Cyprus-Forum.com

[insan]

Then these settlers have all the right to demolish whatever investment they made for GC properties. For instance if they have planted 100 olive trees on an empty GC land, they have the right to cut them all down before returning the land to its original owner. Also all houses built by settlers on GC land should be demolished before returning the land. Or would it be better to grant them to the original owners as a gift of past 30 years for the sake of unification?

[Alexandros Lordos]

There are so many rumours about the number of settlers. Let's assume their number is 80.000 together with their spouses and descendants. Can we assume them as 15.000 families with 3.5 children each? Ok.

According to my estimation, 13.000-14.000 settler families have been occupaying houses belong to GCs. Most probably, the agricaltural land they were given in North should be proportionate to their population, particularly in Karpasia district that there are several pure settler villages.


What about their first generation descendants who came to Cyprus when they were child or teenagers?

My estimation of their numbers is that they constitute 1000-2000 families.
It is highly probable that most of them built their own houses on GC land.

First of all, these settlers have nothing equivelant in South to exchange.

What kind of future is waiting these settlers?

What percentage of these settlers considerably invested the houses and lands they occupy?

I think those who considerably invested the GC properties wouldn't want to return them unless they are paid the compensation of what they invested. So what can they do? Most of them wouldn't be able to buy those properties. Perhaps most of them could afford to rent or lease the properties they considerably invested. Let's say 1000-2000 families who considerably invested the GC properties in last 20-30 years decided to restitute the properties to the original owners. Who will pay their compensation of the investment they have made? Original owners of the properties or Turkey?


What is your opinions about the settlers issue? How can it be solved humanely and without creating tensions?

Hmm, I see the various problems here Insan, in fact I am surprised that the majority of settlers voted Yes at the referendum.

Maybe they were hoping on getting EU citizenship, and then emigrating to someplace within the EU.

Or maybe they were relying on the very strict restitution laws of the Annan Plan and the workings of the Property Board - according to which, many GC properties in the north would be offered for sale in the free market for very low prices, and GCs would be banned from purchasing.

So in effect, settlers would have been able to buy very cheap GC properties, and then have their own legal "freehold". This, you might understand, is unacceptable to GCs ...

Basically, the situation is deadlocked here, because any solution that DOES NOT involve GC property falling in settler hands would mean that the settlers will have no place to go, whereas any situation that DOES involve GC property falling in settler hands is totally unacceptable to GCs ...

The only humane (or at least relatively humane) solution that I can think of is:

All settlers who remain are built new homes, at the expense of Turkey. The way this would work in practice, is that in the first three-five years each settler (who is on the 45.000 list) will have to decide if he will stay in Cyprus or emigrate abroad (Turkey, EU, or US). If he chooses to emigrate, perhaps there can be a monetary compensation for him as well. If instead he chooses to stay then a new home should be built for him, on land that is NOT of original Greek Cypriot ownership. (e.g. state owned land, evkaf land if the evkaf is willing to make a donation, TC land that the constituent state will buy).

(It is important to note at this point that Settlers MUST NOT end up in GC properties, whatever the mechanism that might get them there is. The moment we have one settler staying in a GC home, we can be assured of a resounding GC No in a second referendum. For this reason, Turkcyp's suggestion that settlers should be able to buy the property he is staying in is not acceptable, unless of course such a transaction is voluntarily agreed by the original owner.)

The cost for compensating settlers and housing settlers should, in my opinion, be borne exclusively by Turkey. At this point also, I disagree with Turkcyp who says it is not a state's business "to pay for the choices of immigrants". Turkey was following a deliberate policy of attracting its citizens to go and live in Cyprus, in order to "fill up the empty houses" and "strengthen the Turkish element in Cyprus". It is therefore wrong to just call these people "immigrants", and treat them as such. Calling them "immigrants" does not make their life any easier, in fact it adds a burden of responsibility on their backs that they cannot bear, and totally absolves Turkey of any and all responsibilities.

[insan]

All settlers who remain are built new homes, at the expense of Turkey. The way this would work in practice, is that in the first three-five years each settler (who is on the 45.000 list) will have to decide if he will stay in Cyprus or emigrate abroad (Turkey, EU, or US). If he chooses to emigrate, perhaps there can be a monetary compensation for him as well. If instead he chooses to stay then a new home should be built for him, on land that is NOT of original Greek Cypriot ownership. (e.g. state owned land, evkaf land if the evkaf is willing to make a donation, TC land that the constituent state will buy).

I agree with you, Alexandros. This is clearly one of the Turkey's biggest faults. She has to pay for it and if TCs wish to share the resbonsibility and the cost, they can do so. We can't expect GCs to also share the responsibility and the cost.

[MicAtCyp]

All I can say is that when the target of one side for 30 years is to create 2 completely separate states and not to unify the country, these are the results. Tens of extremely difficult problems to solve. And where the only solution possible, would require compromises upon compromises of the other side.

Cannedmoose described briefly but quite well how the problem can be solved. On the other hand we are faced with a new problem.Will Turkey accept any responsibility?

Now on Insans comment that not many people would like to discuss this problem, I think the reason is because -at least for us the GCs- we don't know many things about them.Their number, their economic status, how many years each group of them is staying here etc etc. All these are vague to us. We are also concerned about their mentality. We hear that most of them are backwards and hostile, then from TC friends in hear we hear most of them got assimilated with the TCs.

Now about the Pontian Greeks. Their difference with the settlers is they were never given any properties, they don't have any political rights, and ALL of them are mainland Greek citizens having a Greek passport.Almost all of them live on rent, and some of them under miserable conditions sleeping on the floor etc.They have a high percentage of heroin addicts, and a ωερυ high percentage of alcoholics. And many of them have noticeable different ethics compared to the GCs. Very few insurance companies accept to issue them car insurance -it is almost guaranteed they will cause a car accident-and those who do charge them 4 times the price....

[MicAtCyp]

Alex also presented an excellent proposal in addition to that of Cannedmoose.
All propsals so far take into account the responsibility of Turkey.

So may I repeat my original question? Do you think Turkey will accept any responsibility?

[brother]

Will the GC administration take responsibility for the tc homes that they have knocked down, will they give compensation so we can build new homes on our lands that they destroyed?

[Viewpoint]

Do 45.000 Turks = 40.000 Pontians???????

[turkcyp]

For this reason, Turkcyp's suggestion that settlers should be able to buy the property he is staying in is not acceptable, unless of course such a transaction is voluntarily agreed by the original owner.)

My proposal involves voluntary sale of property. No GC will be forced to sell its property to settler. But if they decide to not settle in north then the priority should be given to settlers in buying the property at appropriate market prices in which the seller GC does not suffer to a loss because the priority id given to settler. I hope this is clearer.

In general I believe everybody should take responsibility for their actions. If you are given a free property in 70’s you should have guessed that there is no such thing as free lunch. If you didn’t then it is your fault. (The same thinh I have said it to “mom” when she lost couple of thousand pounds in the banking crises some years ago. “If you do not realize that a bank offering you %15 interest rate on pound is a very risky bank, and willing to take free lunch, then you should be ready to accepts the suffering as well, which was loss of money in her case.)

The cost for compensating settlers and housing settlers should, in my opinion, be borne exclusively by Turkey. At this point also, I disagree with Turkcyp who says it is not a state's business "to pay for the choices of immigrants". Turkey was following a deliberate policy of attracting its citizens to go and live in Cyprus, in order to "fill up the empty houses" and "strengthen the Turkish element in Cyprus". It is therefore wrong to just call these people "immigrants", and treat them as such. Calling them "immigrants" does not make their life any easier, in fact it adds a burden of responsibility on their backs that they cannot bear, and totally absolves Turkey of any and all responsibilities.

In this instance I again disagree. Nobody in Turkey had told these people that you guys have to migrate to Cyprus. Nobody put a gun to their had either. There were encouragement given by the state but they did not have to move to Cyprus. Think it as getting “unfair subsidies” from government then turning and suing government when the “unfair subsidies” are eliminated.

The only fact remains is this. These settlers all benefited from the situation and the policies of government back then were making them better of if they immigrate so they did. Now they can not turn back and ask money from government for cancellation of their unfair subsidy.

They are given an opportunity to stay on the island as equal citizens or turn back to Turkey to their previous life again with the Turkish citizenship they have never lost. That should be more than enough for them. If they decide to stay they can live by renting, buy another house, or try to buy the property they are already living in from GC owner if she/he is willing to sell.

They were given free lunch and now that free lunch has stopped they are still expecting the government to give them something in return of free lunch.

Quite honestly in my mind they should even rank lower than foreigners. Because TCs has left something in south so they have paid the price, foreigners come here and pay money to buy the land and property so they have paid the price, but settlers they did not have any price. It’s time they should start paying for their lunches like everybody else.

But having said that, I totally support that they should be given citizenship and stay on the island if they decide to stay, and at the same time they should be helped in easing the pain on making this transition. But the onus of the burden should be on them not any other government.

Take care,

[insan]

But having said that, I totally support that they should be given citizenship and stay on the island if they decide to stay, and at the same time they should be helped in easing the pain on making this transition. But the onus of the burden should be on them not any other government

I think this is the best way to solve the settlers problem. They should be given a chance to fulfill their civic obligations like all other citizens of Cyprus. They also should be given public assistance to overcome the economic difficulties. The ones who fulfill their civic obligations stay, others go.

[MicAtCyp]

Quite honestly in my mind they should even rank lower than foreigners. Because TCs has left something in south so they have paid the price, foreigners come here and pay money to buy the land and property so they have paid the price, but settlers they did not have any price. It’s time they should start paying for their lunches like everybody else.

Now I am going to make the advocate of the devil here in supporting the settlers.And what if they are financially unable to pay any price at all? Should we throw them in the streets? Those who will eventually stay aren’t human beings? Or you think we can afford solving the problem with the GCs and the TCs and have a new problem of discrimination Vs the settlers.In my opinion someone has to accept the responsibility for those who are completely unable to "pay the price" and who else other than Turkey must do that?

In my mind the majority of the settlers are so poor that they fall in this category that I described above. But again perhaps I am wrong, we GCs don't know much about the settlers just hearsay things. Can you enlighten us on this matter, I mean just about how many of the setlers are at the near poverty level, how many on average and how many are really rich?