Cyprus-Forum.com

[insan]

http://kypros.org/Cyprus/cy_republic/demography.html

http://www.kibris.gen.tr/english/relati ... ation.html

http://www.trncgov.com/abouttrnc_demographics.htm

http://www.cypnet.com/.ncyprus/main/fac ... opulat.htm


You may find lots of useful statistics and data regarding the Cyprus demographic structure, population, birth rates, death rates, migrant rates etc...

The average annual rate of population increase during the period 1974-1998 should be 1.2 percent on both sides of the Island, according to my calculations...


Statistical table no:4 at kypros.org indicates that approx. 20.000 settlers had been brought to North in 1974-85 period...

According to the figures of table no:4, in 1985-1992 period some 3000 more settlers should had beeen brought to North.


And according to the figures given by trncgov.com approx. 20.000 more settlers should had been brought to North in 1992-98 period.

By taking the migration rates of TCs into consideration, we can undoubtly claim that 45-50 settlers has been brought to North in 1974-2004 period.

It is said that settlers birth rate is at least twice the TCs birth rate... So it should be averagely %2.5/year.


And approx. half of those settlers should be women... If each of the settler women had given birth to average of 3 children; there should be approx 75-80.00 Cyprus born children of settlers.

Thus, we may say the total population of registered settlers in North is approx. 125-130.000.

The 5th version of Annan Plan had allowed all of them to stay in Cyprus as the citizens of unified Cyprus but rejected by majority of GCs.


According to the Geneva Convention and international laws this is illegal but couldn't have been stopped in the past 30 years...

Now there are settlers whom had been brought to North some 20-30 years ago and had 2-3 children who were born in cyprus.


And there are approx 20-25.000 settlers whom had been brought to North some 10 or 8 years ago. Let's suppose half of it comprises of women and each have 2 children; they should have been 45-50.000 in total.


Conclusion:

Turkey illegaly have brought settlers to North for political purposes.... Annan Plan had given all of them the right to stay in Cyprus as the citizens of unified Cyprus but rightfuly rejected by majority of GCs. In spite of the situation of settlers is illegal; it also impossible to repatriate them all...


What should be done, then?


In my opinion those who have been brought in last 10 years, should be funded by international community and repatriated. Though the punishment bill must be paid by turkey but I don't think that she would be able to afford those 50.000 settlers...


What's your feasible opinions?

[Bananiot]

As far as I remember Papadopoulos agreed for 31 thousand to remain but Talat insisted on 41 thousand. Where in the 5th version of the A plan does it say that all 130 or so thousands could remain after the solution?

[insan]

As far as I remember Papadopoulos agreed for 31 thousand to remain but Talat insisted on 41 thousand. Where in the 5th version of the A plan does it say that all 130 or so thousands could remain after the solution?

Talat had submitted a 45.000 persons list of settlers to UN Secretary General... These were only the settlers which have been brought by turkey to the North during the past 30 years... Their Cyprus born children not included because they are considered as Cypriots not settlers; by TC administration and UN

If the Annan Plan was accepted; all of those 45.000 settlers who are registered TRNC citizens and their children would be granted United Cyprus citizenships...

Furthermore, all other settlers who were unregistered due to various reasons and the ones that had work permission would stay in Cyprus as long as they fulfill the legal requirements but they wouldn't be granted United Cyprus citizenships...

[erolz]

In my opinion those who have been brought in last 10 years, should be funded by international community and repatriated. Though the punishment bill must be paid by turkey but I don't think that she would be able to afford those 50.000 settlers...

What's your feasible opinions?

I cannot agree with this. As far as I am concerned the Turkish mainland settlers here should become and example of how a modern mature Cyprus is able to treat weaker ethnic minorites (or even majorites) with compassion and fairness. The Turkish mainland settlers are treated here by many TC (and to my personal shame as a TC) as second class citizens. They may well represent about 50% of the population (of the north) but how many TRNC MP's are turkish settlers? What proportion of the wealth of the North do they hold? In terms of political representation at parilamentary level and in terms of control of wealth they are a minority. I think that the stronger (politicaly and monetarily, if not numericaly) party should act with compassion to any such minority. They should avoid any attempts to marginalise or villify the weaker. Is it not exactly this kind of failure to repect and support weaker (numerical, political or monetary) minoties that has blighted Cyprus' history to date?

Whatever the rights and wrongs of their being here, they are here now and in my view we should make every effort (GC and TC alike) to treat them as Cypriots and with respect compassion and equality. It scares me that one thing that seems able to unite GC and TC is a dislike of another ethinc group (Turkish mainlanders).

If there were moves to repatriate Turkish mainland settlers from Cyprus, then should there not also be equal moves to repatriate any settlers from countries other than Turkey?

[mehmet]

Erolz,

I agree that the mark of a civilised society is how it treats its minorities. Because due to democratic principles it can treat minorities very badly indeed. I wrote in another post what my initial reaction was when I was younger to Turkish people arriving in Cyprus. Things move on and we have to accept that the people in Cyprus now are Cypriots, just as immigtants to other countries are accepted by the countries they go to.

[Piratis]

erolz, what you say is nice until you realize that the Turkish settlers were brought to Cyprus illegally with the only aim to change the demographics of Cyprus. This kind of actions constitute international crime, and therefore they can not be compared with immigrants that came to Cyprus legally or even illegally.

Nobody should be treated as second class citizen. Therefore the settlers should go back to the county of which they are citizens (Turkey). They are not citizens of Cyprus, nobody that is authorized to give such kind of citizenships gave any to them.

One thing are immigrants another thing are settlers.

[mehmet]

perhaps as Turkish Cypriots were brought to Cyprus illegaly by Ottoman Empire you think perhaps we should be rep[atriated to China or somewhere in former USSR?

This is nonsense and you know it, if RoC decide 100,000 Greeks can come to protect the ethnic majority that is ok because it is legal?

[erolz]

erolz, what you say is nice until you realize that the Turkish settlers were brought to Cyprus illegally with the only aim to change the demographics of Cyprus.

Are we then to punish innocent people for actions that they did not have a hand in? Did the settlers come here to change the dmographics or did they come here seeking a better life for themeselves and thier families. I say lets show our compassion, our level of maturity as a state, our ability to empathise with ethinc minorites by saying HOWEVER they ended up here, legal or otherwise, we aill embrace them as Cypriots now. We will not persecute or villify them. We will not promote or encourage hatred of them. We will not force them to do anything they do not wish to do.

Are we (GC and TC alike) really so scared that such settlers represent a real threat to the uniqness of being Cypriot? That if they are not removed that Cyprus will no longer be Cyprus and Cypriots will no longer be Cypriots? Or are they just a convient place to direct our concerns, fears and hatreds anywhere other than to each other?

[MicAtCyp]

Is it not exactly this kind of failure to repect and support weaker (numerical, political or monetary) minoties that has blighted Cyprus' history to date?

No! It was the dis-respect of their human rights. The settlers do have human rights. The GC refugees don't have human rights? How can anyone deprive a GC refugee the right to returned to his legally owned home and land for a settler to be there?

How about the International laws for collonisation? Whose human rights did the settlers violated by being the human element of that. No ones?

And whose human rights will they be violating when they cannot adapt, they are illeterate, behave with hostility and use to take the law in their hands? When they cannot even understand and comply with the law...

The matter is not just a matter of humane approach. It is also a matter of not limiting our own human rights. If it was just a matter of humane approach then Europe should open all its borders for the poor people of Africa to come in, and the USA its own for the Latin Americans and the Cubans.

[erolz]

How can anyone deprive a GC refugee the right to returned to his legally owned home and land for a settler to be there?

I am not saying that there should be no settlement on GC lost properties. I am saying this does not requirr repatriation of the settlers. Moving homes within Cyprus maybe but moving countries is not required.

How about the International laws for collonisation? Whose human rights did the settlers violated by being the human element of that. No ones?

They are not the ones that took your properties. They are not the ones who had any objective to change deomographics in Cyprus. They are simply people who are seeking a better life.

And whose human rights will they be violating when they cannot adapt, they are illeterate, behave with hostility and use to take the law in their hands? When they cannot even understand and comply with the law...

This is exactly the kind of rehtoric that scares me. If they are illeterate then the solution is to educate them, not expell them. What evidence do you have that because they are poor people from eastern Turkey (in the main) that they are any less honest, any less willing to abide by the laws where they live, any less able to understand than anyone else? If someone breaks the law they should be punished. Labelling one group of people as more likley to break the law than another is distastful to me. If there is a correaltion between a given ethinc group and greater crime breaking, it is in my view and experience not og a 'genetic' disorder of that group but a reflection of their inequilty within the scoiety concerned.

The matter is not just a matter of humane approach. It is also a matter of not limiting our own human rights. If it was just a matter of humane approach then Europe should open all its borders for the poor people of Africa to come in, and the USA its own for the Latin Americans and the Cubans.

How does allowing settlers to stay in Cyprus affect anyones human rights, if the issue of property is dealt with. Exactly how are human rights infinged by allow a poor Turk from eastern Turkey to remain in Cyprus (not in someone elses property) to seek a better life for themselves and their famaily. Or is is a human right to not have to see or live in the same country as poor, uneducated people who obviosuly will be law breakers? The comaprsion with Europe and the USA would be more accurate if you suggested that they should expell existing immigrants. There are elements within EU ans USA that propose such measure and thankfully they are regarded as 'exteremists' on the whole. The issue of who you let in and what you do once they have been let in are sperate issues.

I understand that you consider their entry illegal. There are valid grounds to do so. However I stress once again that even though their entry can be considered illegal, they were not the perpetrators of that crime (unlike illegal immigrants who 'sneak' into a country. Is it really then fair to punish these people for that illegality? Should those who perpetrated the crime not be the ones to be punished, following some sort of prosecution?