The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content


niyazi kizilyurek

Everything related to politics in Cyprus and the rest of the world.

Re: niyazi kizilyurek

Postby repulsewarrior » Thu Feb 28, 2019 8:50 pm

...thank-you, Kikapu, i only wish i could say it better myself.
User avatar
repulsewarrior
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 10861
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2006 2:13 am
Location: homeless in Canada

Re: niyazi kizilyurek

Postby kurupetos » Thu Feb 28, 2019 9:53 pm

repulsewarrior wrote:...thank-you, Kikapu, i only wish i could say it better myself.

I would vote for Kikapu, but unfortunately he's not a candidate... :(
User avatar
kurupetos
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 18855
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 7:46 pm
Location: Cyprus

Re: niyazi kizilyurek

Postby Pyrpolizer » Thu Feb 28, 2019 10:00 pm

You have explained your position very well Kiks.

My view is that in comparison with the Annan Plan or the 1960 agreements it's going to be worse in some aspects and better on others.
As for the future of TCs in case of no solution: Not bright, albeit a number of them have and will always be profiting.
User avatar
Pyrpolizer
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 10669
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 11:33 pm

Re: niyazi kizilyurek

Postby Sotos » Thu Feb 28, 2019 10:22 pm

Kikapu wrote:
Pyrpolizer wrote:
Sotos wrote:


I know very well what TCs want because the TELL us what they want: Everything divided in two. Go ask the TCs how many of them accept a truly united Cyprus without any division of either the territory or among the citizens, and almost nobody will accept this. From this forum out of so many TCs we've seen over the years only Kikapu wants such thing. People like Kikapu are probably less than 1% among TCs, and partitionists like Akinci and Niyazi are NOTHING like Kikapu.


What we wanted was ENOSIS. Did you forget that? Enosis caused the reaction for partition. So much you know about our history….
Like I said the majority of TCs are happy with a BBF, Kikaku included.


just that we all understand my position on BBF, is that since BBF is what is agreed to by the sides and it is what has been negotiated for the last few decades, I too support BBF as a concept since it is the only thing on the table. Where many people are divided on BBF, are it's applications. To Turkey and the "trnc", they want BBF which had everything in the 1959 Zurich agreements and more. To the RoC, they want a Democratic system as it is practiced anywhere in the western world, and this was way before 2004 when the RoC became part of the EU. We all know what the majority TCs and Turks want in the BBF via the Annan Plan and we also know what the majority of the GCs do not want in the BBF, also via the Annan Plan. There lies the dilemma.

I personally do not want or trust any settlement based on anything close to or worse than the 1959 Zurich agreements in any new BBF agreements as those said agreements is what has caused all the problems that we have today. Most of us have seen that movie in real time, and repeating past mistakes will only lead to similar problems in the future. It is a system that was never design to succeed other than cause division of the people and the country, so why repeat it? Turkey would love to repeat it, using the TCs as it's foot soldiers to demand the return of the failed past agreements because the Turks want full control of the island, either directly or indirectly, and the only way they can ever hope to achieve that, is through another undemocratic agreements as the case was with the 1959 Zurich agreements.

The RoC is not going to allow such agreements to happen, and did not happen before 2004 when the RoC became a full member of the EU, and most definitely, it is not going to let it happen anytime in the future as an EU member state. If the numerical minority TCs are not going to trust a fully Democratic system built into BBF as an EU member state with all of it's safeguards on rule of law, Human Rights and International law, why would the numerical majority GCs trust an undemocratic system in the BBF that goes against all of the EU's values?

It is a waste of time for the TCs/Turks asking for such undemocratic agreements to be in the BBF unless they expect the repeat of past problems to reappear in the near future, and they will. There's no question about that in my mind Why would anyone want to repeat failed past policies and not give a chance to Democratic policies with EU values? The GCs/RoC wants to give a Democratic system a go and not the past failed undemocratic system so why won't the TCs/Turkey?

For Federal Democratic system to work, "Political Equality" can only be based on political equality of each state to each other via the upper house, with "one man one vote". Political Equality cannot be based on equality of communities, but only individual citizens. This is not rocket science and we do not need to re-invent the wheel on what Democracy is and how to apply it. Cyprus is in the EU and has no choice but to apply EU values to any new BBF agreements regardless what the TCs and the Turks wants otherwise. This is the reality of today, just as the reality of the partitioning of the island at present via invasion and occupation by Turkey. The TCs and Turkey holding occupied territory as a ransom to blackmail the GCs/RoC to a BBF settlement not based on EU values only prolongs the non settlement on the island. For the GCs and the RoC is an easy choice. Keep the current status quo as is over turning the clock back to the 1959 Zurich agreement and worse.

Having lived in the Democratic Federal Government System in the USA for 25 years and Democratic Federal Government System in Confederate Switzerland for 15 years, I would choose both countries systems any day of the week over the systems proposed by the TCs/Turkey, because it can never safeguard the islands future in a positive way, but the opposite would be the outcome. We are Europeans and must accept to live in western democratic system regardless which community is a numerical minority or which one is a numerical majority, since governments in Democratic countries are formed by political parties in the majority and not by communities in the majority.

I hope I have explained my position on BBF!


Very well said Kikapu. Unfortunately the position of the Turkish side is that they take for granted the racist division of the population that was forced on us with the 1959 "agreements" (which as you correctly said is what caused all subsequent problems) and they want to add to that a geographic division as well, legalizing the results of the invasion and ethnic cleansing. If both land and people are divided in two, then what the fuck is united then? Nothing at all. Just a skin deep fake "unity", while everything on the inside is divided in two, in a dysfunctional, undemocratic banana republic. Why the hell would we choose this legalized form of partition? To reward the Settlers who have taken our homes with EU passports, and to give a free pass to 80 million Turks to roam the whole Cyprus?

I have studied the systems of USA and Switzerland, as well as Belgium, and they are NOTHING like what the Turkish side wants for Cyprus. In all those cases the territory is divided in states, but the citizens are NOT divided. If you are a USA citizen you can be resident of any US state you choose with FULL political rights. They don't have the "Black's State" or the "White's state". Even in countries like Belgium a Walloon can move to Flanders with FULL political rights and I believe the same is true for the Swiss Confederation. They called their country "confederation" but they are a lot more united than the "federation" that the Turkish side wants to impose in Cyprus.

So with BBF compared to 1959 agreements, we accept to move from a unitary state to a federated state, so more geographic division, but in return we expect to have democracy and a more united population compared to what we had in 1959. Otherwise the result will be the worst kind of partition.
User avatar
Sotos
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 11356
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 2:50 am

Re: niyazi kizilyurek

Postby Lordo » Fri Mar 01, 2019 12:38 am

you are barking up the wrong tree my native american friend. cyprus is nothing like any other country. there are two main communities in cyprus and they deserve the right to not only rule themselves but also so self determination.

gcs will not be able to flood the north and take control of the north politically. only becasue bloodshed will ensue like in 1963 when they tried exactly that to reduce tcs to a minority.

it is time to tell the truth to gcs instead of inflaming their myths and fears. you either take it or leave it. bbf has a good system where each community can rule themselves without imposing their will on the other or the other's will imposed on them.
what happens in america can stay there as it is also full shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit.
switzerland is the most racist country on earth, they can keep it too.

cyprus for cypriots. thats it.

everything else is bullshiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit of the first order.
User avatar
Lordo
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 15588
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 2:13 pm
Location: softalar, banana republic

Re: niyazi kizilyurek

Postby Sotos » Fri Mar 01, 2019 8:04 am

Lordo wrote:you are barking up the wrong tree my native american friend. cyprus is nothing like any other country. there are two main communities in cyprus and they deserve the right to not only rule themselves but also so self determination.


:lol: Classic view of a partitionist! If you want to rule yourselves and have a separate self-determination, then where is the unity?

There is nothing different in Cyprus. Most countries are multi-ethnic. And since like many other countries the ethnic groups in Cyprus were mixed all over the country, then a unitary state with minority protections is what would be the right system for Cyprus.

Ethnic based Federations are for countries where different ethnic groups are majorities in different regions of the country. We have made a HUGE compromise to accept such thing for Cyprus even thought this separation of the population did not occur naturally like all the other such federations, but was the result of a foreign invasion, occupation and ethnic cleansing. And yet, even us accepting to turn Cyprus from a unitary state to a federation, isn't enough for you.

You accept only the name "Federation" but the content you want has NOTHING to do with Federations as they exist in all other countries. What 99% of TCs want is PARTITION, but because you failed to achieve it, half of the TC partitionists want a disguised partition which they believe is easier to achieve, and will give them the added benefit of keeping them in EU, having a share to our natural gas, and having access to our facilities and services in the free part of Cyprus.

Only a tiny minority of TCs, like Kikapu, truly care for a united Cyprus, and we can see how the partitionists attack them.

To those fake Federation TC partitionists like Lordo and Akinci let me tell you: The kind of partition you are dreaming about is NOT feasible and will never happen. If you stop being so fucking greedy then you can be equal Cypriot and EU citizens and have a federal state to run your own internal affairs, just like all the other federations. If you don't agree to that and you continue to greedily demand a disguised partition where everything is divided in 2 and nothing is truly united, then there will be no solution and gradually Turkey will assimilate all of you and you will cease to exist. At that point RoC and Turkey will probably come to a deal of exchange of land and populations, we will get some land back and Turkey will get the rest of the north and TCs will become citizens of Islamic Turkey and lose your EU citizenship and access to the free part of Cyprus and EU.

You need to wake up and realize that it is Turkey which won the war, not the TCs. If you continue acting so stupidly and greedily because you think that you are the winners of the war and you will now get everything your way, then not only you will not win anything but you will be the biggest losers.
User avatar
Sotos
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 11356
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 2:50 am

Re: niyazi kizilyurek

Postby Kikapu » Fri Mar 01, 2019 9:45 am

Lordo wrote:you are barking up the wrong tree my native american friend. cyprus is nothing like any other country. there are two main communities in cyprus and they deserve the right to not only rule themselves but also so self determination.

gcs will not be able to flood the north and take control of the north politically. only becasue bloodshed will ensue like in 1963 when they tried exactly that to reduce tcs to a minority.

it is time to tell the truth to gcs instead of inflaming their myths and fears. you either take it or leave it. bbf has a good system where each community can rule themselves without imposing their will on the other or the other's will imposed on them.
what happens in america can stay there as it is also full shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit.
switzerland is the most racist country on earth, they can keep it too.

cyprus for cypriots. thats it.

everything else is bullshiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit of the first order.


You obviously do not know anything about Switzerland to label it as the “most racist country in the world”. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Cyprus is like any other country and will be like any other country once every citizen accepts Democracy and the rule of law. You do not accept it and via Turkey, most TCs are told not to accept it. It is funny how Turkey does not grant the same rights for the Kurds to self rule, but want to impose disguised partition in Cyprus under so called “self rule” but equal in other functions. I find that to be very racist in the form of “separate but equal”. What is even funnier, that when it suits the TCs, they pretend to like “democracy and the rule of law” in the “trnc” because they are the majority, but when it comes to having democracy and the rule of law in Cyprus, suddenly it is not so funny anymore because they will be the minority.

They do not understand this one simple fact, that it is the political majority parties that rules the government and the country, and not majority ethnic communities. It is obvious that Muslims are not capable to understand or accept of the functionings of democracy and the rule of law, hence the fact, it does not exists anywhere in the Muslim world, including Turkey.

As for self determination, you can try to do that if you had your own ancestry land in Cyprus like the Kurds have in Turkey or what the Swiss has with their Cantons, but even then, as the Catalonia has shown us, it is not that easy. The TCs have no such ancestral land to speak of in Cyprus as the whole island had a mix population, and the “trnc“ does not count as one, since it was formed under invasion, expulsion of rightful citizens and finally occupation and importation of illegal settlers by Turkey, which the TCs have welcomed all this with open arms, and now the TCs expect to be “masters in the north and partners in the south”. Good luck! :roll:
User avatar
Kikapu
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 16691
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 6:18 pm

Re: niyazi kizilyurek

Postby Kikapu » Fri Mar 01, 2019 11:14 am

Pyrpolizer wrote:You have explained your position very well Kiks.

My view is that in comparison with the Annan Plan or the 1960 agreements it's going to be worse in some aspects and better on others.
As for the future of TCs in case of no solution: Not bright, albeit a number of them have and will always be profiting.

That‘s the problem, Pyro. Turkey and the TCs think that they can demand more and more from the RoC and the GCs as a “punishment“ for them not accepting the Annan Plan. All that does is, it makes it easier for the RoC and the GCs to reject Turkey‘s and TCs demands, hence no settlement based on Turkey’s and the TCs demands. The RoC can go through the motions of “negotiations“ until the cows come home as they have no intentions of giving up the RoC to BBF unless their demands are met as an EU member state. In the meantime, the RoC continues with it‘s busy plans with the hydrocarbons with international players in which Turkey is kept in check in trying to threatening the final outcome of the said hydrocarbons.

There was a reason why the GCs agreed to BBF back when, which was to get rid of the 1959 Zurich agreements. This was also the biggest mistake the TCs made by agreeing to BBF, because they gambled everything they had in the 1959 Zurich agreements. Now everything is on the table to negotiate from scratch. Anytime you have 13 points that is missing in any constitution that does not protect Democracy and the rule of law, you would want to change it in anyway you can for the smooth running of any country. Makarios‘s 13 points proposals did not work, so, after the invasion and occupation of northern part of Cyprus by Turkey, it was smart for the RoC to agree to BBF as a concept, but not agree to it‘s terms that would be worse than the 1959 Zurich agreements. I believe the RoC will let the northern part of Cyprus go if push comes to shove rather lose the remaining RoC forever.

The RoC also knows there is very little chance ever losing the occupied areas as it does not serve Turkey‘s interests just keeping the north as they want to rule the whole island in one form or the other. This will never ever happen, hence the reason why there would never be a two state solution as neither side wants it. This is the trump card which the RoC hold along with the EU membership, hydrocarbons and the legality over the whole island. Under these circumstances, the TCs are at the mercy of the RoC and Turkey, unless they choose to be part of the EU member state RoC and live as equal citizens of the RoC in a Democratic country.
User avatar
Kikapu
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 16691
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 6:18 pm

Re: niyazi kizilyurek

Postby Oceanside50 » Fri Mar 01, 2019 6:43 pm

I’m not a fan of this BBF by any means but to answer Lordos suggestion that having democratic ideals is anathema to a Cyprus solution. What Lordo doesn’t understand is that, the BBF central government will have limited jurisdictions, ie passports, foreign policy, federal police, federal taxes, federal courts. the central government could not impose onto the states because all three governments are equal, meaning their laws are equal there is no supremacy, the only supremacy is in EU law and regulations..
Oceanside50
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 2233
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2013 5:45 pm

Previous

Return to Politics and Elections

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests