Cyprus-Forum.com

[erolz]

But we don't want to take away any of your human rights.

Yes you (you personaly and you as a community) do want to take away our rights. You consistently insist that we are not a people and thus deny that we have the rights of a people. That is clearly a breach of our human rights.

Firstly you deny our rights by saying we are not a people. Then you say even if we are a people we can not have the rights of a people because we were no all located in a single area in 60. We are a people and we have the rights of a people. If GC had been willing to accept this reality in 1960 then there is little doubt in my mind that much of the suffering of Cypriots since 60 onwards would not have occured.

If you didn't over do it, I am willing to accept some limitations of our human rights in order to accommodated a federal system in Cyprus.

You mean if we give up totaly our rights as a people then you may offer us some 'gifts' instead - that can be taken away as easily as they are given as when it suits. Not good enough. Especially given the past.

But if a federal system can be accommodated with lets say "5%" sacrifices of our human rights (e.g. not all refugees returning), then don't ask from us to accept "30%" sacrifices just because you want to screw us as much as possible.

You offer a 5% restriction on your rights in return for 100% denial of our rights as a people. Not good enough.

Finally let's be totaly clear here. I am NOT saying that our right to self determination justifies and legalises the TRNC. What I am saying is that there are two sets of rights that have to be balanced and accomodated and that simply denying that we have nay rights will not lead to such a compromise.

[PEACE]

Yeah, right. The EHRC and the EU are working so great for Turks in Western Thrace.

That's the point.


Can you please open out "EHRC"!?
I'm sure i know it but now i couldn't remember its expansion now.




Issuing summons,getting the result can continue a long time and that can be too late for us.

Also how we can be sure that goverment won't slack to do what result says?

[Saint Jimmy]

...which even we, GCs, can't trust. We are EU members and how has it helped us against Turkey?

Well, it's not completely useless. Louizidu (sorry for misspelling) got her money so it might work in some cases but I don't think TCs or GCs can trust the EHRC and the EU to solve their problems. We need to have a solid solution where people can clearly see that their rights won't be violated.

True. I stand corrected.

[Piratis]

Yes you (you personaly and you as a community) do want to take away our rights. You consistently insist that we are not a people and thus deny that we have the rights of a people. That is clearly a breach of our human rights.

What I said is that you have no right to take away our human rights. As I said before, if you declared the pure TC villages as independent, I would have no problem with that. So as long as you do not harm us, I don't care if you take self determination or not.

But I repeat: You have no right to use self determination in way that violates the human rights of others. If we accept that some of our rights will be limited, then yes, this is a compromise from our side and you have to accept it such.

[PEACE]

Ok,i remembered the expansion of EHRC.So you don't need to say.
European Human Rights Court. It was on the tip of my tongue!

[erolz]

What I said is that you have no right to take away our human rights.

Where did I say TC had a right to deny your rights? I have never said such. However your inistance that TC are not a people but just a minority in their own homeland IS a denail of our human rights.
What I have said and am saying is that when two sets of rights are in conflict - as they are in Cyprus - then both sides will need to compromises on their absolute rights if the wish to live in peace and harmony togeather. If one sides simply denies the rights of the other then such a compromise can never be reached.

As I said before, if you declared the pure TC villages as independent, I would have no problem with that. So as long as you do not harm us, I don't care if you take self determination or not.

That was not acceptable to GC in 1960 (and I doubt it would be so today either to many). If GC had been willing to accept the TC people equal rights in 1960 and onwards then we would not be in this mess in the first place. We are in this mess today because GC have denied our rights in this regard (and ultimately they paid a high price in 74 for this denial of our rights). Try reading what the GC position on TC 'self determination' was in Cyprus leading upto 1960 and from 1960 onwards. If you do you will see that the idea that TC could have had their rights to self determination in 1960, without any complaint from GC in Cyprus is just madness. To imply that we could have had this in 1960 but chose not to then because really what we wanted is to steal your land and deny your rights (because we hate you) is also madness.

But I repeat: You have no right to use self determination in way that violates the human rights of others. If we accept that some of our rights will be limited, then yes, this is a compromise from our side and you have to accept it such.

And I repeat I am not and have not ever said this. What I have said is that when your rights clash with our rights then if we want peace and harmony then we must both compromise.

You accept that some of your rights will be limited at the same time time you insist we have no rights as a people at all (as you consistenly do). The fact is the only reason you will consider any restriction on your rights is not an acceptance of our rights and the need for a compromise and balance on both sides. You consider it because you do not have sufficent 'balance of power' to force your optimal (100%) solution on us - thus you compromise your rights to a limited extent (5% to use your figure) while continuing to deny our rights 100% (by insisting we are not a people and do not have the rightsd of a people). Not good enough.

[magikthrill]

because I am in a 8- 10 hour time difference zone from most of you guys I log on an see about 100 new posts. kinda hard to keep on track so ill just summarize the jist of what I have to say

Erolz,

I understand what you are saying, since your arguments are based on logic.

However, if your ideas were good enough, then the Annan plan would have been favored by GCs.

THe problem lies in the fact that TCs right to self-determinatino conflicts with many human rights of GCs, not just one. And I am not saying this to cpmare human rights in terms of numbers, but when you lay things down on the table then the GC community will realize that in the end thye are giving up more to satisfy the TCs right to self-determination.

And finally, allowing Turkish settlers has nothign to do with TCs right to self-determination (Aside from illegally changing the demographics, but these people arent TCs to begin with )

[erolz]

I understand what you are saying, since your arguments are based on logic.

I try.

However, if your ideas were good enough, then the Annan plan would have been favored by GCs.

My idea is simply that there needs to be first an acceptance of TC rights to self determination (rather than denial) and then an attempt to blalance the TC rights against those of GC. The Annan plan may have been rejected for any number of reasons. It may have been rejected by GC because it recognised the TC right as people and need to compromise its absolute rights as such - and this itself was not acceptable to GC that voted no. It may have been reject because they accepted TC right to some degree of self determination but felt the balance was too much in TC favour at expense of GC. These are very different senarios.

THe problem lies in the fact that TCs right to self-determinatino conflicts with many human rights of GCs, not just one. And I am not saying this to cpmare human rights in terms of numbers, but when you lay things down on the table then the GC community will realize that in the end thye are giving up more to satisfy the TCs right to self-determination.

I agree that this conflict of TC rights as a people and GC indivduals rights is at the core of the Cyprus problem. All I am really saying is that as long as the GC position is that TC habe no rights as a people at all (as Piratis will insist for example). I am happy to discuss an acceptable balance between TC and GC rights in a united cyprus - if it is based on an acceptance of our rights and a need for balance. I am not prepared to discuss it on the basis that we have no rights as a people at all.

And finally, allowing Turkish settlers has nothign to do with TCs right to self-determination (Aside from illegally changing the demographics, but these people arent TCs to begin with )

Actually it does. If the TC have total and absolute right to self determination then they also have a right to allow anyone else citizenship of their state or entry and residence of their state - without any hinderance or let from anyone else. This is exactly the kind of absolute right that I am willing to limit on the part of the TC community (after a solution) - in recognition of the need to balance this right against those of GC.

If we want a peaceful harmonious Cyprus both sides have to accept some limit on their absolute rights (be they rights as indivduals or as peoples).

Denying we have any such rights gets us nowhere (its what has got us here so far).
Insisting there can be no compromise or limits on rights also gets us no where.

Thats how I see things anyway

[Piratis]

Having right of self determination has nothing to do with what you did.

Why the hell should the right of self determination have anything to do with Kerinia, Famagusta or Morphou, when in those areas you were a minority? Why does north Cyprus or any part of Cyprus fall under your "self determination" and not under our "self determination"?

Your rights and our rights do not clash at all. It is your outrageous demands that clash with our rights.

As I told you before, if we assume that you had self determination rights, then take the purely TC villages and declare them independent*. See, no clash. But you want to take our land, and put it under your control, which has nothing to do with self determination. This is why is called SELF, because you control by yourself what you own, not to steal what we own and control that!! Such thing has NOTHING to do with self determination, and everything to do with stealing.

I told you many times, that because TC and GC were mixed all over the island, we can not have separate self determinations. This is why there is one self determination for all Cypriots together. If you owned a part of land, say like the Chechens own Chechnya, or like the Kurds own Kurdistan, then I would tell you to get your part of land and do whatever you want. But you do not own any part of land by yourselves, you own the 18% of Cyprus as a whole ... the 18%, not the 50% !!

*Because declaring the purely TC villages independent would be very inefficient for you (although it shouldn't really be our problem) I have already accepted if TCs keep 18% of land (in a way combine all the villages in one big area) and get over with it. This of course is not your right, but is the only way that we might agree on something.

[-mikkie2-]

Erol,

You have to accept that to get what you want you have to compromise the individual rights of the refugees. My argument is why should these people be denied their rights in order to suit your collective rights as a people? It is individual human rights that actually count in the end.

This is the greatest injustice to me because you want us to compromise the rights of the refugees and also to compromise the rights of any GC's that may wish to live in the north in order to suit your needs tp the exclusion of others.

If people choose to live in the north there must be representation of those people in all aspects of political life in the north. Trying to keep strict bizonality is unfair but I do think this can be overcome if GC's that would live in the north can have representation that would allow them to have a voice but to keep a balance such that the TC's have the majority of seats in their constituent state. That way the GC's could never dominate politically in the north but be able to have a voice in the north. Likewise the same should be done in the south so that TC's living in the south can have a voice in the GC constituent state but never be allowed to dominate politically in that state.

If an intricate web is weaved between the two communities in this way then in my view that will have the effect of binding us whilst respecting the needs of each community no matter where individuals choose to live.