnic killers had. What effect driving TC from their homes at gunpoint and burning the hoes after they left had. The reason you ignore all of these questions is that you have no interest in objective understanding , only in propaganda.

If you had any complaints then why you didn't take RoC to international courts? Why there are no UN resolutions or anything of that sort placing the blame on the GCs as you do? (in the same way that UN declared your pseudo state as legally invalid)

There was no 'international court' that had jusrisdiction and could stop your leaderships illegalites. Your leadership knew this. They knew that the only thing that could ultimatley stop their illegalites was Turkey. If you think the TC community could have challenged and stopped these illegalites at the ECHR at that time it just shows you know nothing of the history of the ECHR.

Apparently Erolz you want to be the Judge, but sorry you are not. You can have any opinion you want, but you can not decide what is legal and what is not based on your own interpretations.

But Clerides in 65 could be Judge and just decide

14.The Government position was that certain
provisions of the constitution which conferred a special status
on the Turkish Cypriot community could no longer be considered as
being in effect;

and

Finally,
Mr.Clerides stated that unless the Turkish Cypriot members
accepted the conditions laid down by him, he found it pointless
to supply to them copies of the pending bills.­

and

However, since the Government
had stated that it no longer recognized Dr. Kuchuk in his capacity as
Vice-President, this latter provision of the constitution was
inapplicable in practice.­

and

He [clerides] made
it plain that, unless agreement was reached on these matters, he
would not permit the Turkish Cypriot members to attend the House.
Mr.Clerides also stated that the constitutional provisions
concerning promulgation of the laws by the President and the
Vice-President were no longer applicable. He subsequently stated
that in his opinion the Turkish Cypriot members had no legal
standing any more in the House.­

It is because the GC leadership showed its DETERMINATION to do as it liked with NO REGARD for legality in its pursuit of illegaly removing the TC communites rights that those TC elements that wanted division as a politcal ideal were able to gain so much support from ordianry TC.

Having acted in the most clearly illegal was the GC leadership was then rewarded for it's illegalites and violence and aggression by the international community with 'recognition'. It was rewarded with such because it was expedient to the world powers at the time to do so, not because such was just or legal. This is clear. So havin gained a massive advantage through the use of illegality and the rewarding of such by the international community placing self interest and expediency pefore justic and international leglaity, you now lecture the TC about ignoring legality and seeking to gain back what was stolen from it , by the SAME meathods - the use of powerful states willingness to place their own self interests before internaional legality and justice.

If you want a solution based on purely legality then you have to address ALL the illegalites, not just ours. If you want to try and keep what you stole illegaly from us and was allowed to steal by powerful states putting their own self interests before legality , then do not expect us to use the SAME meathods.

An excellent post that will remain as a cornerstone for future discussions. Well done erolz.

[SN]

An excellent post that will remain as a cornerstone for future discussions. Well done erolz.

I second that.

Specially this quote

If you want a solution based on purely legality then you have to address ALL the illegalites, not just ours. If you want to try and keep what you stole illegaly from us and was allowed to steal by powerful states putting their own self interests before legality , then do not expect us to use the SAME meathods.