Cyprus-Forum.com

[Viewpoint]

For many years he was the negotiator and since the late 50's he was many things, among else, vice leader of the Akritas plan, that aimed at exterminating our TC compatriots in one night! He is a known entity. I know exactly what to expect from him. He has never believed in bicommunal, bizonal federation and like Makarios he probably thinks he can play games and fool all the people all the time. At the moment the only people he fools are the GCypriots, it remains to be seen for how long more.

at least a few people are honest

[boulio]

any credible source than just bananiot?

[MicAtCyp]

Bulio, wouldn't you hate someone who is bent on partitioning your country?

Why should you hate Viewpoint? 2 posts above he sent you his kisses! Yet he is thePrime Minister of division in this forum.

Ziartides knew TP inside out

How come? They were sleeping together at night????

[insan]

A former associate of the new President of south Cyprus, Tassos Papadopoulos, has described the Greek Cypriot leader as a ‘sickened Turk-hater who can never compromise his hardline nationalist beliefs.

The description comes from Andreas Ziartides, a leading Greek Cypriot trade unionist and a member of AKEL, the Communist party that was one of Papdopoulos’ main backers in the recent election.

Mr Ziartides is quoted in the Greek Cypriot daily Alıthea, which published a profile of Papadopoulos on 2 February 2003.

“I had realised that he had no ear for concessions or compromise regarding the Turks.

I have identified a very negative characteristic. He is a sickened Turk-hater. He is a sickened racist with regard to the Turks. With Tasos as interlocutor, it t is impossible to find a compromise with the Turks.”

The new leader in the south certainly has a long history of anti-Turkish activity. On 23 October 1967, he made the following speech at the celebration of United Nations Day in Limasol: “Freedom for us means only the integration of this southern outpost of Hellenism into national entity.”

It was this belief that led him to take action during the attacks on 15 November 1967 against the Turkish Cypriot villages of Kophinou and Ayios Theodoros . The aim of these attacks were again to eliminate the Turkish Cypriots in these villages situated at strategically important places near Limasol, from where tens of thousands of Greek soldiers were clandestinely launched in the island.

Tassos Papadopoulos was also one of the Greek Cypriot leaders who tried to make the 1960 Constitution unworkable and thereby achieve ENOSIS His role in the Akritas Plan, a plot to wipe out the Turkish Cypriot population, was noted as follows in the book Genocide Files (p.81) by British journalist Harry Scott Gibbons: “In order to implement this scheme (altering unilaterally the Constitution to achieve ENOSIS), Makarios entrusted Polykarpos Yorgadjis, Tassos Papadopoulos and Glafkos Clerides with the task of formulating a secret plan of action. This plan, the famous “Akrtitas Plan”…”

[Bananiot]

Insan, the above is taken from the book I mentioned previously. Must I tell you that one does not have to sleep with someone to know him inside out? I have been sleeping with my wife for the last 25 years and I can hardly claim I have scratched the ... surface.

Anyway, Ziartides worked closely with Papadopoulos when Makarios appointed Tasos in 1960 minister of Labour. Ziartides tried to put some sense into the arrogant young man that Tasos was. He succeded, Ziarides said, in a number of fields, yet politically, he remained the chauvinist he is today, despite Christofias's claim that "the man has changed". At least Christofias recognises who Tasos was, because, if he has changed he must have been different before.

[Alexandros Lordos]

at least a few people are honest.

Whereas the rest of us are lying, dishonest cheats?

This topic was not meant to be about Tassos, but you made it to be so after picking on a secondary comment in one of my posts.

In this thread, we were supposed to be discussing US Policy on Cyprus - which is an important topic in itself. If all you wish to do is express your sentiments about Tassos, please start a new thread.

[Alexandros Lordos]

I am copying here my last post on the actual topic of the thread, before the subject was diverted to Tassos:

It seems to me that the US is only now trying to develop a post-referenda policy on Cyprus ... up until now, they have been going on autopilot, and officially saying the same things they were saying before the referenda - i.e. that the Annan Plan (in its fifth form) is the only plan on the table. This policy is of course out of date, it made sense before the referenda to push people towards a decision, but it is totally counter-productive now:

a. Because it totally alienates the GCs
b. Because it is encouraging the TCs to be totally unyielding and uncompromising in future negotiations.

To the limited extent that I see things from the inside, the Americans have been "searching for a new policy on Cyprus" for months now (amongst the various people I talked to, the Americans have so far been one of the "most eager" audiences for survey data), and it seems that the "road-map" idea is what they have finally come up with ...

I think it is a clever policy, it is respectful to GC concerns, but at the same time it encourages responsible behaviour. The Americans avoided the ridiculous demand "tell us what changes you want to the Annan Plan" which the UN has very undiplomatically been putting forward. Instead, by asking for a road map, the Americans are giving Tassos some leeway to talk about negotiating procedure and expound on general areas of concern ...

I agree with MicAtCyp that if we start by "saying what changes we want", the result will either be instant deadlock or a plan with minimal changes (most probably the first). In my opinion, we need to start negotiations on a more general level, with the two sides discussing and agreeing the overall principles and philosophy which will underpin the solution, and only then going into the details. It can not be taken for granted that the principles which were "agreed" (they were never agreed of course, the UN just did a ... collage) by Clerides and Denktash in 1999-2000 (i.e. when the foundations of the Annan Plan were being laid), are still valid today, or that they in any way express the views and approaches of Papadopoulos and Talat - who currently hold the popular mandate to negotiate on behalf of the GCs and of the TCs.

This approach will not "take years", but neither can it be completed in a few months. I believe that we need at least six to nine months of negotiations before we can agree on a general framework, then at least another year before we can agree on the details, and then at least six months to educate the public and prepare them for the referenda - so, at least two years. If we start immediately after April, and if neither side wastes time by being intransigent, then maybe we can have a solution by mid 2007 ...

This might sound like a long time, but actually it will be an extremely busy period for everyone involved - including the public, which should, in my opinion, be intensely involved in the negotiations, not ignored and avoided like last time.

[Viewpoint]

Dear Alexandros Lordos, with all due respects my comment was merely trying to point out that at least a few people on this forum are brave and honest enough to call the kettle black in other words see Tassos for what he really is a liar, eoka pledged, Turk hater. This does not in any way suggest that the rest of contributors who worship the ground he walks on, supports him or wants to allow him the opportunity to show what he is made of, are " lying, dishonest cheats?" as you put it. They just have a differing opinion from mine and many TCs who absoulutely hate the guy and would never trust anything he says, he has a very bad negative persona in the North.

Dont you feel that US Policy on Cyprus is effected by many factors including to a certain extent Tassos/GCs stance, demands etc etc, so his character, history, approach and commitment towards solving the Cyprus issue is of great importance.

But I take your point and respect your wishes ho great one, you know our brains better than we do (just joking)refraining from mentioning anything outside of the subject in this thread although I still feel they are related and contributors do it all the time, why should I be singled out?

[insan]

we need to start negotiations on a more general level, with the two sides discussing and agreeing the overall principles and philosophy which will underpin the solution, and only then going into the details.

TC side faced exactly with the same sitution in late 80's. There isn't any difference between Kyprianou's stance and Tassos' stance. And there wasn't any difference between the basic parameters of UN draft 1987 and Annan Plan 2002.

As for US policy regarding Cyprus; US made the biggest mistake by recognizing GC administration as the defacto government of South Cyprus. The main reason of GC leadership's intransigence is this US mistake.

Conclusion: TC community does not want to play this dirty game of GC leadership anymore. Turkish side is well aware of that nothing has changed concerning the demands of GC leadership. Turkish side has already known what GC leadership will demand. The matter of the fact is to push GC leadership to formaly reveal exactly what it wants. Turkish side does not have to go negotiations to learn what Tassos demands. Two years ago, Turkish side went negotiaitions and learned what the GC leadership demands were. During the negotiations process while Turkish side negotiated in direction of its own solution thesis; Hellenic side; in dream of "European solution" didn't sincerely negotiate with Turkish side. Time is up, game over. Tassos last chance is to reveal what changes he wants to be made on Annan Plan. If his demands are rational and in parameters of Annan Plan, Turkish side will returns to negotiations table otherwise enough waste of time. The only way to solve the problm is partition.

[Alexandros Lordos]

Dear Alexandros Lordos, with all due respects my comment was merely trying to point out that at least a few people on this forum are brave and honest enough to call the kettle black in other words see Tassos for what he really is a liar, eoka pledged, Turk hater. This does not in any way suggest that the rest of contributors who worship the ground he walks on, supports him or wants to allow him the opportunity to show what he is made of, are " lying, dishonest cheats?" as you put it. They just have a differing opinion from mine and many TCs who absoulutely hate the guy and would never trust anything he says, he has a very bad negative persona in the North.

By saying "at least some people are honest" you are clearly implying that those with a different view are not honest. Even though you say you are a man of peace (even peace through partition), you are pouring poison with your comments. I do not presume to "know your brain better than you do" - in fact, I frankly do not understand what it is you are trying to achieve with the way you respond.

Don't you feel that US Policy on Cyprus is effected by many factors including to a certain extent Tassos/GCs stance, demands etc etc, so his character, history, approach and commitment towards solving the Cyprus issue is of great importance.

Sure, so let's discuss the whole issue in context, including the parameter called "Tassos". By responding with one-liners, as has become your habit of late, and in fact insulting and un-substantiated one-liners, you are not being at all constructive.