The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content


"Kofi Kikapu's peace solution for Cyprus"....

Propose and discuss specific solutions to aspects of the Cyprus Problem

Postby Viewpoint » Thu Aug 16, 2007 10:42 pm

Nikitas
The reason no one talks about Enosis anymore is because it has become irrelevant.


How do you know its not under the surface where you cannot detect it as soon as GC obtain control of the island due to their numerical advantage this ideology will return, how will you stop it? This is exactly why we need safeguards to ensure no community forces its will on the other.

Things have changed both in Greece and Cyprus and the rest of the world too.


Sure...Iraq...Rwanda...Serbia...Montenegro...Bosnia....Israel...Palestine... plenty of examples.

No one on the Greek side talks about taking over the whole of the island. Whenever you drive through areas formerly occupied byt Turkish Cypriots people will stress that the properties are "Turkika". No mosque has been turned into a church. There has been no practice of obliterating evidence of the Turkish presence of the past.


The GCs today claim they represent the whole island,,,yes or no? then if they claim this then they cannot go against this claim by changing street names, or stop medical care or passports. Just for one moment think about the international backlash and the prestige the "RoC" would lose. If given the opportunity they would convert all Turkish names to Greek ones over night. We on the other hand do not claim to represent you, we have our own constitution.

As for unity with Greece, you have it totally wrong. I have been living in Greece for over 30 years and I need a residence permit just like all other foreigners. So do the children who were born here. Cypriots here do not vote and are legally no different than other aliens. The notion that the EU unifies countries in the way Enosis was meant to unite Greece with Cyprus is just not true.


Indirectly you have achieved enosis through the EU together with 23 other states. Do you deny this fact?

The obliteration of any sign that Greeks once lived in the north is interpreted as exrpessing an identity that was denied to you. How is the erasing of the word Greek from the tourist brochure on Salamis, or Lapithos, an expression of your identity? That assertion realy beats me! What we do perceive from these practices in the north is exclusion through obliteration and no one wants to risk that happening in any other part of the island.




Like it or not, recognized or not this is the TRNC where we do not claim to be the "RoC" or respresent GCs...so we do what we TCs want, not very sifficult to understand, yet you appear to having great difficulty, maybe you are in denial and do not want to see or accept the reality before you.
User avatar
Viewpoint
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 25211
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 2:48 pm
Location: Nicosia/Lefkosa

Postby zan » Thu Aug 16, 2007 10:59 pm

Viewpoint wrote:
zan wrote:You really are flogging a dead horse and then shouting at those around you who telling you that you are mad. The reason that I say that is because you are so mixed up and have forgotten all that has happened in Cyprus during your life time. When I vote in the UK I have nothing to compare but policies. They did not not try to kill me and my family. They are not holding my people under siege. We do not have a divided nation of which I was once a part. You insult every one of us with these comparisons in which you refuse to accept that we have a completely different situation to the UK or to wherever we were driven to by murdering genocidal thugs. You have no respect for our history and therefore you have concocted a recipe from ingredients that are not indigenous to our region. What the hell is the matter with you. :roll: :evil:


Great post my friend, you hit the nail right on the head.


Thanks VP but I know whose head it should be hit into :roll: :lol:
User avatar
zan
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 16213
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 8:55 pm

Postby zan » Thu Aug 16, 2007 11:07 pm

Kikapu wrote:
zan wrote:OK! :? So we are going to learn from the past but ignore the past so that we do not make the same mistakes again....Have the Three Stooges heard that one before???


Now to get on to the great Kifeas plan......

Just think about it for one minute...Is that not the same as giving both parties a veto. What will happen is one side will vote for GC rights and the other TC rights and STILL nothing will get done. Can you not see that. This is why I say separate states will run their own affairs.
On the; why don't I right my own plan....I am not qualified. I don't know much about art but I know what I like...... :wink:

I am not qualified. You are not qualified and Kifeas is not qualified. Not with ideas like that anyway.


Well of course I see that. The only difference is, that the number of members in the Parliament is proportional to the each community, and it is fair and Democratic, rather than insisting on a 50-50 which is not getting us anywhere. As you very smartly figured out, the TC's still have a VETO if they all decide against a certain law, but guess what, you have 20 members making a decision for the TC's and not just one vice President. The more players you have there's more chance on a give and take rather than between two men, the President and a Vice president.

I'm glad you have finally grasped the basic concepts of Democracy. :wink: :wink: (being sarcastic)

There's hope for us all yet. :lol: :lol:

So as you can see, Kifeas has put in Safeguards for the TC's, that you and VP has been asking for.

Is this not correct.??

So, no more excuses please. :D :D



There is no difference to giving us 50-50 than this concoction Kiks. The point was that you say one will not work and advocate another when they are equal in status. Do you think by having just a president voting that he can vote what he likes or does he have to have a majority of his party and countrymen's agreement.

You are tying yourself up in notts ( :wink: ) here mate. If one will not work then nor will the other. If that is the case then welcome to the world of partition..you partitionist you..... :shock: :lol:


So to recap, in case you did not get what I was saying above...We, the TCs were given too much power in 1960 and that is why the system did not work but you have redesigned the wheel and are giving us back the same power and are convinced that it will work and are now calling it democratic.....Clear as mud!
User avatar
zan
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 16213
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 8:55 pm

Postby Nikitas » Fri Aug 17, 2007 9:08 am

Viewpoint,

I read your response several times. You are stuck on things that are really no longer valid.

Some years ago the Greek parliament in Athens had an open debate on Cyprus. It was an interesting review of past policies and at some point in the 60s the idea of Enosis was actively pursued, that much was stated on record.

Today the policy is different, it is based on the principle that Cyprus (the RoC to you) decides and Greece simply supports. In other words Greece has managed to get rid of the Cyprus problem in a politcally painless way. Entry into the EU has allowed Greece to reinforce this "achievement". In effect Greece is glad to be rid of Cyprus.

Your explanation about the obliteration of all signs that Greeks once lived in the north is not convincing. Read your tourist information leaflets and see what I mean. There is a great deal of effort made to avoid using the word Greek, even when referring to obviously Greek areas like Salamis and other classical sites. In the case of Salamis the web site goes to the ridiculous extent of saying it was founded by Evagoras ( a Greek) but the city is Roman!


You say that the RoC claims to represent the whole island. Till a solution is worked out that is the way things are, a unitary state with one personality recognised by the UN. But you miss my point. Moving around in the RoC does not feel like being in Greece. This much you can test for yourself. Moving around in the north of Cyprus feels very much like being in Turkey. If anyone united part of the island with a foreign country then obviously it was not the Greeks.

Like most people in this forum you too forget that from July 15 1974 till July 20 there was fierce fighting between Greeks in Cyprus. The Greek Cypriots were resisting the take over by the mainlanders and their local allies. So some people actively opposed Enosis because unlike the Turkish Cypriots they did not want to become just another district of a another nation. There is a vast difference between being free from Greek Cypriots and being suservients to Turkey. The two do not have to go together.

You insist that you cannot be represented by the RoC. Is that the official position of the Turkish Cypriot community? Judging by the response to the oil exploration rights and the defense agreement with France it seems that it is not. The Turkish side was quick to remind us that they have a claim in the oil, and a say in the international agreements that the RoC signs. At some point, if you insist on this two state thing you got to prove you believe it yourselves, otherwise you cannot convince anyone that your aim is not to be "exclusive masters of the north and partners in the south".

Are you people really ready to accept the full extent of two truly independent states and all the ramifications of such a situation? Can you live behind an international frontier while the other side is free to enter into agreements and partnerships with other states at will? In other words are you willing to let the RoC be totally free if you have your state? The evidence so far does not support this view.
Nikitas
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 7396
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 2:49 pm

Postby Kikapu » Fri Aug 17, 2007 11:31 am

zan wrote:
Kikapu wrote:
zan wrote:OK! :? So we are going to learn from the past but ignore the past so that we do not make the same mistakes again....Have the Three Stooges heard that one before???


Now to get on to the great Kifeas plan......

Just think about it for one minute...Is that not the same as giving both parties a veto. What will happen is one side will vote for GC rights and the other TC rights and STILL nothing will get done. Can you not see that. This is why I say separate states will run their own affairs.
On the; why don't I right my own plan....I am not qualified. I don't know much about art but I know what I like...... :wink:

I am not qualified. You are not qualified and Kifeas is not qualified. Not with ideas like that anyway.


Well of course I see that. The only difference is, that the number of members in the Parliament is proportional to the each community, and it is fair and Democratic, rather than insisting on a 50-50 which is not getting us anywhere. As you very smartly figured out, the TC's still have a VETO if they all decide against a certain law, but guess what, you have 20 members making a decision for the TC's and not just one vice President. The more players you have there's more chance on a give and take rather than between two men, the President and a Vice president.

I'm glad you have finally grasped the basic concepts of Democracy. :wink: :wink: (being sarcastic)

There's hope for us all yet. :lol: :lol:

So as you can see, Kifeas has put in Safeguards for the TC's, that you and VP has been asking for.

Is this not correct.??

So, no more excuses please. :D :D



There is no difference to giving us 50-50 than this concoction Kiks. The point was that you say one will not work and advocate another when they are equal in status. Do you think by having just a president voting that he can vote what he likes or does he have to have a majority of his party and countrymen's agreement.

You are tying yourself up in notts ( :wink: ) here mate. If one will not work then nor will the other. If that is the case then welcome to the world of partition..you partitionist you..... :shock: :lol:



So to recap, in case you did not get what I was saying above...We, the TCs were given too much power in 1960 and that is why the system did not work but you have redesigned the wheel and are giving us back the same power and are convinced that it will work and are now calling it democratic.....Clear as mud!


Zan,

OK wise guy, since you and VP are so anti solution along the plan I presented, and since you both want a Turkish run state in the North, and are willing to let GC's come and live there under your rules, then I assume you're also going to be giving them regardless what ever number of GC's are in the Northern State, 50% percent of power sharing, so that the GC's get to control their own future.?? If the answer is NO, then I can see the status que continuing with the isolation and a de facto State. But VP predicts that the "TRNC" will become recognised in 10 years time. There you go Zan, just hang in there and all the problems for the TC's and the "TRNC" will all go away in about 10 years, just as it has for Israel after taking over Palestinian land in 1948. Sarcasm intended. I believe the phrase used by Nikitas " you want to be Masters of the North, and Partners in the South" seems to be very true with all the Partitionist. Talk about being "Double Faced".
User avatar
Kikapu
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 13540
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 6:18 pm

Postby Viewpoint » Fri Aug 17, 2007 1:05 pm

Nikitas
I read your response several times. You are stuck on things that are really no longer valid.


What are those "things" be exactly?

Some years ago the Greek parliament in Athens had an open debate on Cyprus. It was an interesting review of past policies and at some point in the 60s the idea of Enosis was actively pursued, that much was stated on record.

Today the policy is different, it is based on the principle that Cyprus (the RoC to you) decides and Greece simply supports. In other words Greece has managed to get rid of the Cyprus problem in a politcally painless way. Entry into the EU has allowed Greece to reinforce this "achievement". In effect Greece is glad to be rid of Cyprus.


Is that why you have constant meetings every time a major decision is to be taken? or you have a Military pact agreement? or that according to 1960 agreements they are still guarantors just like Turkey. You will have hard time convincing anyone that you have parted ways as you contradict yourself by stating that you are now joined at the hip via the EU..so in reality you have achieved enosis of sorts indirectly.

Your explanation about the obliteration of all signs that Greeks once lived in the north is not convincing. Read your tourist information leaflets and see what I mean. There is a great deal of effort made to avoid using the word Greek, even when referring to obviously Greek areas like Salamis and other classical sites. In the case of Salamis the web site goes to the ridiculous extent of saying it was founded by Evagoras ( a Greek) but the city is Roman!



If you have not noticed we are not Greek and therefore have problems pronouncing many Greek names.. London was once Londinium ....Istanbul was once Constantinople...times change and so can names this nothing unusual. In the remote possibility of ever uniting we can agree to apply both names, are you happy now?

You say that the RoC claims to represent the whole island. Till a solution is worked out that is the way things are, a unitary state with one personality recognised by the UN. But you miss my point. Moving around in the RoC does not feel like being in Greece. This much you can test for yourself. Moving around in the north of Cyprus feels very much like being in Turkey. If anyone united part of the island with a foreign country then obviously it was not the Greeks.



You may be blind to the fact that the TRNC physically exists but I am not I live and breath it. For me as a TC the "RoC" is a GC state run by GCs for GCs and does not include any of my elected leaders, not do I pay tax to that state or claim any benefits. For me the south is not my country the TRNC is, this is very natural has we have been living divided for over 44 years.

I have been to Athens and the south is very similar but what does this prove we share many common factors so this is a natural evolution.

Like most people in this forum you too forget that from July 15 1974 till July 20 there was fierce fighting between Greeks in Cyprus. The Greek Cypriots were resisting the take over by the mainlanders and their local allies. So some people actively opposed Enosis because unlike the Turkish Cypriots they did not want to become just another district of a another nation. There is a vast difference between being free from Greek Cypriots and being suservients to Turkey. The two do not have to go together.


I look at the 1960 agreements as a point in time when we had the opportunity to build one Cypriot people but we lost that chance. The TCs are stuck between choosing on the grounds of history which is in the GC case the period between 1960 to 1974 and Turkey 1974 to date...well I am sure even you can see which has been better times for TCs. Without safeguards to ensure no GC domination and being reduced to just another minority like the Indians in the UK then this problem will be around for many years to come. You have to comprehend that we are 2 equal partners and that one cannot force the other to do anything like in the past.

You insist that you cannot be represented by the RoC. Is that the official position of the Turkish Cypriot community? Judging by the response to the oil exploration rights and the defense agreement with France it seems that it is not. The Turkish side was quick to remind us that they have a claim in the oil, and a say in the international agreements that the RoC signs. At some point, if you insist on this two state thing you got to prove you believe it yourselves, otherwise you cannot convince anyone that your aim is not to be "exclusive masters of the north and partners in the south".


I agree with you the TRNC should say nothing about the GC natural resources endeavours, the south seas are theirs and the north ours, simple as that. We should stand our ground as a separate state and respect our neighbours wishes.

Are you people really ready to accept the full extent of two truly independent states and all the ramifications of such a situation? Can you live behind an international frontier while the other side is free to enter into agreements and partnerships with other states at will? In other words are you willing to let the RoC be totally free if you have your state? The evidence so far does not support this view.


Totally agree. Let us go if you can and see the results. Let us have our own recognized state and you will see the progress change in the north. Even under your inhumane embargoes my community has survived and prospered much to your disappointment.
User avatar
Viewpoint
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 25211
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 2:48 pm
Location: Nicosia/Lefkosa

Postby Kifeas » Fri Aug 17, 2007 2:20 pm

Nikitas wrote:Viewpoint,

Your explanation about the obliteration of all signs that Greeks once lived in the north is not convincing. Read your tourist information leaflets and see what I mean. There is a great deal of effort made to avoid using the word Greek, even when referring to obviously Greek areas like Salamis and other classical sites. In the case of Salamis the web site goes to the ridiculous extent of saying it was founded by Evagoras ( a Greek) but the city is Roman!


It is called "Kemalist Scientific Historiovisionism," just like "Marxist-Leninist Scientific Socialism!"

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
User avatar
Kifeas
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 4927
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 10:19 am
Location: Lapithos, Kyrenia, now Pafos; Cyprus.

Postby zan » Fri Aug 17, 2007 3:21 pm

Kikapu wrote:
zan wrote:
Kikapu wrote:
zan wrote:OK! :? So we are going to learn from the past but ignore the past so that we do not make the same mistakes again....Have the Three Stooges heard that one before???


Now to get on to the great Kifeas plan......

Just think about it for one minute...Is that not the same as giving both parties a veto. What will happen is one side will vote for GC rights and the other TC rights and STILL nothing will get done. Can you not see that. This is why I say separate states will run their own affairs.
On the; why don't I right my own plan....I am not qualified. I don't know much about art but I know what I like...... :wink:

I am not qualified. You are not qualified and Kifeas is not qualified. Not with ideas like that anyway.


Well of course I see that. The only difference is, that the number of members in the Parliament is proportional to the each community, and it is fair and Democratic, rather than insisting on a 50-50 which is not getting us anywhere. As you very smartly figured out, the TC's still have a VETO if they all decide against a certain law, but guess what, you have 20 members making a decision for the TC's and not just one vice President. The more players you have there's more chance on a give and take rather than between two men, the President and a Vice president.

I'm glad you have finally grasped the basic concepts of Democracy. :wink: :wink: (being sarcastic)

There's hope for us all yet. :lol: :lol:

So as you can see, Kifeas has put in Safeguards for the TC's, that you and VP has been asking for.

Is this not correct.??

So, no more excuses please. :D :D



There is no difference to giving us 50-50 than this concoction Kiks. The point was that you say one will not work and advocate another when they are equal in status. Do you think by having just a president voting that he can vote what he likes or does he have to have a majority of his party and countrymen's agreement.

You are tying yourself up in notts ( :wink: ) here mate. If one will not work then nor will the other. If that is the case then welcome to the world of partition..you partitionist you..... :shock: :lol:



So to recap, in case you did not get what I was saying above...We, the TCs were given too much power in 1960 and that is why the system did not work but you have redesigned the wheel and are giving us back the same power and are convinced that it will work and are now calling it democratic.....Clear as mud!


Zan,

OK wise guy, since you and VP are so anti solution along the plan I presented, and since you both want a Turkish run state in the North, and are willing to let GC's come and live there under your rules, then I assume you're also going to be giving them regardless what ever number of GC's are in the Northern State, 50% percent of power sharing, so that the GC's get to control their own future.?? If the answer is NO, then I can see the status que continuing with the isolation and a de facto State. But VP predicts that the "TRNC" will become recognised in 10 years time. There you go Zan, just hang in there and all the problems for the TC's and the "TRNC" will all go away in about 10 years, just as it has for Israel after taking over Palestinian land in 1948. Sarcasm intended. I believe the phrase used by Nikitas " you want to be Masters of the North, and Partners in the South" seems to be very true with all the Partitionist. Talk about being "Double Faced".


I am not trying to be a wise guy Kiks just trying to point out the similarities of the two systems and the silliness behind trying to sell one and condemn the other...With a bit of humor of course. And in that same vein if I do not believe that one 50-50 system will work then why would I accept another.

As I have said to you before you took on the job and have come up against another brick wall. You have to be the one to get around it. Stop getting angry. Tell me where I am going wrong in my thinking that both systems are one and the same thing and that you said one of them would not work but the other will. It is you that have confused me as to what you want???
User avatar
zan
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 16213
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 8:55 pm

Postby Kikapu » Fri Aug 17, 2007 6:24 pm

zan wrote:
Kikapu wrote:
zan wrote:
Kikapu wrote:
zan wrote:OK! :? So we are going to learn from the past but ignore the past so that we do not make the same mistakes again....Have the Three Stooges heard that one before???


Now to get on to the great Kifeas plan......

Just think about it for one minute...Is that not the same as giving both parties a veto. What will happen is one side will vote for GC rights and the other TC rights and STILL nothing will get done. Can you not see that. This is why I say separate states will run their own affairs.
On the; why don't I right my own plan....I am not qualified. I don't know much about art but I know what I like...... :wink:

I am not qualified. You are not qualified and Kifeas is not qualified. Not with ideas like that anyway.


Well of course I see that. The only difference is, that the number of members in the Parliament is proportional to the each community, and it is fair and Democratic, rather than insisting on a 50-50 which is not getting us anywhere. As you very smartly figured out, the TC's still have a VETO if they all decide against a certain law, but guess what, you have 20 members making a decision for the TC's and not just one vice President. The more players you have there's more chance on a give and take rather than between two men, the President and a Vice president.

I'm glad you have finally grasped the basic concepts of Democracy. :wink: :wink: (being sarcastic)

There's hope for us all yet. :lol: :lol:

So as you can see, Kifeas has put in Safeguards for the TC's, that you and VP has been asking for.

Is this not correct.??

So, no more excuses please. :D :D



There is no difference to giving us 50-50 than this concoction Kiks. The point was that you say one will not work and advocate another when they are equal in status. Do you think by having just a president voting that he can vote what he likes or does he have to have a majority of his party and countrymen's agreement.

You are tying yourself up in notts ( :wink: ) here mate. If one will not work then nor will the other. If that is the case then welcome to the world of partition..you partitionist you..... :shock: :lol:



So to recap, in case you did not get what I was saying above...We, the TCs were given too much power in 1960 and that is why the system did not work but you have redesigned the wheel and are giving us back the same power and are convinced that it will work and are now calling it democratic.....Clear as mud!


Zan,

OK wise guy, since you and VP are so anti solution along the plan I presented, and since you both want a Turkish run state in the North, and are willing to let GC's come and live there under your rules, then I assume you're also going to be giving them regardless what ever number of GC's are in the Northern State, 50% percent of power sharing, so that the GC's get to control their own future.?? If the answer is NO, then I can see the status que continuing with the isolation and a de facto State. But VP predicts that the "TRNC" will become recognised in 10 years time. There you go Zan, just hang in there and all the problems for the TC's and the "TRNC" will all go away in about 10 years, just as it has for Israel after taking over Palestinian land in 1948. Sarcasm intended. I believe the phrase used by Nikitas " you want to be Masters of the North, and Partners in the South" seems to be very true with all the Partitionist. Talk about being "Double Faced".


I am not trying to be a wise guy Kiks just trying to point out the similarities of the two systems and the silliness behind trying to sell one and condemn the other...With a bit of humor of course. And in that same vein if I do not believe that one 50-50 system will work then why would I accept another.

As I have said to you before you took on the job and have come up against another brick wall. You have to be the one to get around it. Stop getting angry. Tell me where I am going wrong in my thinking that both systems are one and the same thing and that you said one of them would not work but the other will. It is you that have confused me as to what you want???


Zan,

Well, if you believe there is no difference, then why are you pushing for a 50-50 Power sharing as a means to give the TC's safeguards. Am I to understand from your statement, that since there is no difference from Kifeas's power sharing plan and the 50-50 that you want, you are just jerking us off with this claim as a smoke screen. In another words, the 50-50 power sharing is not the main issue for you, is it.??

But to get back to Kifeas's plan for a moment, although it gives the TC's all the Safeguards as your 50-50 plan, it also gives positions in the government in a 80-20 proportion, which will be the demand of the GC's to be fair and balanced. Do you think it is wrong to expect that by the GC's.?? So, if you think 50-50 is fair, then I don't know why you do not accept Kifeas's Plan, which actually "levels the playing field", to use VP's words.
User avatar
Kikapu
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 13540
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 6:18 pm

Postby Nikitas » Fri Aug 17, 2007 6:30 pm

Viewpoint,

The assertion that Greece has managed to be rid of the Cyprus problem is not my original thought, it was spoken by Mehmet Ali Birad on an interview on Greek TV and reiterated on CNN Turk translated into English by the Cyprus Information Office (if I remember the translation source). Like many others I happen to value Mehmed Ali Birad's opinion and conclusions on political matters even when I don't like them.

Nikitas
Nikitas
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 7396
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 2:49 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Cyprus Problem Solution Proposals

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests