From what I heard, they'll be meeting every few days, discussing, in turn, each aspect of the solution in depth.
The thing is that the solution will not be the result of any talks between any GC or TC political party. Of course such meetings are always helpful but at the same time I wouldn't rush into describing them as a major development. After all, such bi-communal meetings between politicians have been going on for years now. The only thing to create some kind of movement out of the currenty stalemate which in turn may lead to developments is if the Cypriot Government (Tassos Papadopoulos) comes up with a real pro-solution policy and takes some serious steps to convince that he means business.
I think Tassos wanted to give it a decent shot at finding a solution, but became alienated half-way through the process when he felt that the UN was not listening to his concerns. After that point, he lost faith in the process and stopped co-operating.
I wonder if Tassos was giving the solution a decent shot when he was having secret disscussions in his residence with Denktash Jt. But let us suppose that what u write is the case. One cannot help but wonder about the day after? there is no solution, no land has been returned, the occupation army is still here and increasing etc etc (Bananiot has summarized it furter up). So what has Tassos done one whole year after the referendum and what about the "infamous" OXI management (diaxeirish tou OXI)? For better or for worse, the Annan plan was rejected - fair enough. The question is if Papadopoulos is capable of putting things back on track and negotiating a decent plan for us? On this i have my serious doubts.
My source is conversations, both with simple GCs and with prominent leaders of the Yes campaign. For instance, one prominent leader of the Yes camp told me that the economic restrictions to investing in the TCCS were not a problem, because it would be easy to bypass such provisions through off-shore companies under a different name. One GC told me that "We should have said Yes, despite the problematic aspects, and then, two or three years later, we could have changed it". When I argued that this is what happened in 1963, the point didn't seem to register.
Since the outcome of the referendum was the rejection of the UN plan, only God knows what would have happened if there was a solution. the thing is that neither side will ever offered the "perfect" plan. But even if this happens it still doesnt matter as the success of any solution will depend greatly on the ability of both sides to address together all the problems that will surely arise in the process. According to some sources, this is not what happened in 1963 when some problems in the implementation of the agreements were also encountered. The TCs for example should have never insisted on the implementation 70-30 ratio "here and now" (by Dec 1962 they were participating with 25%). And makarios should have not rushed with suggestions to amend the Constitution, especially at that time when tension was running high and when there were other ways to bypass the problems that were encountered (for more on this read "My Deposition" by Glafkos Clerides, Vol.1).
O.
