Cyprus-Forum.com

[boulio]

The Kurdish Problem in Turkey was created by the political Kurdish groups of neighbouring countries with help and provocations of the enemies of Turkey; including Armenia, Greece and GC administration

your paranoia and hate for hellenes has no boundaries.

[Piratis]

I do not want partition of Cyprus but in such a hypothetical senario that you suggest then yes I would support a GC minority community in and independent TC state having the kind of equality and protections that I want for the TC community within a untied Cyprus. If for example the TC majority in this fictional state proposed union with Turkey and rhis was opposed by the GC minority in the TC state I would support their right to block such a move.

Would you accept that the 18% of GC minority will have its own federal state of 29%, rotating presidency, veto power on everything, and that GC country will have the right to intervene whenever the GC minority was threatened and also maintain troops in the TC country?

[erolz]

Erol,
Democracy should have the same meaning everywhere; In the US, in the UK, in Iraq, in Pakistan, in Egypt, in Saudi, in Turkey and in Cyprus.

As I see it there are many forms of Democracy around the world - within nation states and between them. There are federal democracies where each federal component has an equal democratic voice on many issues, regardless of their realtive sizes and I do not consider this inhernetly anti democratic. There are countires that implement democracy through a system of proportional representation and there are those that have a first past the post system. There are as many different types of democracy as there are of tyranny.

You cannot refer to the un-democratic 1960 British/Turkish imposed constitution and guarantees, only when it pleases you.

I do not accpet that the concept of one community one vote is inherently and by principal undemocratic. It can be but it is no more undemocratic in principal than Cyprus having and equal vote as other EU members on many EU issues is undemocratic in principal.

Cyprus from being only a British colony, was “granted” pseudo-independence, to become a colony of the three “guarantors”, in such a way that two of them would always cancel each other out; in other words, Cyprus remained a British colony in disguise.

I find your thesis that the 1960 agreements where no more than British colonial rule in disguise no more convincing that Isans' arguments that the RoC's entry into the the EU is Enosis by disguise. There is a partial truth in both but both views imo are far from the whole truth.
The simple fact is that a 'solution' was 'imposed' on Cyprus (and not just by Turkey and Britain - Greece did as much or more 'imposing' than any one else) and particularly GC because GC did not want or ask for independance. They asked for something that was unacceptable to the TC community that shared the Island with the GC community. If GC and TC had united togeather against British colonial rule then no force on earth would have stopped the creation of an indpendent Cyprus without outside interferance or limits. To claim that the 1960 agreements were forced on Cyprus purely to ensure a disguised cotinuation of British colonial rule is to me some of the most blatant re writing of history.

The Cypriots should not be forced to live in the 60s by imposed anachronistic constitutions, occupation armies and military bases.

Cypriots have to lay in the bed they made. If Cypriots had sought independance as Cypriots and not pursued devisive objectives based not on Greekness or Turkishness but on Cypriotness then we could have written our own consitituion and agreed to British bases or nat as we wished. We did not do this and now we pay the price for this past failure.

Geoge Bush’s and Rice’s “democracy”, should be the same for all states, friends and foes!

What has George Bush's 'democracy' got to do with anything? The states has no particular love of democracy. You can be as undemocratic and tyrannical as you please as long as you also support US interests - this is the fact based on the US's actions and not their words - and has been the case for hundreds of years. The examples of the US supporting undemocratic states are legion - as are their undermining of democratic states. The only thing that matter is do you support US interests or not. Certainly the US will USE democracy as a means to disguise and justify their real objectives - just as some GC try to use it in a similar way in Cyprus.

The mistakes and wrongs of the past should first be acknowledged and then be prevented from re-occurring in the future. The people are not as naïve as they used to be, in this “neck of the woods”.

So what mistakes and wrongs are you aknowledging on behalf of the GC commuity in Cyprus, for your 'non naive' perspective? That Enosis was a devisive desire on the part of GC that did much to destroy the prospect of a united and independant Cyprus? That a GC communities wishes should not always and automaticaly overide those of the TC community in Cyprus? That we need to have some degree od equality of the communites in Cyprus if we are to protect each community from potential domination of the other? Are these the kind of wrongs you think should be acknowledged by GC for thier part?

I will say a little about my personal views about democracy. For me democracy is not a 'high ideal' that is pure and simple and clearly deliniated and is always right. For me it just a system. It can be used well and it can be used badly. It can be used to increase freedom and prevent tyrany and it can also be used to limit freedom and create Tyranny.
By contrast 'non violence' is an idea that I consider a 'high ideal'. It is pure and simple and clearly deliniated and always right - in my view. In a world of moral ambiguites and a billion shades of grey it is a clear cut line that can be drawn the same universally and it is universally morally right. Democracy is just not like this - for me at least.

We have been here before and with respect I refer to an earlier post of mine that can be found here

http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.p ... lexis#3419

[insan]

The Kurdish Problem in Turkey was created by the political Kurdish groups of neighbouring countries with help and provocations of the enemies of Turkey; including Armenia, Greece and GC administration

your paranoia and hate for hellenes has no boundaries.

So you deny this fact? Well I'd like to remind you PKK training camps in Greece, Ocalan's GC issued passport, joint lobbying activities and military relations among them.

[erolz]

Would you accept that the 18% of GC minority will have its own federal state of 29%, rotating presidency, veto power on everything, and that GC country will have the right to intervene whenever the GC minority was threatened and also maintain troops in the TC country?

Sigh

When have I EVER demanded that the TC community should have veto rights on EVREYTHING? Really I have been totaly clear and totaly consistent on this point.

If it was necessary for the fictional GC numerical minority community in a fictional independant recognised TC state to have 'exceptional' protections in terms of political representation - for them to feel safe and trust that the TC numerical majority wants to create a inclusive multi cultural state then yes I would support such things. If they fictional TC had also had a history of trying to force the fictional GC community to accept things that were totaly unacceptable for it and had used force and violence and terror against them as a means to this end then I would support stronger measures to protect the GC community than if it had no such history.

[insan]

Would you accept that the 18% of GC minority will have its own federal state of 29%, rotating presidency, veto power on everything, and that GC country will have the right to intervene whenever the GC minority was threatened and also maintain troops in the TC country?

How about granting that %18 even % 33 of GCs "political equality", rotational governorship in TCCS and sharing 1/3 of the land ownership that would be %29 under a bi-communal, bi-zonal federation which was proposed in Annan 5? No?

[Piratis]

If they fictional TC had also had a history of trying to force the fictional GC community to accept things that were totally unacceptable for it and had used force and violence and terror against them as a means to this end then I would support stronger measures to protect the GC community than if it had no such history.

Remember the TMT terrorist organization that killed several GCs? How about the force that the TCs used to kick out the GCs from their own homes? Some years after the invasion there were a lot of GCs in the occupied areas. But you put in action your "Akritas plan" to force most of them out. The ones that remain are treated very badly. So? Will you deny the bad treatment that GCs had by you in order to apply your double standards again?

So then we agreed. Partition it is. And the TRNC will be split into a GC federal state and a TC federal state and everything else as per Annan plan that you consider so fair and nice.
This way we have a state the way we believe is right (majority rule, equality of citizens etc) and you get a state the way you believe is right (equality of communities etc) seems like the perfect plan to me.

So, what will you give to the "numerically less" GCs of "TRNC"? You said before that you didn't want to give/take veto on everything. Ok, so lets see what you will give instead.

P.S

When have I EVER demanded that the TC community should have veto rights on EVREYTHING?

Well, if its not on everything then it must be on specific issues, something that I always accepted, but as far as I remember you didn't .. right?

[erolz]

Remember the TMT terrorist organization that killed several GCs? How about the force that the TCs used to kick out the GCs from their own homes? Some years after the invasion there were a lot of GCs in the occupied areas. But you put in action your "Akritas plan" to force most of them out. The ones that remain are treated very badly. So? Will you deny the bad treatment that GCs had by you in order to apply your double standards again?

Dealing with your venomous and aggresive posts is very wearying. I will do my best not to respond in kind.

You suggested a fictional senario. When I gave you my honest views about this fictional senario you jump on me for not 'accepting' what happned to GC in the past at the hands of TC and Turkey. The only point I was trying to make was that for me the amount of protection a minority community needs (if your are trying to build a united state) is related to how they have been treated in the past. I made no assertions that GC had been treated badly by TC in the past or not. I just explained the connection to me - in general and in the fictional terms that the whole discussion was in.

So then we agreed. Partition it is.

Must you twist everything? I made it clear that I do not desire partition - but none the less tried to answer what I thought was your question, though right now it seems that it was less of a question (to which you genuinely wanted my opinion) and more of a jumping off point to 'rant' and twist. I appologise if this seems unfair to you but it is how I feel.

And the TRNC will be split into a GC federal state and a TC federal state and everything else as per Annan plan that you consider so fair and nice.
This way we have a state the way we believe is right (majority rule, equality of citizens etc) and you get a state the way you believe is right (equality of communities etc) seems like the perfect plan to me.

What are you saying here?

So, what will you give to the "numerically less" GCs of "TRNC"? You said before that you didn't want to give/take veto on everything. Ok, so lets see what you will give instead.

Sigh

We have been over this exact same ground so many times before. Once again. Where a decsion affects the two communites differently then there should be seperate consent from each community. Where a decsion affects both communites the same there should be a simple majority vote.

Well, if its not on everything then it must be on specific issues, something that I always accepted, but as far as I remember you didn't .. right?

Once again. You want a list of specfic and limited 'exceptions'. I prefer a statement of the 'prinicpal' to be used and if necessary some form of independent arbitration when it can not be agreed if the principal applies or not. The basis of the principal is as outlined above and that I have stated many many times now so once more. Where a decsion affects the two communites differently then there should be seperate consent from each community. Where a decsion affects bothe communites the same there should be a simple majority vote.

Why do I have concerns over a predefined list and have a preference for a 'principal' appraoch? The answer is simple and obvious but no doubt you will manage to twist it so that you can claim I prefer a 'principal' appraoch because I am a theif that wants to steal from you or I beleive that TC are gods chosen people and should have priveledges that no other community should have. A 'principal' appraoch is flexible and can be applied to new and unforseen circumstances as and when they occur. A list approach is rigid and requires that TC 'pre guess' any future senario that may occur - which is simply an impossibility.

However I suspect this difference between a 'principal' approach vs a list appraoch goes deeper for both of us. You want a list because I suspect in your heart you do not accept that TC have any 'right' to political equality. You can accept a limited list of things that you consider 'exceptions' (and not an expression of TC rights) because you are under 'duress'. I futher suspect thast if you were not under duress (like the GC community was not in the period 63-74) you would not offer even this list of expcetions and that once you were no longer under duress you would want to remove these as well. For me a 'principal' approach has a deeper current in that such a principal appraoch accepts a principal - and does not define this principal as exceptional or an exception.

[Piratis]

made no assertions that GC had been treated badly by TC in the past or not.

Ok, sorry if I assumed that you did. In any case I made an assertion, with which I hope you do not disagree.

I made it clear that I do not desire partition

Well, you do disire some form of partition right? I mean separation = partition. Don't you want Cypriots to be separated based on race?

What are you saying here?

What I am saying here is that if the solution is partition with a GC "numerically less" community in "TRNC" getting as much as you would get in "united Cyprus" based on Annan plan, then I am satisfied.

You want a list because I suspect in your heart you do not accept that TC have any 'right' to political equality.

They have the right of community equality. "political equality" on everything, no they don't. But as I said, if you think this is the correct thing to do, then I assume you would agree to give this to a GC "numerically less" community in "TRNC" and then agree for partition. Right?
In this way, we get what we believe is right (majority rule etc) and you get what you believe is right (political equality of communities etc).

[erolz]

Ok, sorry if I assumed that you did.

Accepted.

Well, you do disire some form of partition right? I mean separation = partition. Don't you want Cypriots to be separated based on race?

I do not 'want' seperation. Seperation is what exists. TC and GC have historically and currently very seperate views, desires, backgrounds, opinions and much else as well. That to me is not a matter of 'desire' but of reality. I want a framework that can lead to this 'speration' diminishing over time, whilst also protecting the TC communities valid rights as a community. I have in the past repeatedly stated that for me, bi zonalilty (physical speration) is no where near as import or essential to me as the need for political equality of the two communites. I would happily consider no bi zonal solutions but would not consider a solution that defines TC as a group in cyprus as no more than a minority community with no more rights than those of a minority community.

What I am saying here is that if the solution is partition with a GC "numerically less" community in "TRNC" getting as much as you would get in "united Cyprus" based on Annan plan, then I am satisfied.

And what I am saying is that I ask for and expect no more for TC than I also accept for any other group in a comprable position.

They have the right of community equality. "political equality" on everything, no they don't. But as I said, if you think this is the correct thing to do, then I assume you would agree to give this to a GC "numerically less" community in "TRNC" and then agree for partition. Right?

See above.

In this way, we get what we believe is right (majority rule etc) and you get what you believe is right (political equality of communities etc).

No what we get is two nation states in one small geographical Island. I do not believe that is 'right'. For me that is a failure. However if the choice is two seperate states in Cyprus or the current status quo for ever then I chose the former - with reluctance.