Cyprus-Forum.com

[Alexandros Lordos]

I am not sure how you (and TCs in general) have come to the conclusion that if all refugees return there will be no bizonality and no TC majority in the north. Maybe this is what Rauf et al have been trying to put into your heads all these years to make you believe that a solution is just not possible (the intersecting red lines that you talked about).

Alexandros,

Forgive me for interfering into your dialogue with turkcyp but weren't they %65 of North who consciously or unconsciously voted yes to the plan thus approved return of about 70.000 GC refugees? Doesn't it seem to you that Rauf failed with his propaganda?

Well ... he did convince the 35% !

But more seriously: Yes, he did fail to convince in the end and overall, but he has been drumming things in your heads for thirty years now, in circumstances that were "not quite democratic", and I am sure it will take time for the TC community to dispel all the myths that Rauf was peddling ...

For instance, this subtle point about "what would happen if all the refugees returned" ... most TCs, even in this forum, believe that it would be impossible for all refugees to return and still have bizonality. And yet, this is not true. Why do you believe it then? Don't you see it is Rauf talking here?

[insan]

As far as I know Rauf has taken into consideration that GCs would never accept permenant restriction on right to settlement and go to ECHR in order to get the restrictions lifted. That was what he concerned about, to my knowledge.

TCs reaction against Denktash, mainly derive from the consideration that he is incapable to solve Cyprus problem one way or another. The secondary reason is the corrupt governing system he has been the main responsible. And thirdly, his cheuvenistic, nerdy attitudes particularly towards TC's dignity and all of his opponents in general.

[insan]

For instance, this subtle point about "what would happen if all the refugees returned" ... most TCs, even in this forum, believe that it would be impossible for all refugees to return and still have bizonality. And yet, this is not true. Why do you believe it then? Don't you see it is Rauf talking here?

Alexandros,

We don't know what's the exact definition of refugee. If all of their descendants and spouses also would be considered in the refugee group; their numbers must be at least twice the number you assume...

[-mikkie2-]

Insan,

Forgive me, but I am confused.

The plan had a strict higherarchy in the way the refugees would be treated. They come last in the pecking order regarding properties and Alexandros, myself and others have pointed out that the end result would be that very few refugees would return under TC administration. Yet you say that the TC's voted for a plan that would let 70000 GC's live amongst you!

Why do you use Talatisms (for want of a better description) to put your point across?

As I said before, we might as well be talking about the weather!

[insan]

Insan,

Forgive me, but I am confused.

The plan had a strict higherarchy in the way the refugees would be treated. They come last in the pecking order regarding properties and Alexandros, myself and others have pointed out that the end result would be that very few refugees would return under TC administration. Yet you say that the TC's voted for a plan that would let 70000 GC's live amongst you!

Why do you use Talatisms (for want of a better description) to put your point across?

As I said before, we might as well be talking about the weather!

I also underlined it that the the relevant provisions of Annan Plan must be ammended in order to encourage the return of 70.000 GC refugees to the region that would be administered by TCs, according to the Annan Plan. If the plan the relevant parties put their signs under, envisages return of 70.000 refugees; everything should be done to encourage and achieve it.

[Alexandros Lordos]

For instance, this subtle point about "what would happen if all the refugees returned" ... most TCs, even in this forum, believe that it would be impossible for all refugees to return and still have bizonality. And yet, this is not true. Why do you believe it then? Don't you see it is Rauf talking here?

Alexandros,

We don't know what's the exact definition of refugee. If all of their descendants and spouses also would be considered in the refugee group; their numbers must be at least twice the number you assume...

Insan,

Yes, we would have to add desendants born after 1974 (and mixed marriages with non-refugees also), but we also should subtract number of deaths of refugees since 1974 ...

I am not sure what the final number would be, most probably it would be more than 70,000 but not by much.

But this doesn't really matter: I can't really envision a Plan that would give the right of return strictly based on refugee status (this was the older approach in negotiations, before the mid-90s). This is not right, "because it is a provision that looks to the past istead of to the future". What do I mean? Basically, I envision "4 different types of return under TC administration":

a. Refugees who will choose to take up permanent residence in the north.
b. Refugees who will choose to have a second home (a holiday home) in the north, while remaining residents of the GC state. (this is going to be the largest group by far)
c. Non-refugees who will choose to take up permanent residence in the north.
d. Non-refugees who will choose to have a second home in the north.

Somehow, a solution Plan has to cater for all the above groups, with the following guidelines:

- There has to be "a limit" to those who return in groups a. and c. , in order to protect bizonality. But if this limit is something generous, like 30%, then we can be sure that any GC who does wish to take up residence in the north will be able to do so.

- The satisfaction of group b. the largest group, will depend exclusively on how the property issue is resolved - residence rights do not concern them, neither will these people affect political bizonality. All that these people want, is a home that they can call their own in the north, so that they can take their kids there over the weekend and show them the village of "pappou" (grandfather). This is where my suggestion for "the right to a new home" comes in to help.

- The satisfaction of group d. (and of group c. for that matter) will mostly depend on how much the free market is applied, ie to what extent they are entitled to purchase property in the north after the solution. The current limitation of 15 years before a GC can purchase property in the north is prohibitive, because people experience it as being "half a lifetime away" ...

Got to go now ... See you later !

[magikthrill]

So as far as this limitation is concenred in this "free" and "united" country is it assumed that the limited number of GCs in the TC state will never even be an issue since there probably won't be that many GCs wishing to live in the north anyway?

As far as the time limitation is concerned:
If the proposal of refugees to return is rightful and is accepted gracefully by GCs then I don't think 15 years is a long time for GCs to have to wait to buy property in the north.

[michalis5354]

You all have left the Turksih factor out! TCs never had an independent view on the issue. They were under the direct influence and control of Turkey.

I have a question here:

Will ever Turkey agree to a solution that satisfy TCs Only? Of course Not!

Remember we are working to improve things not to make things worse!

[magikthrill]

Will ever Turkey agree to a solution that satisfy TCs Only? Of course Not!

Michali,

You are not making sense here? Turkey would and has suppoerted a "solution" that satisfies TCs only. It was called the Annan plan.

[Piratis]

magikthrill, the Annan plan didn't satisfy only the TCs. First and above all it satisfied the ones that created the plan: The British, the Americans and their ally Turkey.