The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content


A poll about bizonality

Propose and discuss specific solutions to aspects of the Cyprus Problem

To what extent should the solution of the Cyprus Problem be bizonal?

No bizonality - the right to settle freely anywhere on the island should be upheld
6
60%
Flexible bizonality - GCs should be welcome in the north and TCs in the south, so long as they do not exceed 33% of the population
4
40%
Strict bizonality - GCs should live in the south and TCs in the north, under conditions of ethnic purity
0
No votes
 
Total votes : 10

Postby insan » Mon Dec 13, 2004 8:56 pm

No bizonality would be ideal.



Agree...

Bizonality for a transitional period (say 10-15 years) could be necessary though.


It seems secure.


A strict pure bizonality is not acceptable. When people can live freely anywhere they choose within EU you can not restrict them of doing so in their own country.



Correct... and if this restrictions will last 10-15 years why do we waste our times, energies and financial resources to build a bi-zonal federal system?

I believe that the TC state should be around 24% of the ground. This way, if almost all TCs choose to live in the TC state, they will have a clear majority even if all GC refugees return.



Who are the refugees by the way? If the definition of "refugee" also includes their children, grand children and the ones those children and grand children married with; their average number might be 170.000 or so. If all of them return TCs won't have a clear majority.



If the TCs decide that they don't care to restrict themselves in their own state, this will mean that they don't have a problem to live along with GCs and therefore it will not be a problem if in the TC state we have 50%-50% GCs/TCs.



Yes piratis, they won't have problem live along with GCs and therefore in the TC state we may have %50GCs/%50 TCs. Nevertheless with this method land ownership of TCs can be reduced to %12 that is what you actually believe belong to TCs.

The senate will be always elected by TCs and GCs separately irrespective of where they live.



Yes, it doesn'tr matter where they live. They should be elected seperatly and have political equality.
User avatar
insan
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 9044
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 11:33 pm
Location: Somewhere in ur network. ;]

Postby turkcyp » Mon Dec 13, 2004 9:20 pm

Dear insan,

When I said that what we are interested is "political bizonality" instead of geographical bizonality, I meant to say that GCs can come and live wherever they want, whenever they want, in what numbers they want.

But this does not mean that there should not be a geographical seperation, in other words predefined borders. Withour pre-defined borders what we end up having is 1960 constitution.

So then why are we still negotiating and giving up our rights that we have obtained in 1960 in order to achieve some other solution. The ideo of negotiation is that we give up something from 1960 constituiton and we obtain something in return, so that both GCs and TCs are better off at the end of the day. Otherwise what are we still negotiating for?

And if we were to give up our righst from 1960 constitution, then at least w should obtain a bizonal federal state, even if its bizonal on paper only. Furthermore without setting specific boundaries there is no way those political restrictions can be applied.

Again I do not care if there are 200k or more, GCs living in 200K TC state. At the end of the day, these homes are going to be there not their primary residences so that they can have restrictions on political involvement. In other words they will never be officially a part of teh northern state population.

These are very legal terms, that should be defined quite clearly.
turkcyp
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1117
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:40 am

Postby insan » Mon Dec 13, 2004 11:16 pm

And if we were to give up our righst from 1960 constitution, then at least w should obtain a bizonal federal state, even if its bizonal on paper only. Furthermore without setting specific boundaries there is no way those political restrictions can be applied.



Let's say the amount of land belongs to TCs is %18 of Cyprus(Private+state land). The percentage of the land which belongs to the GC refugees who will return was added to %18 and the percentage of land administered by TC constituent state was increased to %29...In 15 years time all of the GC refugees(170.000) returned and population ratio in Turkish Constituent state became 60TC/40GC. Then all restrictions was lifted, some 100.000 more GCs and 60.000 foreigners bought land from TCs and settled down to Turkish Constituent state in 5 years time after the restrictions lifted. As a consequence, the population ratio in Turkish Constituent State became 60GCs/40TCs/20Foreigners and the land belongs to TCs reduced to %5 of the total Cyprus land. At this stage TCs are nothing more than a minority in Cyprus and can't be one of the politicaly equal community partner of GC community. In 20 or 25 years all TCs can be erased from the Cyprus map.
User avatar
insan
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 9044
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 11:33 pm
Location: Somewhere in ur network. ;]

Postby turkcyp » Mon Dec 13, 2004 11:52 pm

insan wrote:
And if we were to give up our righst from 1960 constitution, then at least w should obtain a bizonal federal state, even if its bizonal on paper only. Furthermore without setting specific boundaries there is no way those political restrictions can be applied.



Let's say the amount of land belongs to TCs is %18 of Cyprus(Private+state land). The percentage of the land which belongs to the GC refugees who will return was added to %18 and the percentage of land administered by TC constituent state was increased to %29...In 15 years time all of the GC refugees(170.000) returned and population ratio in Turkish Constituent state became 60TC/40GC. Then all restrictions was lifted, some 100.000 more GCs and 60.000 foreigners bought land from TCs and settled down to Turkish Constituent state in 5 years time after the restrictions lifted. As a consequence, the population ratio in Turkish Constituent State became 60GCs/40TCs/20Foreigners and the land belongs to TCs reduced to %5 of the total Cyprus land. At this stage TCs are nothing more than a minority in Cyprus and can't be one of the politicaly equal community partner of GC community. In 20 or 25 years all TCs can be erased from the Cyprus map.


None of the things you have said nullifies the need for bizonality.

For example I have a house in France, but I can not vote France elections, only I can vote in municipality elections in France. The same should be true for GCs moving to TC state. Their numbers do not change the basic tenent of this provision. They can be 10k, 100k, 300k, it doesn't matter. Their other political rights, they should exercise in GC state.

I am sorry but I am not getting your point here in this discussion. I am really having hard time understanding what is your position?
turkcyp
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1117
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:40 am

Postby insan » Tue Dec 14, 2004 12:14 am

I am sorry but I am not getting your point here in this discussion. I am really having hard time understanding what is your position?



Start thinking from here:

If %80 of the land of one (constituent) state belongs to others, it is not your (constituent) state anymore. After 20 or 25 years, you are just a plain citizen of GCs and Eouropeans invaded Cyprus. No federation, no bi-zonality, no bi-communality. Is there such a small state or administration area in the world, under the risk of losing %80 of its land for the sake of unrestricted freedoms?

After all happened, we all will become real EU citizens, considering any of the EU countries as our homeland...
User avatar
insan
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 9044
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 11:33 pm
Location: Somewhere in ur network. ;]

Postby pantelis » Tue Dec 14, 2004 7:12 am

Insan and Turkcyp,

I simply would like to remind you what helps a village, or a city, or a country, or a union group of countries improve and advance.
Money and jobs.
People with money come into the this entity and invest their money, expecting to get them back with a profit. In the process, the local (original) people there benefit from the new economic activity these money people bring in.
No honest investor would dare risk his money in a place where the political climate is not stable and Democratic. If he comes, his interests have to be secured and backed by the laws of the place.

There is also the case where investors risk their investments if they are in "bed" with dictators, provided the rate of return is high enough. In this case, these investors rob the local people and share some of their profits with only the dictators.

(Speaking of crooks, does anyone know the stories of Asil Nadir first hand? Can you please tell us about him, briefly. Is Kibris, the most popular paper of the TCs? Why did Nadir support the Annan plan, contrary to Denktash's positions? What is his role in the north now? Is he considered a benefactor or a crook?)

Erdogan wants a clear promise from the EU, that eventually Turkey will be become a member. Why? Because he knows that this is the only way he will be able to attract foreign investment into the country, thus create jobs, thus improve the economy, thus improve the standard of living of the people, thus maintain power for his party, therefore become rich through the process.

My conclusion:
Simple people do not care about who has political power, as long as they have jobs, money and a good life.
The politicians care who has political power, because he who holds the power, holds the biggest "spoon".
pantelis
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 391
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2004 2:41 am
Location: USA

Postby insan » Tue Dec 14, 2004 12:53 pm

Insan and Turkcyp,

I simply would like to remind you what helps a village, or a city, or a country, or a union group of countries improve and advance.
Money and jobs.
People with money come into the this entity and invest their money, expecting to get them back with a profit. In the process, the local (original) people there benefit from the new economic activity these money people bring in.
No honest investor would dare risk his money in a place where the political climate is not stable and Democratic. If he comes, his interests have to be secured and backed by the laws of the place.



Of course if they don't import cheaper labourers from other EU members. I remember once MicAtCyp warned us against this danger. What's the situation re brother MicAtCyp?
User avatar
insan
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 9044
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 11:33 pm
Location: Somewhere in ur network. ;]

Postby Alasya » Tue Dec 28, 2004 12:51 am

Piratis wrote:

"I believe that the TC state should be around 24% of the ground"


Ok 24% of the ground, and say 42% of the sky that sounds fair! Our ideas for a settlement is finally reaching new dimensions. How about the Sea?
User avatar
Alasya
Member
Member
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 8:42 pm
Location: Quebec City, CANADA

Postby Alasya » Tue Dec 28, 2004 1:50 am

With all respect, I do not think the USA is an appropriate model to be applied to Cyprus. Belgium would be a much more appropriate model.

Firstly, it is not generally accepted as fact that the USA is a multi-cultural society or melting pot as you put it. Most of the 50 states are nearly all white, British (mostly Anglo-Saxon, and Celtic).

it is only in certain states such as California (which has always had a Spanish presence-it was a part of Mexico back in the time of Jefferson), New York (traditional entry point for many future Americans), Florida (significant Hispanic population), Pennsylvania (huge German population) that people of many different backrounds make up a large portion,a quarter, half or even a majority of the population.

And as for the states such as Connecticut, Rhode Island, Indiana and Texas, Virginia, Massachusetts, Maryland, Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, it is only the Cities that one can really call multi-cultural. In rural Massachusetts, people are nearly all of English Puritan descent and are proud of their Pilgrim Fathers.

In the other states such as Dakotas, Carolinas, Wisconsin, Montana, Idaho, Alaska, New Mexico, Nebraska, Iowa, Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Oregon, Wyoming, Minnesota, Oklahoma, Kansas, Colorado, Arkansas, Tennesee, Mississippi, Louisiana (except in Lafayette where the Cajuns live), Alabama, Kentucky, Nevada (not Las Vegas), and Most of Georgia, and Missouri they are populated by whites primarily of Anglo-Saxon and Celtic descent, in other words British and Irish.

The British culture and influence is without a doubt the dominant one in the United States, except it is not called British nowadays, it is called American. You only have to look at the surnames of US congressmen on the US Congress website to realise how many English, Scottish and Irish surnames dominate both houses of congress. Even the African-Americans who in their own right form a nation have more British influences than of any other culture. They were after all shipped cruelly across the Atlantic to the East Coast by British seamen of entreprise.

People were NOT free in the days of Jefferson, or Lincoln or Washington to be who they liked. Civil Liberties were some what of a rarerity back then. American republicanism was imposed on the population after the defeat of the British colonialists and it was drilled into every Child in every school in a very bias way, thats why America of the English colonies grew into America. People did not call themselves Americans out of choice. Indoctrination played a pivotal role in forming future generations of Americans. American Kids till this very day sing their national anthem at School and houses in many middle-class areas play the US flag on their front lawn.

Even German immigrants to the US in the 18th, 19th and 20th century had to anglicize their names to sound more American! I read in a book on the history of the United States that one guy was compelled to change his surname shortly after arrival from Schmidt to Smith in order to improve "his standing" in his adopted society. More recently I have a good Armenian friend who lives in California who changed his name from Hagopian to Harris when he first arrived in the US.

You just cannot say that the US does not atleast try to impose in a bias way an American (formerly British) way of life to its current and future citizens. I have seen immigrants to the USA have to sing the National Anthem and swear an oath. America especially today under Bush junior is more patriotic than ever before.

As for the African Americans, they are not as different in culture, religion and language as their white American neighbours. Their mother-tongue is English (not including Haitians, Dominicans and francophone Blacks and Mulattos from Louisiana), they are Christian (mostly protestant) and their culture is not a million miles away from their white neighbours.

Cyprus on the other hand is a bi-ethnic state, it is not a melting pot (integration is difficult enough, as for assimilation it is and always has been rare), nor is it a melting pot of cultures, there is only one dominant culture on the island, a Cypriot culture. A culture where hellim / halloumi eating nouveau riche serve high in calories preserved fruits drenched in syrop to their guests and where any medical condition can be cured with Zivania.

What is interesting is that despite 30 years of division and where ever they are in the World, Greek and Turkish Cypriots seem to manifest very similar traditions (not just cuisine but also drahoma, attitudes, values and a love of black colored clothes for the ladies) they seem to share many idiosyncraties.

Belgium is the only other EU state is bi-ethnic (in other words it has two main ethnic groups). Because Belgium is firmly within the EU, it has been for some time, it is very useful to us to examine the Belgian model, as it will help us to draw lessons on how a bi-ethnic state and a federation (which we have been negotiating toward with the famous Annan plan) functions in the EU. For those of us who work or study law, examining the BElgian model also helps us to regard the competency of EU law versus member state law (in Cyprus` case) Federal and state law.

Happy New Year! Yeni Yilliniz Kutlu olsun! or as we say here in Quebec, Bonne année Merveilleus por tous! :lol:
User avatar
Alasya
Member
Member
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 8:42 pm
Location: Quebec City, CANADA

Postby boulio » Tue Dec 28, 2004 3:39 am

CYPRUS THEY WAY IT SHOULD BE 1960 THAT IS:

www.monde-diplomatique.fr/cartes/IMG/arton615.jpg
boulio
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 2575
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 6:45 am

PreviousNext

Return to Cyprus Problem Solution Proposals

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests