The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content


Positions of the Parties on Key Issues: What is better for u

How can we solve it? (keep it civilized)

Postby MicAtCyp » Fri Aug 27, 2004 9:01 am

Erol wrote: I do try and do this. Perhaps I do not do it very well but I do try. It is not made easier by 'absoloutist' statments and feeling a need to have to counter these but I try none the less.


I am glad for it Erol. Really.
User avatar
MicAtCyp
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1579
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2004 10:10 am

Postby insan » Fri Aug 27, 2004 10:46 am

So the 100% of GCs + 100% Armenians + 100% Latins + 100% Marnonites + 49% of TCs = 90% of Cypriots it is not a vast majority of Cypriots????



This means all christian community of Cyprus VS %51 of muslim community; in case of it is a result of referandum.

In Senate, it's same with the US federal system.

a) Some issues may need seperate simple majority vote of the senators of each communities + 2/3 combined majority vote of each communities House of representatives.

b) Some issues may need seperate 2/3 majority vote of the senators of each communities + 2/3 combined majority vote of each communities House of Representatives.

c) Some issues may need seperate extraordinary majority vote of both Senate and House of Representatives.

Only with this system a true partnership and governmental structure can be established in order to secure and satisfy both communities interests. I can't understand why you insist on TCs shouldn't have a say regarding all issues. Why? If Cyprus belongs all of us, we all should have the right to speak, discuss and vote for it.

Can you tell me what are those issues that you think should be under GCs monopole?

Economy? Tourism? Security? Agriculture? Culture and Education?

What's wrong with having the same sovereignity rights as federal constituent states of Cyprus and sharing the executive power proportionaly? Is it unfair?

What's wrong with having equal number of senators exactly donated with equal powers in central state? Is it unfair?


Majority = 50% + 1 vote from all Cypriots.
Vast majority depends on what you believe is "vast". Most said that the 76% "no" in the referendum was "vast". But as I showed you it is possible to have a super vast majority without even having a majority of TCs.


In Cyprus where GCs are outnumbered than TCs, majority cannot be considered %50 + 1 vote. You are trying to abuse the democrasy by being the outnumbered community. You know that there are two communities in Cyprus.


So except from the number difference, what is the difference between TCs and Maronites? (apart from what the TCs gained after 1960 using the power of Turkey).



What differences exist between GC community and Maronites; exactly the same differences exist TC community and Maronites. No matter what religion they have or what language they speak.


As I said before, the problem isn't being minority or majority...

The problems are:

1- Sharing the executive power proportionaly and the legislative power equally.

2- Settlers and the GC properties they occupy.

3- The limitations of right to have property and settlement of memebers of each community in constituent states.

4- Conditions of intervention and number of foreign troops.

5- Compensating the Cypriots who affected in 1963-2004 period due to loss of use.

I think Turkey, Greece, RoC and UK are the main responsibles of the losses of Cypriots and the loss of use compensations must be paid by themselves equally. If other countries would like to give a hand, they are welcome....

What do you think? I'm sure Piratis is against them all ;)

[/quote]
User avatar
insan
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 9037
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 11:33 pm
Location: Somewhere in ur network. ;]

Postby Piratis » Fri Aug 27, 2004 2:38 pm

In Cyprus where GCs are outnumbered than TCs, majority cannot be considered %50 + 1 vote. You are trying to abuse the democrasy by being the outnumbered community. You know that there are two communities in Cyprus.


I am not abusing anything. It is simple democracy. 50%+1 vote is majority.
If you want the minorities to have equal power with the majority, then why not give to the Latins, Maronites and Armenians an equal number also? So the senate can be made by 10 GC, 10 TC, 10 Latins, 10 Armenians and 10 Maronites.
If you don't like this, it simply means that you want to abuse democracy because you are numerically more than Latins, Maronites and Armenians. :wink:

What differences exist between GC community and Maronites; exactly the same differences exist TC community and Maronites. No matter what religion they have or what language they speak.

Thats what I am saying too. The only difference between GCs and Maronites, Latins, Armenians and TCs is that GCs are more.
User avatar
Piratis
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 12261
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 11:08 pm

Postby insan » Fri Aug 27, 2004 6:28 pm

If you want the minorities to have equal power with the majority, then why not give to the Latins, Maronites and Armenians an equal number also? So the senate can be made by 10 GC, 10 TC, 10 Latins, 10 Armenians and 10 Maronites.
If you don't like this, it simply means that you want to abuse democracy because you are numerically more than Latins, Maronites and Armenians.



If there were also some 130.000 Maronites, 150.000 Latins and 180.000 Armenians in Cyprus; they could equally participate in Senate too. The numbers are just for examples.. what I mean is that their population isn't sufficient to participate equally in Senate. This doesn't mean they can't be elected a senator of the constituent state they are a resident of... Even, in Senate; 5 or 6 chairs can be granted to the minorities of Cyprus. It could be 4 from GC constituent state and 1 from TC constituent state.

TCs position in Cyprus is exactly same with the GC community. 1/5 of total population cannot be put in minority position. Are any of the minorities in Cyprus have 1/5 of the population of any of the two communities? NO.

In case a just, fair, secure and viable solution is reached; be sure of that those TCs who obliged to emmigrate abroad in last 20 years and even backwards will return to Cyprus. With or without the allowed settlers TCs population will be 220.000 plus in a few years time after the solution plan is put into implementation...

I think this time you got it ;) Though, what important is to make T-Pap to understand this.
User avatar
insan
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 9037
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 11:33 pm
Location: Somewhere in ur network. ;]

Postby Piratis » Fri Aug 27, 2004 9:10 pm

what I mean is that their population isn't sufficient to participate equally in Senate


But your whole point before was that population is irrelevant for senate partitipation.
In the case of the US, California has 35 million people and Wyoming half a million. Thats 70 times less, but still both states get 2 senators. You are just 18 times more than any of those other minorities.

You can't say that for the senate population does not matter, and later say that population matters. You have to decide if it matters or if it doesn't. :wink:
User avatar
Piratis
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 12261
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 11:08 pm

Postby erolz » Fri Aug 27, 2004 10:56 pm

insan wrote:
As I said before, the problem isn't being minority or majority...

The problems are:

1- Sharing the executive power proportionaly and the legislative power equally.


But surely the issue of how power should be shared is directly related to the issue of if TC/GC communites are defined as 'minority' or as 'peoples'?

insan wrote:
2- Settlers and the GC properties they occupy.


For me these are two seperate issues. An issue of settlers. An issue of GC owned land prior to 74 being in use by someone other than the GC owner. There are settelrs that do not live on land owned by GC pre 74 and there are non settler that do. The two issue are not one imo and it does not help to make them one.

insan wrote:
5- Compensating the Cypriots who affected in 1963-2004 period due to loss of use.


What about cypriots that lost not 'property' but who lost the lives of loved ones. I personaly (and maybe for personal reasons) find something distastful in the focus of 'compensation' in terms of property and not in terms of human loss. It feels at times that property matters and human lives do not. If anb EU court can decide that lack of access to a property for 30 years is 'worth' $900,000 then how much is the loss of a husband and father for 40 years worth? (I admit that there have been times when I considered asking the EU court of human rights this question - and one day maybe I will)
Last edited by erolz on Fri Aug 27, 2004 10:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
erolz
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 2414
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 5:00 pm
Location: Girne / Kyrenia

Postby insan » Fri Aug 27, 2004 10:57 pm

But your whole point before was that population is irrelevant for senate partitipation.
In the case of the US, California has 35 million people and Wyoming half a million. Thats 70 times less, but still both states get 2 senators. You are just 18 times more than any of those other minorities.

You can't say that for the senate population does not matter, and later say that population matters. You have to decide if it matters or if it doesn't.





There are nearly 55,000 minorities in Wyoming; 13,706 live in Laramie County. According to the Census Bureau, Laramie County had the state's largest Hispanic population in July 2002: 9,495, or 11.5 percent of the county's total population of 82,894.

Sweetwater County had the second-largest Hispanic population, 3,643, or 9.8 percent of the 37,194 residents. The third largest Hispanic population was in Natrona County, which was 5 percent Hispanic with 3,340 of its total population of 67,336.

Percentage-wise, Carbon County had the largest Hispanic population: 2,182 people out of an overall population of 15,346, or 14.2 percent. Weston County also had a large Hispanic population, 13.6 percent of its 7,083 residents, or 961 people.

Goshen County is also home to a large Hispanic population: 1,087, or 8.9 percent of its overall population of 12,244. Teton County's population was 8 percent Hispanic, or 1,495 of a total of 18,586.

Niobrara County -- the least-populated county of the least-populated state -- had just 38 Latinos, or 1.7 percent of its 2,302 total.


So... why don't those minorities in wyoming have their own state?


In Cyprus there are two major communities which have been seeking a federative structure in order to establish a united state ;)


You are still trying hard to abuse the conceptions my friend... you are trying hard to degrade TCs and be the Kings of Cyprus. Though you and your kind have already thought that you are the Kings of Cyprus. No way my friend, no way... Someday you'll understand this. And even you are not aware of that I'm not defending the known, official Turkish policy... Moreover you are not aware of what you ignore and what impressions you create on some Cypriots.... Someday you'll understand your fault my friend... At the end, you'll find no TCs to discuss and negotiate with. Someday the stronger who doesn't involve with the details will put all her trump cards infront of you... You'll understand that you are not even a Don Quixote.... but thenceforth there will be no turning back for all of us.


If what you defending is also what T-Pap and majority of GCs defend; you can't even find just a single TC who would accept what you defend... You are trying to exclude TCs some of the affairs of central state which are "so significant" for you. You think they are not important for TCs. Bully for you! Those important affairs of central state is none of TCs business. They are just a useless, blockheads who continually try to block the GC community. Their most significiant duty is blocking the other community. Actually they should be the ones who will be blocked and pulled up their stakes. Bully for you!

TCs shouldn't put their nose in your significant matters, because you are the Kings of Cyprus and TCs are your underlings; apprentices... Bully for you...!
User avatar
insan
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 9037
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 11:33 pm
Location: Somewhere in ur network. ;]

Postby insan » Fri Aug 27, 2004 11:16 pm

But surely the issue of how power should be shared is directly related to the issue of if TC/GC communites are defined as 'minority' or as 'peoples'?


In my opinion GCs and TCs are two main "peoples" of Cyprus since the British Rule. They were participating in Kavanin Assembly as two communities(peoples) of Cyprus under British Rule. Then they became independent and kept participating in House of Representatives of RoC. There were unfair aspects of 60s constitution against GCs... While one group of GCs Cypriots were struggling democratically to overcome the unfair aspects of constitution, some other group of Cypriots abused it and made the problems a tool of Enosis. Same things also happned in TC community and they also abused the problems and made them a tool of Taksim.



What about cypriots that lost not 'property' but who lost the lives of loved ones. I personaly (and maybe for personal reasons) find something distastful in the focus of 'compensation' in terms of property and not in terms of human loss. It feels at times that property matters and human lives do not. If anb EU court can decide that lack of access to a property for 30 years is 'worth' $900,000 then how much is the loss of a husband and father for 40 years worth? (I admit that there have been times when I considered asking the EU court of human rights this question - and one day maybe I will)



What you offer erols? Tell us what's your opinion about it... How can those who lost their beloveds and loved ones be compensated? You should know how Denktash regime compensated them. He said to the ones who have human losses in their family that "These GC properties and this little amount of monthly blood money are yours. Your beloveds and loved ones paid the price of those GC land and properties by their blood." What a proud eh? What did they tell the relatives of TC communists that their loved ones had been killed by TMT; you guess? [/quote]


For me these are two seperate issues. An issue of settlers. An issue of GC owned land prior to 74 being in use by someone other than the GC owner. There are settelrs that do not live on land owned by GC pre 74 and there are non settler that do. The two issue are not one imo and it does not help to make them one.


Have you got any statistics regarding what percentage of settlers occupy GC owned land/property and what percentage do not? It is said that just %10 of the land of North legally belongs to TCs. Guess what percentage of land is illegally being used by settlers...
User avatar
insan
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 9037
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 11:33 pm
Location: Somewhere in ur network. ;]

Postby erolz » Fri Aug 27, 2004 11:39 pm

insan wrote:
In my opinion GCs and TCs are two main "peoples" of Cyprus since the British Rule. They were participating in Kavanin Assembly as two communities(peoples) of Cyprus under British Rule. Then they became independent and kept participating in House of Representatives of RoC. There were unfair aspects of 60s constitution against GCs... While one group of GCs Cypriots were struggling democratically to overcome the unfair aspects of constitution, some other group of Cypriots abused it and made the problems a tool of Enosis. Same things also happned in TC community and they also abused the problems and made them a tool of Taksim.


I pretty much agree with you above and your 'analysis'. I have previous voiced an opinion that 'lecturing on human rights and UN 'laws' ' is not helpful. However if the argument is that a solution MUST be based on (external) 'laws' and human rights without any compromise or limits then writing such compromises or limits into the consitution will not solve the problem (as they failed to do in 1960). Thus I have 'moved on' to an approach of trying to get these 'compromises and limits' first recognised in the very institutions and definitions of rights that it is insisted that everything must be consistent with. There are no easy solutions - if there were the problem would already have been solved.




insan wrote:
What you offer erols? Tell us what's your opinion about it... How can those who lost their beloveds and loved ones be compensated?


Again I have no easy answers. I just have something deep within me that 'cries out' when there is talk of loss purely in terms of property. This to me feels like a 'degrading' of the human loss suffered by many in Cyprus. Sure it's easier to compensate a loss of property either by money or return or both. It is impossible to compensate the human loss of a loved one - there can be no return and no amount of money is 'sufficent'. I just say do not 'forget' the human loss because it is uncompensatable.

insan wrote:
Have you got any statistics regarding what percentage of settlers occupy GC owned land/property and what percentage do not? It is said that just %10 of the land of North legally belongs to TCs. Guess what percentage of land is illegally being used by settlers...


I have no statistics but the issues seem logicaly seperate to me. I am also more personaly aware of non settlers living in propoerty owned by GC prior to 74 than I am of settlers. It just seems to me that these are two seperate issues. One of property and one of settlers.
erolz
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 2414
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 5:00 pm
Location: Girne / Kyrenia

Postby Piratis » Sat Aug 28, 2004 12:22 am

Lets ask Erolz to tell us,

When he came to the conclusion that TCs are "peoples", using the exact same criteria would the Armenians, Latins and Maronites qualify as "peoples" too? If no why?

So... why don't those minorities in wyoming have their own state?


Because minorities are not supposed to have their own state?

Lets ask Erolz again, using the exact same criteria that you used to define TCs as "peoples", would the Hispanics of the US be "peoples" too?


Someday you'll understand your fault my friend

Which is?

All I am saying dear Insan, is that we made our maximum compromise by accepting a solution based on federation. Instead of recognizing our move and do some serious compromises too, you are telling me that accepting a federal solution was not a compromise but your right and you expect from us to do even more compromises?

It should be clear to you and everybody that accepting a federal solution was our final compromise. If you want to bargain, then you will not bargain against our max compromise, but against our 100% legal rights without a single discount.
User avatar
Piratis
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 12261
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 11:08 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Cyprus Problem

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests