The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content


Turkey lays its cards open: No Cyprus recognition

How can we solve it? (keep it civilized)

Postby erolz » Thu Dec 09, 2004 3:52 am

pantelis wrote: Tcypriot,
By voting "yes", the TCs gave their consent for entering the EU family, with or without Turkey, as well as to receive fistfuls of euros from the EU. Everything about the EU is legal and paid for.


By voting yes we gave our consent to the Annan Plan and as an extension of that for Cyprus to enter the EU as a _Unifed_ state. By voting no the GC made the 'Annan Plan' void. How you can then take the yes vote as being 'consent' for an _ununifed_ Cyprus to enter the EU on the part ot the TC community is frankly beyond me.
As for the 'fistfulls of euros from the EU' and ingoring the fact the this money has been tied up and delayed by political manouverings, I would remind you that this 'one off' injection of euros from the EU is less than the _annaul_ subsidy that Turkey gives to the North.

pantelis wrote:Turkey's continued interference in Cyprus' internal and external afairs, is a violation of the EU laws. The occupation of part of Cyprus (now part of the EU) by the Turkish army, makes Turkey a violator of the EU laws, as well as the 1960 "agreements", thus the "agreements" become null and void, until fully restored(never). The EU laws are what count now, I think, not the 1960 "agreements".


If the 1960 agreements are null and void then there is no RoC, there is no independent Cyprus and there is no legal basis for the British bases.
If the situation was a simple as you suggest above (that Turkey is occupying part of the EU illegaly) then why would the EU even consider Turkish accession to the EU without a straight pre condition that they first removal all 'interference' in Cyprus affairs ? The fact is that (thankfully) many power basis in the EU realise and accept that the situation is far from as simple as you portray above.

This kind of statement is indicative of the idea that the EU will now deliver to GC that which 40 years of pain and tradgey for Cypriots has so far failed to deliver. As far as I am concerned the EU will not allow the tail to wag the dog. It is clear to me than many 'power bases' within the EU now realise the mistake in allowing a RoC EU entry into before a settlement. Those centers of power feel 'betrayed' by the actions of the RoC and some have even gone as far as saying so openly (an extraordinary action in itself).

Trying to recast the Cyprus problem as one merley to do with 'EU law' and the 'illegal presence' of Turkish troops in Cyprus is just the same old effort (to create a unifed Cypriot state under the sole effective control of a GC numerical majority). Thankfully there are many within the EU that understand that the Cyprus problem is much 'deeper' than these surface 'facts'. Thankfully they are not about to allow the EU to be the agents that sucseed in granting GC all that they want (and failed to gain in the past from murder, death and ethnic cleansing amongst other means). The RoC may be in the EU now but it will not be allowed to indefinatley dictate or blackmail the EU and any attempts to do so will ultimately cost the RoC dearly imo.

The presence of Turkey in Cyprus today is a symptom of the Cyprus problem. It is not the problem itself. Attempts to remove this symptom without dealing with the underlying problem will fail, one way or another as far as I can see.
erolz
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 2414
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 5:00 pm
Location: Girne / Kyrenia

Postby pantelis » Thu Dec 09, 2004 6:01 am

By voting yes we gave our consent to the Annan Plan and as an extension of that for Cyprus to enter the EU as a _Unifed_ state.


Cyprus, in its entirety, entered the EU. The TCs, as citizens of the RoC, became EU citizens.


Code: Select all
there is no independent Cyprus


Cyprus is independent, as long as she does not depend on external entities' handouts for her existence, but to the majority of her people, with the sweat of their work and their taxes.


there is no legal basis for the British bases.


III. THE TREATY OF GUARANTEE

This is the draft of a treaty to be concluded between the Republic of Cyprus on the one part and the United Kingdom, Greece and Turkey on the other under which the Republic of Cyprus undertakes to "insure the maintenance of its independence, territorial integrity and security, as well as respect for its Constitution." The Republic of Cyprus also undertakes "not to participate in whole or in part, in any political or economy union with any state whatsoever." Activities promoting union or partition are prohibited. The United Kingdom, Greece and Turkey on their part guarantee the independence, territorial integrity and security of the Republic of Cyprus and the system established by the basic articles of the Constitution. The three powers also will prohibit in their territories any activities promoting the union of Cyprus with another state or the partition of Cyprus. In case the undertakings of this treaty are infringed upon, Greece, Turkey and the United Kingdom shall consult "with a view to making representations or taking the necessary measures to ensure observance of these provisions." If common or concerted action proves impossible, each of the three guarantors reserves the right to act alone "with the sole purpose of re-establishing the state of affairs established by the present treaty." The treaty is to come into force with its signature.


None of the interested parties have met their responsibilities to all the parts of the treaty. What holds and what doen't?


why would the EU even consider Turkish accession to the EU without a straight pre condition that they first removal all 'interference' in Cyprus affairs ?


I, also, have the same question as you have.


The fact is that (thankfully) many power basis in the EU realise and accept that the situation is far from as simple as you portray above.


No, the fact is that their interests are above the interests of Cyprus and the Cypriot people. We know, by now, that everything revolves around the interests of each country separately- there is no justice in politics only interests!

It is clear to me than many 'power bases' within the EU now realise the mistake in allowing a RoC EU entry into before a settlement.


They did what was right - according to their interests, at the time of their decision. They had lost all hope of a rational response from your side.


The RoC may be in the EU now but it will not be allowed to indefinatley dictate or blackmail the EU and any attempts to do so will ultimately cost the RoC dearly imo.


They know that what the RoC has the right to do now, Turkey may be able to do in the future, if they let in the group. That is a much scarier thought to them, than Cyprus vetoing Turkey out. (I am watching the demostrations in Turkey against the new Penal Code, while I type)


Trying to recast the Cyprus problem as one merley to do with 'EU law' and the 'illegal presence' of Turkish troops in Cyprus is just the same old effort (to create a unifed Cypriot state under the sole effective control of a GC numerical majority).


A referendum in the north, asking the right questions like, "should the Turkish troops stay or go?", or "should the settlers stay or go?", or "should the Turkish government officials have the final word in every TC "government" office or not?", would give the world the clear picture of Turkey's role in Cyprus. Would you entertain such a referendum (without the "help" of the "grey dogs" and of the bombs, of course).
Let your people choose their leaders without interference, pressure and threats from Turkey, for a change. Once you have a free and democratic voice representing you, it will be a lot easier to sort out our differences and figure out our common interests for a mutually acceptable "road map".


The presence of Turkey in Cyprus today is a symptom of the Cyprus problem.


This might have been believable in July 1974. With the continued occupation, since 74, Turkey has been exposed to the world over, she is Cyprus' problem. Turkey or the Turkish Cypriots have never gone to the UN, requesting the restoration of the 1960 constitution. Partition was their demand, all along. The brokerred partition plans, by our "friends and allies" are proof of their true intentions. ( What did not help the situation, was the existence of a sizable leftist movement, on both sides of the Cypriots communities, providing Ankara with devoted foreign guidance and support (today these interests have shifted into a different arena, but remain alive and well, as the Cyprus Problem is).
Last edited by pantelis on Thu Dec 09, 2004 7:03 am, edited 1 time in total.
pantelis
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 391
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2004 2:41 am
Location: USA

Postby pantelis » Thu Dec 09, 2004 6:37 am

38. As feasible help strengthen non-Communist labor organizations in Cyprus.

39. Be prepared, as appropriate and feasible, to encourage the reimposition of the ban on the Communist Party of Cyprus.

40. Discreetly encourage the new Cyprus Government to develop, maintain, and train its internal police and security services to combat Communist subversion.


http://dosfan.lib.uic.edu/ERC/frus/frus ... prus5.html



Creating a Common Homeland which will live in peace is only possible by freeing ourseleves from the bases, troops and weapons brought to the island because of its strategic position.

Cyprus must be freed from military bases, troops and weapons.

To achieve this main goal, we must in a spirit of international solidarity cooperate with the forces of peace in our country, region and the world.


http://www.cyprusive.com/default.asp?CID=369
pantelis
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 391
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2004 2:41 am
Location: USA

Postby erolz » Thu Dec 09, 2004 12:11 pm

pantelis wrote:
By voting yes we gave our consent to the Annan Plan and as an extension of that for Cyprus to enter the EU as a _Unifed_ state.


Cyprus, in its entirety, entered the EU. The TCs, as citizens of the RoC, became EU citizens.


I understood that you were claiming that the TC yes vote to the Annan plan equated to the TC consent to the RoC, without unification, entering the EU. If I misunderstood your argument then appologies. If not then I still argue that TC consent to the Annan plan can in no (reasonable) way be taken as TC communities consent for the RoC to enter the EU without a settlement.

pantelis wrote:
Code: Select all
there is no independent Cyprus


there is no legal basis for the British bases.



You seemed to be contending that Turkey could not refer to or use the 1960 agreements as any basis for future discussion because they are 'null and void'. If your position is the 1960 agreements are null and void then they are null and void in their entirety. You can not arbitarily say this part is null and void and this part is not, or they are void in these conditions but not void in others.

pantelis wrote:None of the interested parties have met their responsibilities to all the parts of the treaty. What holds and what doen't?


Exactly. In the absense of agreement on changes they are either null and void in their entirety (in which case there is no RoC and no legal basis for British bases etc) or they still stand in their entirety. There is no 'half way house' (in legal terms).

pantelis wrote:I, also, have the same question as you have.


The difference vbeing the answer is self evident to me. Namely the EU does not swallow GC propaganda that the only issue in Cyprus is the presence of Turkish forces and influence. They recognise what you seem to be refusing to recognise - that the issue is much deeper and more complex than that.

pantelis wrote:They did what was right - according to their interests, at the time of their decision. They had lost all hope of a rational response from your side.


They did what they thought was right at the time, based on a (false) assumption that it was TC intrasigence that was preventing a settlement. They have learn't the hard way that such an assment was in fact wrong. They have now beeen lumbered with a problem they did not expect to have when they agreed to entry of RoC with or without settelment. I have little doubt that if they could 'turn back the clock' they would not make the same decision again. I also have little doubt that many blame the RoC for this problem.

pantelis wrote:Let your people choose their leaders without interference, pressure and threats from Turkey, for a change. Once you have a free and democratic voice representing you, it will be a lot easier to sort out our differences and figure out our common interests for a mutually acceptable "road map".


Are you sure you do not mean 'cut all your ties with the only ones who supported you in your direst hour of need and who represent your strongest allies so that GC will be more able to impose a solution that is to their liking and not yours'?

You claim I do not have a free and democratic voice in the North. I refute this. No one has ever put any pressure on me to vote any other way that I choose to.

pantelis wrote:This might have been believable in July 1974. With the continued occupation, since 74, Turkey has been exposed to the world over, she is Cyprus' problem. Turkey or the Turkish Cypriots have never gone to the UN, requesting the restoration of the 1960 constitution.


You want the TC to go back and request a return to a senario that led them into 11 years of tradgey (when no one seemed to care very much about the rule of law or human rights) and led to the events of 74? That would be patent madness even if blood had not been spent to protect us from that failure.

The Cyprus issue remains the same as it did then. Will we and can we agree to live togeather in Cyprus on terms that we all agree are fair and just and that meet both sides concerns - or not. To me your 'line' that the Cyprus issue is merely about the presense of Turkish troops here does nothing to help solve the TRUE Cyprus problem and much to aid it's continuance. Are you prepared to share the island on terms that TC can accpet? If not are you prepared to sanction an agreed division? If you are not prepared to do either of these, then no amount of insistance that the 'only' problem in Cyprus today is the presence of Turkish troops will lead to true peace and harmony in Cyprus let alone real unity.
erolz
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 2414
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 5:00 pm
Location: Girne / Kyrenia

Postby MicAtCyp » Thu Dec 09, 2004 6:11 pm

Metecyp wrote: Watch out, the admin might get pissed

PS. Avrupa Yok ==> No Europe


That's what I meant!
No cyprus recognition=No Europe (for Turkey.)
User avatar
MicAtCyp
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1579
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2004 10:10 am

Postby MicAtCyp » Thu Dec 09, 2004 6:33 pm

For those people who cannot comprehend how Cyprus became an EU member does the Helsinki agreement ring a bell?
Jesus, sometimes you guys seem so ignorant...
Sorry.
User avatar
MicAtCyp
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1579
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2004 10:10 am

Postby brother » Thu Dec 09, 2004 6:35 pm

So i guess that the E.U aspirations will finish next week, as there is not any chance for recognition of ROC by Turkey, tassos plan has back fired, well i hope this makes you all happy.
User avatar
brother
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 4711
Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2004 5:30 pm
Location: Cyprus/U.K

Postby pantelis » Fri Dec 10, 2004 5:54 am

Erol wrote:
I understood that you were claiming that the TC yes vote to the Annan plan equated to the TC consent to the RoC, without unification, entering the EU. If I misunderstood your argument then appologies. If not then I still argue that TC consent to the Annan plan can in no (reasonable) way be taken as TC communities consent for the RoC to enter the EU without a settlement.


Response:
I did not see any TCs demonstrating against RoC's application and acceptance in the EU. I saw them demonstrating against your leaders, who are still in power, and for a united Cyprus. The Annan plan was dictated by Turkey, not the TCs. That is what Turkey was willing to accept, that's what they voted. Anything better than the status quo would have been supported by the same number, whether it was called Annan plan or Osman plan.
The TCs are willing to enjoy the benefits of being part of the EU, as members of the interanationally accepted RoC, but cannot swallow the reality of the existence of the RoC.
The Cyprus problem was created with the 1960 treaties. Turkey and the TCs did not accept anything for 44 years, except proposed partition plans. As soon as they realized that RoC's EU prospect was not simply a dream, they devised their own plan, with the help of their friends. Their plan aimed to derail the Roc's EU train, or at least delay it until they could get on board also. To their dismay, they failed. The train no only left without them, the RoC was on board.
On Dec 17, Turkey will be given a chance for a train ticket for the next EU trip, only if she stops her efforts to bend the rules of the rail-system.
The RoC, this small patch of dirt that amounts to nothing, has as much power as the mighty UK has. Isn't this how you interpret your right to be "equal", in an RoC partnership, to have the power of a veto?
What good, is this power for, if you have it and refrain from using it in the only case you have full justification to do so?
Like your leaders speak about the "realities" north of the mine-fields, there are also realities in the south and beyond, beyond the coasts of Cyprus. Which are these realities about the RoC?
-The RoC was not dissolved before entering the EU, it will never be dissolved.
-The RoC is a full member of the EU and the UN.
-All Cypriots who carry an RoC passport are not only citizens of the RoC, but citizens of the EU.
-The RoC is represented and participates in the EU and internationally, through the funding of the taxpayer citizens of the RoC.
-The RoC is a contributor member of the EU. (Erol, you do not expect the RoC taxpayers to send money to help the economy of a country that does not have the decency to recognize the existence of her benefactors? Do you?)

In other words, the external issues of the RoC are settled and paid for - this is the reality, Erol, the EU clock cannot be turned back,(unless someone alludes the the RoC has WMDs :D .


Erol wrote:
You seemed to be contending that Turkey could not refer to or use the 1960 agreements as any basis for future discussion because they are 'null and void'. If your position is the 1960 agreements are null and void then they are null and void in their entirety. You can not arbitarily say this part is null and void and this part is not, or they are void in these conditions but not void in others.


Response:
Turkey chose to ignore the 1960 agreements with a 30+ years occupation of part of Cyprus. The Annan plan, adopted by Turkey, has nothing to do with these agreements, it is a disguised legalization of a de facto partition.

Erol wrote:
Exactly. In the absense of agreement on changes they are either null and void in their entirety (in which case there is no RoC and no legal basis for British bases etc) or they still stand in their entirety. There is no 'half way house' (in legal terms).


Response:
They are null and void in the occupied part of Cyprus. Do you know of any GCs who use the government offices and the passports of Denktash? I do not need to tell you where the TCs go, when they need government or health services, do I?

Erol wrote:
The difference vbeing the answer is self evident to me. Namely the EU does not swallow GC propaganda that the only issue in Cyprus is the presence of Turkish forces and influence. They recognise what you seem to be refusing to recognise - that the issue is much deeper and more complex than that.


Response:
The human right abuses of Turkey and their racist ways, both within their country as well abroad, are very well known to all. Simply visit any human rights site. Propaganda is what Turkey does right now, by passing laws and reforms without implementing them.


Erol wrote:
They did what they thought was right at the time, based on a (false) assumption that it was TC intrasigence that was preventing a settlement. They have learn't the hard way that such an assment was in fact wrong. They have now beeen lumbered with a problem they did not expect to have when they agreed to entry of RoC with or without settelment. I have little doubt that if they could 'turn back the clock' they would not make the same decision again. I also have little doubt that many blame the RoC for this problem.


Response:
What they know and think about versus what they actually do or say, are not necessarily logical to you and me. What is important, is to understand that they always act in their best interests. They also know that what they may say is "fair and just" for someone else, may become "fair and just" and fair for themselves, one day. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." What I can bet on, is that before Turkey joins the EU, the veto will be abolished and a more democratic system will be adopted. By then, the UK will be a member of NAFTA, not the EU.


Erol wrote:
Are you sure you do not mean 'cut all your ties with the only ones who supported you in your direst hour of need and who represent your strongest allies so that GC will be more able to impose a solution that is to their liking and not yours'?


Response:
The European framework of the rule of law the aquis communautaire are what Turkey trying to adopt and conform to, right?. If they are good for Europe and Turkey, they should be good to all Cypriots also, without derogations and discrimination.

Erol wrote:
You claim I do not have a free and democratic voice in the North. I refute this. No one has ever put any pressure on me to vote any other way that I choose to.


Response:
I did not say that there TCs without special privileges. They are at least 35% of the lot. If I remember correctly, you voted "NO" to the referendum. Remind me why, please.


Erol wrote:
You want the TC to go back and request a return to a senario that led them into 11 years of tradgey (when no one seemed to care very much about the rule of law or human rights) and led to the events of 74? That would be patent madness even if blood had not been spent to protect us from that failure.

Response:
Are you the same person as you were at fifteen? I hope not! Remember two things, "you cannot have your cake, and eat it too" and "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

Erol wrote:
The Cyprus issue remains the same as it did then. Will we and can we agree to live togeather in Cyprus on terms that we all agree are fair and just and that meet both sides concerns - or not. To me your 'line' that the Cyprus issue is merely about the presense of Turkish troops here does nothing to help solve the TRUE Cyprus problem and much to aid it's continuance. Are you prepared to share the island on terms that TC can accpet? If not are you prepared to sanction an agreed division? If you are not prepared to do either of these, then no amount of insistance that the 'only' problem in Cyprus today is the presence of Turkish troops will lead to true peace and harmony in Cyprus let alone real unity.


Response:
The Turkish occupation force, is like a cancerous tumor on the body of Cyprus. It needs to go, so the mind can think clearly. Things cannot change overnight, but they can. The people of Cyprus can live and prosper together, in peace, because they are not stupid. Yes there are fanatics on both sides, but these kind of groups exist in every country.
The European norm, can become the norm for Cyprus also. We do not have choice, if we decide to live together, without borders. Even if "they" decide that you can enter the EU as a separate country, you cannot avoid conformance with the EU common law. The EU does not build walls, it tears them down. This is what surprises the most, with Turkey's application, not the fact the EU is willing to accept her, but the fact that they want to get in. The Turkish generals will not give up their power, without a fight.

I proposed a "plan", in a different forum, long before the annan plan was finalized, before the opening of the gates.
My plan was to create a third zone (county), part of the RoC, say in Famagusta and Karpasia; to create jobs and invite in all progressive people, of both sides, to live and work together, and thus become the nucleus of the future Cypriot Society. The rest will follow.
pantelis
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 391
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2004 2:41 am
Location: USA

Postby metecyp » Fri Dec 10, 2004 6:34 am

pantelis wrote:My plan was to create a third zone (county), part of the RoC, say in Famagusta and Karpasia; to create jobs and invite in all progressive people, of both sides, to live and work together, and thus become the nucleus of the future Cypriot Society. The rest will follow.

Interesting idea...how about the south gives up some land, the north gives up some land and a bicommunal progressive zone is created somewhere in the middle with no ties to either the TRNC or the RoC...
User avatar
metecyp
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1154
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 4:53 pm
Location: Cyprus/USA

Postby pantelis » Fri Dec 10, 2004 7:14 am

Interesting idea...how about the south gives up some land, the north gives up some land and a bicommunal progressive zone is created somewhere in the middle with no ties to either the TRNC or the RoC...


Did I say my idea in the Greek language..... Metecyp?
pantelis
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 391
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2004 2:41 am
Location: USA

PreviousNext

Return to Cyprus Problem

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests