The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content


Kyprianou and Denktash in AGREEMENT?

How can we solve it? (keep it civilized)

Kyprianou and Denktash in AGREEMENT?

Postby denizaksulu » Fri Jan 01, 2010 8:47 pm

http://www.cyprus-mail.com/cyprus/kypri ... l/20091231


Some info that appeared in the CM ref. tp 1979.
User avatar
denizaksulu
Forum Addict
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 36077
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 11:04 am

Postby Bananiot » Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:33 am

Some of these issues have been discussed in radio shows and the tv. It is true that bizonality, which is a hot issue today still, was not mentioned in the high level agreements but indeed, Yiannakis Christofides used the term in his speech to the SC in August 1979. It is obvious that he had the green light from Makarios to use this term. He could never take the initiative on such issue unless he was clearly instructed to do so.

Another issue that dominated the political scene at the time was the Anglo-American-Canadian plan for a comprehensive solution. Among else, this plan provided for the residents of Famagusta to return to their homes on the first day of the talks, no matter if these did not produce the goods. The usual culprits rejected the plan, but DISI (headed by Klerides at the time) had agreed and also AKEL was very positive. However, the following day, Astavin, the USSR ambassador in Nicosia told Papaioannou that the USSR could not agree to a plan that was prepared by the imperialists and of course this sealed the fate of the plan. Needles to say that it was 100 times better than the annan plan, for all of us. Yet, Lyssarides, Papadopoulos and the rest of the rejectionists gave a loud no, just as they did to all plans that were produced since 1948!
User avatar
Bananiot
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 6397
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 10:51 pm
Location: Nicosia

Postby DT. » Sat Jan 02, 2010 8:25 am

All this time Bananiot you've been telling us that the BBF was agreed as far back as the high level agreements. It would be suicide to change it now. It now seems we never agreed to a Bi-zonal BF at the high level agreements.
User avatar
DT.
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 12571
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 8:34 pm
Location: Lefkosia

Postby Bananiot » Sat Jan 02, 2010 9:49 am

Of course we had. Simply Makarios wanted a softer term to describe it, for obvious reasons. Do you also think that we should dump the accord no matter of the consequences?
User avatar
Bananiot
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 6397
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 10:51 pm
Location: Nicosia

Postby DT. » Sat Jan 02, 2010 10:16 am

Bananiot wrote:Of course we had. Simply Makarios wanted a softer term to describe it, for obvious reasons. Do you also think that we should dump the accord no matter of the consequences?


We hadn't. What was discussed (not agreed) was a bi-regionality without autonomy to the 2 regions. More districts than states.
User avatar
DT.
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 12571
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 8:34 pm
Location: Lefkosia

Postby Bananiot » Sat Jan 02, 2010 10:25 am

Read between the lines, it is dead easy. Why did Christophides (our Foreign Minister), a very decent chap by the way, introduce the term during his speech to the Security Council of the UN on August 31 in 1979? Can you give a rational explanation to this?
User avatar
Bananiot
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 6397
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 10:51 pm
Location: Nicosia

Postby observer » Sat Jan 02, 2010 11:06 am

DT. wrote:All this time Bananiot you've been telling us that the BBF was agreed as far back as the high level agreements. It would be suicide to change it now. It now seems we never agreed to a Bi-zonal BF at the high level agreements.


At the second Geneva Conference in 1974, Denktaş and Clerides had a series of informal meetings and issued the following releases afterwars

Denktaş issued the following report:

1. Mr Glafkos Klerides and Mr Rauf Denktaş, having met within the framework of the Geneva Declaration of 30th July from 10-12 August, agreed that a fundamental revision of the Constitutional structure of the Republic of Cyprus is necessary to ensure that the tragic events of the past should not repeat themselves, and in order to provide the minimum conditions in which the Greek and Turkish communities can permanently coexist together in the Republic in full confidence so that the security of each is safeguarded.
2. Bearing in mind the existence in practice in the Republic of Cyprus of two autonomous administrations, they agreed that this revision should result in the establishment of a federal system of government based on the following fundamental elements:
a. The Republic of Cyprus shall be an independent bi-national state.
b. The Republic shall consist of two federated states with full control and autonomy within their respective boundaries.
c. In determining the competence to be left to the federal government, the bi-national nature of the State shall be taken into account and the federal competence shall be exercised accordingly.
d. The area of the Turkish Cypriot Federated State shall cover 34% of the territory of the Republic falling north of a general line starting from the Limnitis-Lefka area in the west and running towards the east, passing through the Turkish controlled part of Nicosia, including the Turkish part of Famagusta and ending at the port of Famagusta.
3. Pending an agreement on the final Constitutional structure of the Republic, the two autonomous administrations shall take over the full administrative authority within their respective areas as defined above and shall take steps to normalize and stabilize life in the Republic and refrain from acts of violence, harassment and discrimination against each other.
4. Mr Klerides and Mr Denktaş further agreed:
a. At once to hold discussions between them in Nicosia, without the participation of the representatives of Greece and Turkey in order to elaborate as a matter of urgency the constitutional structures envisaged above, and,
b. To report to the Foreign Ministers of Greece, Turkey and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, at a further meeting to be held on 1st September 1974, on the conclusions reached.

Klerides issued the following report:

1. Mr Glafkos Klerides and Mr Rauf Denktaş, having conferred at Geneva between August 10 and 12, 1974, have concluded that a fundamental revision of the governmental system of the Republic of Cyprus is necessary to provide the conditions in which the Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot communities will be able to coexist in peace in the Republic with an utter and mutual confidence that the security of all will be safeguarded. They have agreed that this revision will result in the establishment of a system based on the existence of two autonomous administrations within suitable boundaries, united under a central government. They have also agreed that these changes will be effected within the framework of a sovereign, independent and united Cyprus Republic.
2. Mr Klerides and Mr Denktaş have moreover agreed:
a. To hold discussions between them in Nicosia in order to elaborate, as a matter of immediate urgency, the constitutional structure envisaged in the above paragraph.
b. To report to the Foreign Ministers of Greece, Turkey and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, at a further meeting to be held on 1st September 1974, on the conclusions reached.

I'd say that both sides had agreed to a BBF.
observer
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1666
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 10:21 am

Postby Piratis » Sat Jan 02, 2010 11:20 am

If by BBF you mean something like the Annan plan, that thing was rejected by the Cypriot people and it is now null and void. Too bad we had to waste so much time on something that can not be accepted by the Cypriots, the only ones who can decide what can happen on their island.
User avatar
Piratis
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 12261
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 11:08 pm

Postby Oracle » Sat Jan 02, 2010 11:37 am

Many politicians aired their views in the tides of time; some were elected to do so, some not. But, we are in the EU now and we have a chance to continue the full democratisation, and bid for the freedom, of our sovereign country.
User avatar
Oracle
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 23507
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 11:13 am
Location: Anywhere but...

Postby observer » Sat Jan 02, 2010 12:04 pm

Oracle wrote:Many politicians aired their views in the tides of time; some were elected to do so, some not. But, we are in the EU now and we have a chance to continue the full democratisation, and bid for the freedom, of our sovereign country.


Many politicians (in fact I think all senior EU politicians plus the UN leadership) urged GCs to adopt the Anan Plan in the run up to the 2004 EU expansion. That plan was based on the BBF principle.
observer
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1666
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 10:21 am

Next

Return to Cyprus Problem

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests