Cyprus-Forum.com

[halil]

Makarios Droushiotis writing in Politis says that any developments in the Cyprus problem have been pushed forward to after the elections in the north, with talks on property probably taking place in May and a referendum by the end of the year. He says that the idea of an international conference chaired by Spain as EU President to be held before the elections has fallen by the wayside after Greek Cypriot reservations that any speedy talks would fail as they did in 2004.



Christofias' preference for the talks to proceed "slowly and steadily", has even been adopted by UN Special Envoy in Cyprus Alexander Downer, who said in an interview with Bayrak radio that a speedy solution could be catastrophic for Cyprus. He added that it would be far better to have a slow negotiated procedure that would result in a lasting solution rather than a speedy but fragile one.What concerns the UN above all is not just that the leaders reach an agreement and sign it, but that it be a solution that can be implemented and for this to happen it would need to have society behind it.



He says that the UN's change of attitude has been brought about by a number of internal developments which indicate that things are heading towards public opinion being primed to accept a solution. These include the publication of a leaflet on Federation; the gradual change of the rhetoric of both the government and Akel towards acknowledging that progress has been achieved; Christofias' reaching out to Disy; and Diko's remaining in government.



Any urgency that the UN has felt so far was mainly due to Eroglu's lead in the opinion polls in the north, but now the race seems open with Talat as possibly the favourite. He adds that although Turkey says it doesn't get involved in the elections in the north, everyone knows that it favours Talat so that the talks can continue. The fact that Tahsin Ertugruloglu has declared his candidacy after repeated visits to the Turkish capital and contacts with Erdogan and Gul, clearly shows that Turkey does not favour Eroglu.



He also recalls that during his recent meeting with Greek Cypriot journalists in Ankara, Erdogan had made it clear that the Cyprus problem remaining unsolved was a problem for the region as a whole and did not want to let this opportunity to go by. It was made clear that neither Christofias nor Talat were seen to be at fault for a lack of progress so far. When pressed to say why Turkey believed there was no progress, they were told: "Both the problem and its solution are on the island. Both leaders want a solution. Both the Greek and Turkish Prime Ministers want a solution, and the guarantor countires also want a solution. But the two leaders know what the problem is and who is blocking the solution".



The writer says that when Turkey says that the problem is in Cyprus, that the two leaders know it, and that they both want a solution, clearly he was referring to internal problems. The elections in the north will clarify things there. A Talat victory would be a vote of confidence for a solution. At the same time Christofias is finally seeking the support of Disy as a basic factor towards a solution.

[Acikgoz]

What I find confusing to this date is the premis for the negotiations working off of basic principles.

If another plan is put forward for unification, why cannot one be put forward also with a view to separation. If we have a BBF that works for TCs, it will mean a paradox in the EU nature of things. GCs have governed themselves very competently for decades now, why mess with that? TCs have only desired unification to end the isolation, else would rather go it alone, why not consider that?
I have real concerns that a forced solution - effectively what it would amount to given there are no options on the table except that things cannot continue as they are - can create real issues for both communities going forward.

I cannot help but feel the outide parties (onlookers/influencers) in a bid to finally move on from the disturbance caused by Cyprus believe this is the only viable option for the island as nothing else has been proposed as feasible.

I would think it healthy to have a second option of separation endorsed by both communities as also in the running for a referendum.

Being practical and seeing the various posts over the months on this site it strikes me as an obvious consideration. Another referendum, the limited option of settlement, the risk of this is all we have brought to the table so either a yes or a no.

I see real tangible benefits for both sides if a solution that alleviates trade and isolation as well as repatriation of properties for the majority. I do however also see significant risks given the ingrained animosity and partisanship that will play out in a small country setting. Would it not be wise to achieve the bulk of the benefits with partition and free borders and consider union at a time when the sustainability of brotherly relations outweigh the current dogma on the island?

[YFred]

What I find confusing to this date is the premis for the negotiations working off of basic principles.

If another plan is put forward for unification, why cannot one be put forward also with a view to separation. If we have a BBF that works for TCs, it will mean a paradox in the EU nature of things. GCs have governed themselves very competently for decades now, why mess with that? TCs have only desired unification to end the isolation, else would rather go it alone, why not consider that?
I have real concerns that a forced solution - effectively what it would amount to given there are no options on the table except that things cannot continue as they are - can create real issues for both communities going forward.

I cannot help but feel the outide parties (onlookers/influencers) in a bid to finally move on from the disturbance caused by Cyprus believe this is the only viable option for the island as nothing else has been proposed as feasible.

I would think it healthy to have a second option of separation endorsed by both communities as also in the running for a referendum.

Being practical and seeing the various posts over the months on this site it strikes me as an obvious consideration. Another referendum, the limited option of settlement, the risk of this is all we have brought to the table so either a yes or a no.

I see real tangible benefits for both sides if a solution that alleviates trade and isolation as well as repatriation of properties for the majority. I do however also see significant risks given the ingrained animosity and partisanship that will play out in a small country setting. Would it not be wise to achieve the bulk of the benefits with partition and free borders and consider union at a time when the sustainability of brotherly relations outweigh the current dogma on the island?

That's not a bad idea. It will force the GCs to choose between union and separation as opposed to union and status quo which favours them. That will put the cat amongst the pigeons as it were. I still think that TCs will vote for unification under BBF with security from Turkey.
Perhaps Eroglu will ask for that to be included. Talat will not ask for that.

[Kikapu]

What I find confusing to this date is the premis for the negotiations working off of basic principles.

If another plan is put forward for unification, why cannot one be put forward also with a view to separation. If we have a BBF that works for TCs, it will mean a paradox in the EU nature of things. GCs have governed themselves very competently for decades now, why mess with that? TCs have only desired unification to end the isolation, else would rather go it alone, why not consider that?
I have real concerns that a forced solution - effectively what it would amount to given there are no options on the table except that things cannot continue as they are - can create real issues for both communities going forward.

I cannot help but feel the outide parties (onlookers/influencers) in a bid to finally move on from the disturbance caused by Cyprus believe this is the only viable option for the island as nothing else has been proposed as feasible.

I would think it healthy to have a second option of separation endorsed by both communities as also in the running for a referendum.

Being practical and seeing the various posts over the months on this site it strikes me as an obvious consideration. Another referendum, the limited option of settlement, the risk of this is all we have brought to the table so either a yes or a no.

I see real tangible benefits for both sides if a solution that alleviates trade and isolation as well as repatriation of properties for the majority. I do however also see significant risks given the ingrained animosity and partisanship that will play out in a small country setting. Would it not be wise to achieve the bulk of the benefits with partition and free borders and consider union at a time when the sustainability of brotherly relations outweigh the current dogma on the island?

What you say would make sense if the north had been historically "Turkish" and the south historically "Greek", but they are not, so why should the majority of Cypriots accommodate the minority in getting a partition and in effect lose part of their country to a minority, and then try and unite at later stage as a Confederation with the land that the majority once lived in for generations. But not only that, now turn around and have the minority also dictate how the south should run upon agreeing to join together.. Now do you see why the majority does not talk about partition but only the minority of Cypriots do, or else, Annan Plan would have passed and you would have gotten your wish as you described in your above post.!

[Acikgoz]

Kiki, I am not talking in absolutes, right vs wrong, good vs evil, history or culture. Even your comment highlights the dilema as there will not and cannot be a 1 person 1 vote system in a unified Cyprus under a BBF system. Your focus on talking majority vs minority is an exact example of the frustrations that will grow.

I don't have a monetary or political agenda, I do know however where there are real snags in the system there will be problems and it doesn't take genius to figure that out. I see the dilema from Belgium to this day, and they are both at the centre of Europe, have the same principle religion etc. etc. and are a significantly larger country.

As I said, curious.

[Acikgoz]

Cyprus, getting the hang of Wonderland:
If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn’t. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn’t be. And what it wouldn’t be, it would. You see?
Alice.

[YFred]

Halil, has there been any polls done in the north since the second UBP candidate anounced he is standing?

[Kikapu]

Kiki, I am not talking in absolutes, right vs wrong, good vs evil, history or culture. Even your comment highlights the dilema as there will not and cannot be a 1 person 1 vote system in a unified Cyprus under a BBF system. Your focus on talking majority vs minority is an exact example of the frustrations that will grow.

I don't have a monetary or political agenda, I do know however where there are real snags in the system there will be problems and it doesn't take genius to figure that out. I see the dilema from Belgium to this day, and they are both at the centre of Europe, have the same principle religion etc. etc. and are a significantly larger country.

As I said, curious.

BBF as in True Federation, much like the states where the TCs will have the majority in the north if enough land is given back to the GCs to become part of the south state, there is no reason why there cannot be one man, one vote, given the fact that each state will have equal power in the upper house and with the rotating presidency, which in my view is gifted to the TCs, considering they being the numerical minority, but so be it in order to reach a settlement providing the presidents loyalties are with the Cypriots and Cyprus and not with the foreign powers. Providing of course, that the TC and the GC are both on the same ticket and are voted nationwide in a one man, one vote. 99% of the laws governing each state will come from each state themselves, therefore one man, one vote cannot be a threat to the numerical minority (TCs). What the TCs need to decide is, is it time to let go the Taksim Dream. Once that question has been answered honestly, then a settlement based on BBF with True Federation, Democracy, Human Rights and International Laws can be accomplished. If the Taksim dream is the goal, then you are right to seek for partition, but then don't be surprised if the majority Cypriots tell you to go and take a hike, since the status quo is a better option for them and worse for the numerical minority.!!

[halil]

Halil, has there been any polls done in the north since the second UBP candidate anounced he is standing?

I didn't hear.

`According the Party’s regulation and the Election and Referendum Law, Tahsin Ertugruloglu lost his membership of his party '

[DT.]

Halil, has there been any polls done in the north since the second UBP candidate anounced he is standing?

I didn't hear.

`According the Party’s regulation and the Election and Referendum Law, Tahsin Ertugruloglu lost his membership of his party '

just announced on CYBC news that Talat is ahead on the latest polls.