The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content


Is there a coherent GC strategy to reunify Cyprus?

Propose and discuss specific solutions to aspects of the Cyprus Problem

Postby Nikitas » Mon Dec 03, 2007 12:07 pm

The USA with the 6th fleet in the Med was somehow forced by RoC to say that! Then the Cypriots have some hidden might we did not know about!

Naturally the USA said it because the Law of the Seat, that the whole world applies, decrees that every state has a an exclusive economic zone, in other words the accepted international law contradicts Turkey in this case.

How the benefits of the oil will be used depends on whether we have one state in Cyprus or two. According to Mr Gul there are two people, two states, two religions etc etc. According the the practices ot the Talat government there are two states, that is why they apply taxation at the "border" and it hits 30 per cent on goods purchased in the south. If there is one state everyone shares in the oil, if there are two then go find your own oil in the north.
Nikitas
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 7396
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 2:49 pm

Postby zan » Mon Dec 03, 2007 12:12 pm

Nikitas wrote:The USA with the 6th fleet in the Med was somehow forced by RoC to say that! Then the Cypriots have some hidden might we did not know about!

Naturally the USA said it because the Law of the Seat, that the whole world applies, decrees that every state has a an exclusive economic zone, in other words the accepted international law contradicts Turkey in this case.

How the benefits of the oil will be used depends on whether we have one state in Cyprus or two. According to Mr Gul there are two people, two states, two religions etc etc. According the the practices ot the Talat government there are two states, that is why they apply taxation at the "border" and it hits 30 per cent on goods purchased in the south. If there is one state everyone shares in the oil, if there are two then go find your own oil in the north.


I didn't say they were militarily forced but by the resolutions passed wrongly... :roll:
User avatar
zan
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 16213
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 8:55 pm

Postby denizaksulu » Mon Dec 03, 2007 12:26 pm

Get Real! wrote:
zan wrote:
Talisker wrote:
zan wrote:Seems like in the last 3 hours they have not thought of one.... :lol:


From what I've seen and read previously Zan, you are a TC. What would your strategy be for reunification if you were a GC?


Yes I am a TC and my views on reunification are well known here but are ignored and I am attacked for things I did not say....Do you really want me to say again because if you have read this forum you will find that the thread will fall apart very quickly. Should we wait and see if any GC will venture an opinion??? You might even get a middle of the road poster that goes by the name of Kikapu to post one of his Gc biased Annan Plans if you are lucky. :wink: :lol:

As per usual you fail to answer the question at hand because you know very well that the RoC is locked in an illegal stale mate from which there is no end unless international law is implemented but this situation suits your treasonous, selfish, and stupid needs because all your community ever thinks about is today and to hell with tomorrow!

Zanny you’re a disgrace to Cyprus and don't even know the meaning of the word Cypriot.



Is stalemate meant to be stale mate as in 'the RoC is a stale governing body'? or are you saying that the 'Gov' is behaving 'illegally' with the North? :roll: :roll:
User avatar
denizaksulu
Forum Addict
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 36077
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 11:04 am

Postby observer » Wed Dec 05, 2007 11:15 am

There is, at governmental level, no GC strategy to reunify Cyprus because what their current President wants is a return to pre-74, only better. Details can be found in the Akritas Plan. As this aim is neither realistic nor achievable, and must be hidden from the international community, coherent policy and strategy has been replaced by empty slogans.
observer
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1665
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 10:21 am

Postby Nikitas » Wed Dec 05, 2007 11:29 am

And do tell us by what means Pap is going to take us back to pre 1974 days? And if he is planning that kind of major gambit why keep insisting that the solution will be BBF?
Nikitas
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 7396
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 2:49 pm

Postby observer » Wed Dec 05, 2007 11:42 am

I think that you missed my point. There is no strategy, or if you prefer no means, for Pap to achieve what he wants. He knows what he doesn't want, however, the BBF solution, but he can't say so because he will lose what little credibility he has with UN, EU, US etc. So he mouths empty slogans demanding the moon to ensure that BBF never happens.
observer
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1665
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 10:21 am

Postby observer » Wed Dec 05, 2007 12:04 pm

Nikitas wrote here http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.php?t=14574

Land distribution is the most important thing in any solution based on biregionality and one thing that totally baffles me is the lax approach of GC politicians to the issue. None of them seem to consider the territorial aspect important, they are always harping on about guarantees and such. Maybe they know something the rest of us do not know.


Kind of supports my theory that Pap don't really want a BBF solution.
observer
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1665
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 10:21 am

Postby Nikitas » Wed Dec 05, 2007 1:40 pm

It is not just Pap, all the others in the past, even Vassiliou who was the most flexible of the GC presidents did not put the territorial issue to the fore. Which is strange, because the better the territorial arrangement gets, the more GC refugees will get their land back, the less compensation to be paid etc. The GC side has been almost silent on this issue.
Nikitas
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 7396
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 2:49 pm

Postby Talisker » Wed Dec 05, 2007 11:59 pm

Nikitas wrote:It is not just Pap, all the others in the past, even Vassiliou who was the most flexible of the GC presidents did not put the territorial issue to the fore. Which is strange, because the better the territorial arrangement gets, the more GC refugees will get their land back, the less compensation to be paid etc. The GC side has been almost silent on this issue.


Nikitas, thanks for the useful info in your previous posts. Regarding the bi-regional, bi-communal federation (BBF) you referred to, I presume that if the GCs support this approach they have a figure in mind as to the relative proportions of the island to be governed by the two communities. What are they aiming for (if not 100%)? Is the idea to use the pre-1974 GC:TC population ratio and divide the land accordingly?
User avatar
Talisker
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1029
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 2:41 pm
Location: UK

Postby Mills Chapman » Thu Dec 06, 2007 6:05 am

Talisker,

A belated welcome to Cyprus Forum. I've enjoyed reading your level-headed and articulate posts. Good job with not getting swept up in others' emoticon exchanges on this thread.
User avatar
Mills Chapman
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 524
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 3:00 am
Location: USA (although, ideally it would be Aitutaki)

PreviousNext

Return to Cyprus Problem Solution Proposals

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest