Cyprus-Forum.com

[Get Real!]

Is the KKTC a pseudo state? (Article by ATA ATUN)

http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/yazar ... rno=114869

Here's just a small section of the "Montevideo Criteria of Statehood" in which I highlight major problem areas that our friend ATA ATUN has totally ignored in his article...

B. Montevideo Criteria of Statehood

The Montevideo Convention may be the most well-known list of characteristics needed for statehood.[176] The Montevideo Convention requires that a new state have a permanent population, a defined territory, a government, and the capacity to enter into relations with other states.[177] The criteria of the Convention have been described as the accepted view of statehood,[178] the traditional criteria for statehood,[179] and the only serious attempt at a definition of statehood.[180] Many other noted scholars use the Montevideo criteria when trying to define a state but do not directly cite the Montevideo Convention.[181]

*283 Although widely accepted, scholars such as Ian Brownlie believe the Montevideo criteria only provide a starting point for the definition of statehood that requires further investigation and criteria.[182] Some scholars add territorial effectiveness as an additional criterion.[183] Other criteria cited are a degree of state permanence, a willingness to obey international law, a degree of civilization, recognition by other states, legal order, and the declaration by the entity that they wish to be a state.[184] Still others would add the requirements of being a free agent in the world and having a permanently organized political society.[185] The Restatement of the Law, Third, Foreign Relations Law of the United States has the exact criteria as the Montevideo with the additional requirement that the entity in question must claim to be a state.[186] These additional requirements are useful in that they help to clarify the Montevideo criteria for statehood. However, the Montevideo criteria are the most widely accepted[187] and are the ones that will be applied to determine whether or not an entity is a state.

http://www.uniset.ca/microstates/10TLSJCIL261.htm

The criteria just keeps going but I don't think we need to dwell in it any further so our friend ATA ATUN should just go back to growing potatoes...

* Ata Atun has been directed here to this thread in case he wants to counter it.

[humanist]

Fat chance, GR ....... he is too busy growing potatos ROTFL (rolling on the floor laughing).

[Pyrpolizer]

Is the KKTC a pseudo state? (Article by ATA ATUN)

http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/yazar ... rno=114869

Here's just a small section of the "Montevideo Criteria of Statehood" in which I highlight major problem areas that our friend ATA ATUN has totally ignored in his article...

B. Montevideo Criteria of Statehood

The Montevideo Convention may be the most well-known list of characteristics needed for statehood.[176] The Montevideo Convention requires that a new state have a permanent population, a defined territory, a government, and the capacity to enter into relations with other states.[177] The criteria of the Convention have been described as the accepted view of statehood,[178] the traditional criteria for statehood,[179] and the only serious attempt at a definition of statehood.[180] Many other noted scholars use the Montevideo criteria when trying to define a state but do not directly cite the Montevideo Convention.[181]

*283 Although widely accepted, scholars such as Ian Brownlie believe the Montevideo criteria only provide a starting point for the definition of statehood that requires further investigation and criteria.[182] Some scholars add territorial effectiveness as an additional criterion.[183] Other criteria cited are a degree of state permanence, a willingness to obey international law, a degree of civilization, recognition by other states, legal order, and the declaration by the entity that they wish to be a state.[184] Still others would add the requirements of being a free agent in the world and having a permanently organized political society.[185] The Restatement of the Law, Third, Foreign Relations Law of the United States has the exact criteria as the Montevideo with the additional requirement that the entity in question must claim to be a state.[186] These additional requirements are useful in that they help to clarify the Montevideo criteria for statehood. However, the Montevideo criteria are the most widely accepted[187] and are the ones that will be applied to determine whether or not an entity is a state.

http://www.uniset.ca/microstates/10TLSJCIL261.htm

The criteria just keeps going but I don't think we need to dwell in it any further so our friend ATA ATUN should just go back to growing potatoes...

* Ata Atun has been directed here to this thread in case he wants to counter it.

I guess you credit this propagandist with too much common sense GR! Why should we bother for someone who just writes stupid monologues, for even more stupid audience, in a newspaper??

Let the TCs in this forum bother support any of his nonsense...

[phoenix]

Ohhh nooohh

Would my new state of Pangaia not be recognized then?

Pip pip
Phoenix

[utu]

Thank you, GR for pointing me to this thread.

In any case, the Montevideo Convention is an accepted piece of international law. If indeed the TRNC - by it's 1983 UDI - meets the convention's criteria, then it is a state, recognized or not. Still, given the political realities in today's world, the convention is simply not enough for TRNC, particularly with the presence of a large number of foreign troops on its territory. Despite the rationale for their presence, the Turkish Forces are - by their very presence in such numbers - doing more to retard TRNC's case for recognition than helping. So, despite the democratic nature of the TRNC government (and yes, I know you folk out there don't like me giving titles without speech marks), 40,000 troops - no matter how benign their presence - is giving a clear impression to the outside world of the TRNC being nothing more than a puppet state, and that is detrimental to its people.

[zan]

Thank you, GR for pointing me to this thread.

In any case, the Montevideo Convention is an accepted piece of international law. If indeed the TRNC - by it's 1983 UDI - meets the convention's criteria, then it is a state, recognized or not. Still, given the political realities in today's world, the convention is simply not enough for TRNC, particularly with the presence of a large number of foreign troops on its territory. Despite the rationale for their presence, the Turkish Forces are - by their very presence in such numbers - doing more to retard TRNC's case for recognition than helping. So, despite the democratic nature of the TRNC government (and yes, I know you folk out there don't like me giving titles without speech marks), 40,000 troops - no matter how benign their presence - is giving a clear impression to the outside world of the TRNC being nothing more than a puppet state, and that is detrimental to its people.

The alternative has to be equated for as well utu......That is just one side of it. Do the TCs want them there and for how long is also an effective answer to the question. Makarios asked for help...He got it.

[Piratis]

utu, do you know what democracy means?

The people of Cyprus, including the northern part of Cyprus, are made by 82% GCs and 18% TCs. So when northern Cyprus is now ruled (illegally and by force) by just that 18%, without any regard to the rights and desires of the great majority of the population, then how can you call that democratic???

The pseudo state is called pseudo state for the simple reason that it is not a state all, apart from the title that the Turks give to it. What it is, is just the occupied part of Cyprus, where the Turks, along with the small minority of TCs, illegally and forcefully rule, against the rights and desires of the Cypriot people.

Democracy would mean to allow the Cypriot people to freely and democratically rule their own island. Not to ethnically cleanse the great majority of them, replace them with foreign Settlers, and then call the result "democratic".

If it was like that then a dictator could simply ethnically cleanse everybody that questioned his authority, and then be "democratically" elected by his sympathizers.

So no, the "trnc" is not a state, and it is not democratic either. It is an illegally occupied territory of Cyprus, where the invaders rule along with their sympathizers, while the great majority of Cypriots have no say.

[zan]

utu, do you know what democracy means?

The people of Cyprus, including the northern part of Cyprus, are made by 82% GCs and 18% TCs. So when northern Cyprus is now ruled (illegally and by force) by just that 18%, without any regard to the rights and desires of the great majority of the population, then how can you call that democratic???

The pseudo state is called pseudo state for the simple reason that it is not a state all, apart from the title that the Turks give to it. What it is, is just the occupied part of Cyprus, where the Turks, along with the small minority of TCs, illegally and forcefully rule, against the rights and desires of the Cypriot people.

Democracy would mean to allow the Cypriot people to freely and democratically rule their own island. Not to ethnically cleanse the great majority of them, replace them with foreign Settlers, and then call the result "democratic".

If it was like that then a dictator could simply ethnically cleanse everybody that questioned his authority, and then be "democratically" elected by his sympathizers.

So no, the "trnc" is not a state, and it is not democratic either. It is an illegally occupied territory of Cyprus, where the invaders rule along with their sympathizers, while the great majority of Cypriots have no say.

As I have said a thousand times and will again...It worked for the "RoC" so..................

[Kifeas]

From the moment a “state” is based on aggression, ethnic cleansing, deliberate colonization, usurpation and theft; neither Montevideo criteria nor Rio de Janeiro carnival parades can change the fact of its illegitimacy and consequently the impossibility of its legalization and recognition as a subject of international law! All the rest, be it from jackass Ata Atun or the fools of this forum, is nothing more than plain “aerogamies” (“fuck-the wind aerobics!”) If the Turks believe they have a case on the basis on the so-called Montevideo criteria, the road is open to go and get a resolution from the UN, or a verdict from the ICJ!

[Kifeas]

Thank you, GR for pointing me to this thread.

In any case, the Montevideo Convention is an accepted piece of international law. If indeed the TRNC - by it's 1983 UDI - meets the convention's criteria, then it is a state, recognized or not. Still, given the political realities in today's world, the convention is simply not enough for TRNC, particularly with the presence of a large number of foreign troops on its territory. Despite the rationale for their presence, the Turkish Forces are - by their very presence in such numbers - doing more to retard TRNC's case for recognition than helping. So, despite the democratic nature of the TRNC government (and yes, I know you folk out there don't like me giving titles without speech marks), 40,000 troops - no matter how benign their presence - is giving a clear impression to the outside world of the TRNC being nothing more than a puppet state, and that is detrimental to its people.

Utu, lets face it! You have a better chance of a case, if instead you refer to the Rio carnival requirements, rather than the "Montevideo criteria!"