Cyprus-Forum.com

Tim Drayton wrote:

zan wrote:

Tim Drayton wrote:

zan wrote:

Tim Drayton wrote:

Naggie wrote:Hello Viewpoint - as I understand your viewpoint, you require a 50-50 split of power (based on 5 seats each) to be divided along ethnic grounds (ie 5 to TC, 5 to GC). Am I wrong here? Kikapu's proposal doesn't allow for this.

In terms of why I don't agree with them - as mentioned in my previous post, I don't believe in national labels and understand ethnicity to be a construct. Cypriot people, like all people, are hybrid and unique and I don't believe they should be categorised politically into separate groups. However, because of years of self-justifying rhetoric from both sides, this division-simulacra has cemented itself into Cypriot minds and too many people think of themselves and the division along the lines of ethnicity. Go to any Cypriot school to see how subjective and nationalist their accounts of history are - or simply just look through this forum to see how we refer to GC and TC. Why not just Cypriots living in the north and Cypriots living in the south?

You are surely then legitimising the ethnic separation that was accomplished in 1974. Do not forget that there is a small community of Turkish-speaking Cypriots still living in Limassol and a small community of Greek-speaking Cypriots still living in Karpasia.

You mean 1964 don't you Tim??

Not exactly, because although the process of ethnic disengagement began at that time, it was not until 1974 that Turkish-speaking Cypriots were concentrated in the north and Greek-speaking Cypriots in the south.

I don't see the difference Tim...Just a more tidy setup for people to be able to SEE the separation....That is why I have a problem with RWs manifesto from the start. A mixed separation to make it look like we are united with the cantons he recommends.

I am just splitting hairs about the precise implication of the terms "Cypriots living in the north/south", that is all. The distribution until 1974 was not on a north/south basis but inside/outside enclaves which were scattered across the island. In a recent book that is probably not to your taste, Arif Hasan Tahsin proposes using the terms "Turkish-speaking Cypriot" and "Greek-speaking Cypriot", rather than "Greek/Turkish Cypriot".

zan wrote:
You have no idea what my tastes are Tim by that remark you made....


Do you think that I TOO have not got a perfect working model in my head of how Cyprus "SHOULD" be?? Do you really think that little of me to say that I cannot comprehend a perfect society in which all can live?? Well just in case you are still in doubt after what I have just asked then I will make the statement right now......I know what heaven is......I also know that t is hard if not impossible to get a camel through the eye of a needle. People being people will never get to the kingdom of god Tim.....If you are set to give away your wealth in order to try then go ahead. I will hang onto mine and look reality in the face.

Zan wrote:I know what heaven is......I also know that t is hard if not impossible to get a camel through the eye of a needle.

Kikapu wrote:

zan wrote:
You have no idea what my tastes are Tim by that remark you made....


Do you think that I TOO have not got a perfect working model in my head of how Cyprus "SHOULD" be?? Do you really think that little of me to say that I cannot comprehend a perfect society in which all can live?? Well just in case you are still in doubt after what I have just asked then I will make the statement right now......I know what heaven is......I also know that t is hard if not impossible to get a camel through the eye of a needle. People being people will never get to the kingdom of god Tim.....If you are set to give away your wealth in order to try then go ahead. I will hang onto mine and look reality in the face.

Zan wrote:I know what heaven is......I also know that t is hard if not impossible to get a camel through the eye of a needle.

This is Zan's way of explaining what True Democracy, Human Rights, International Laws and EU Principles are, and no wonder he believes it will never happen in Cyprus.!

Zan, I agree with you, that you will never get a camel through the eye of a needle, no question about it, and I don't even know what the hell heaven looks like, unlike you.!

humanist wrote:Cyprus will be freed form the Turkish occupation .....

Not so fast, VP.

The answer depends on what options you present the GCs with, in whether or not they want to be accommodating to allow the north state to remain majority TCs. If the overwhelming GC refugees land is returned to become part of the south state, then the answer is a "NO", but if you want to keep the overwhelming GCs land to become part of the north state, then the answer is a possible "YES". You would control the outcome based on how much GC land you want to keep. You cannot keep their land and then not expect them to try and get it back in anyway they can. By returning only 7-8% land back as per AP, you are not even returning the land of 50,000-60,000 GCs, which would then leave about 120,000 GCs land in the north, which they will have the right to move into under freedom of movement, even if they are all not able to return back to the same houses, but will be able to return back to the villages they once lived before. With 120,000 GCs already in the north state, it will be very easy to increase their numbers by more GCs moving to the north, just because they will have security through their numbers. If on the other hand the north state is reduced to 18%-20% and most TCs would live in the north, then only a very smal number of GCs would have their property in the north, less than 30,000 GCs. Even if they all would move to the north, which I doubt more than 5,000 moving, the TCs would maintain the overwhelming majority and still have a Democratic system.

I had also stated in my BBF thread, that if the TCs were to make good compromises on land to be returned back to the GCs where the overwhelming majority of the GC land is returned, then the TCs can ask for derogation from the EU and the GCs to only allow those GCs who still have land in the north state to become the "Grandfathered-in Population" with all their Democratic rights protected. What that would mean is that, lets just say 30,000 GCs still has property in the north state, that those 30,000 GCs would then have the right to be in the north state, whether they actually live in the north state or not. They would become the "Grandfathered-in Population" of the north, against the population of the TCs at around 70,000-80,000 and 50,000 allowed settlers to total around 140,000-150,000 TCs plus more TCs coming from abroad to settle in the north as time goes by, which would push the north's TC population to a potential 200,000. The derogation would be, that the number of potential GCs wanting to live in the north state can grow ONLY at the same rate as the growth of the TC population in the north (Cypriot citizens only). If the TC population grows at 2% per year, then the north's potential maximum GC population can only grow at 2% also, based on the "Grandfathered in Population" numbers, which is 30,000, allowing growth rate of about 600 more GCs to be added to that 30,000 number to become 30,600 for that year whether or not they are actually living in the north. This new number, 30,600 will then become the next "Grandfathered-in Population" for that year. The smaller the north state is with as little GCs properties as possible, the smaller the "Grandfathered-in Population" number will be.

These are the option you need to decide on. I don't believe you will get that many GCs living in the north however, therefore the above derogation would be only academic and redundant and may never be used, but it will secure the TCs keeping the north majority TCs as well as keeping the upper house seats in the TCs hand in a Democratic way, agreed to by all sides.! If you want the same derogation to apply by keeping the north state to be around 30%,then the GCs may not be so accommodating and will tell you "NO". Why would they let you keep their land in the north state when they want to be in the south state. Even if they said yes, then the "Grandfathered-in Population" would start from around 120,000 GCs with an increase of 2,400 per year at 2% vs. the population of the TCs in the north at around 150,000, assuming all the TCs would move to the north state. As you can see from the numbers, you will create a lot of problems for yourselves in trying to keep the north a majority TC and keeping the upper house in the hands of the TCs. There is no free lunch, VP. You choose, but be prepared to live with the consequences when things start going wrong for you in the north politically if you want to keep most of the GC land to remain in the north state.

But there is a much easier way to do away with all these problems, and that is to do away with ethnic political parties altogether in Cyprus and have ONLY Political Parties based on Political ideology. How can anyone then have any concerns who lives where and how many, since all the political parties would include people from all ethnicity. That is the way how civilized countries have done it in a multi ethnic places, like Switzerland for example, as well as all the multicultural societies across the Democratic West.


http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.p ... &start=130

Kikapu wrote:

Not so fast, VP.

The answer depends on what options you present the GCs with, in whether or not they want to be accommodating to allow the north state to remain majority TCs. If the overwhelming GC refugees land is returned to become part of the south state, then the answer is a "NO", but if you want to keep the overwhelming GCs land to become part of the north state, then the answer is a possible "YES". You would control the outcome based on how much GC land you want to keep. You cannot keep their land and then not expect them to try and get it back in anyway they can. By returning only 7-8% land back as per AP, you are not even returning the land of 50,000-60,000 GCs, which would then leave about 120,000 GCs land in the north, which they will have the right to move into under freedom of movement, even if they are all not able to return back to the same houses, but will be able to return back to the villages they once lived before. With 120,000 GCs already in the north state, it will be very easy to increase their numbers by more GCs moving to the north, just because they will have security through their numbers. If on the other hand the north state is reduced to 18%-20% and most TCs would live in the north, then only a very smal number of GCs would have their property in the north, less than 30,000 GCs. Even if they all would move to the north, which I doubt more than 5,000 moving, the TCs would maintain the overwhelming majority and still have a Democratic system.

I had also stated in my BBF thread, that if the TCs were to make good compromises on land to be returned back to the GCs where the overwhelming majority of the GC land is returned, then the TCs can ask for derogation from the EU and the GCs to only allow those GCs who still have land in the north state to become the "Grandfathered-in Population" with all their Democratic rights protected. What that would mean is that, lets just say 30,000 GCs still has property in the north state, that those 30,000 GCs would then have the right to be in the north state, whether they actually live in the north state or not. They would become the "Grandfathered-in Population" of the north, against the population of the TCs at around 70,000-80,000 and 50,000 allowed settlers to total around 140,000-150,000 TCs plus more TCs coming from abroad to settle in the north as time goes by, which would push the north's TC population to a potential 200,000. The derogation would be, that the number of potential GCs wanting to live in the north state can grow ONLY at the same rate as the growth of the TC population in the north (Cypriot citizens only). If the TC population grows at 2% per year, then the north's potential maximum GC population can only grow at 2% also, based on the "Grandfathered in Population" numbers, which is 30,000, allowing growth rate of about 600 more GCs to be added to that 30,000 number to become 30,600 for that year whether or not they are actually living in the north. This new number, 30,600 will then become the next "Grandfathered-in Population" for that year. The smaller the north state is with as little GCs properties as possible, the smaller the "Grandfathered-in Population" number will be.

These are the option you need to decide on. I don't believe you will get that many GCs living in the north however, therefore the above derogation would be only academic and redundant and may never be used, but it will secure the TCs keeping the north majority TCs as well as keeping the upper house seats in the TCs hand in a Democratic way, agreed to by all sides.! If you want the same derogation to apply by keeping the north state to be around 30%,then the GCs may not be so accommodating and will tell you "NO". Why would they let you keep their land in the north state when they want to be in the south state. Even if they said yes, then the "Grandfathered-in Population" would start from around 120,000 GCs with an increase of 2,400 per year at 2% vs. the population of the TCs in the north at around 150,000, assuming all the TCs would move to the north state. As you can see from the numbers, you will create a lot of problems for yourselves in trying to keep the north a majority TC and keeping the upper house in the hands of the TCs. There is no free lunch, VP. You choose, but be prepared to live with the consequences when things start going wrong for you in the north politically if you want to keep most of the GC land to remain in the north state.

But there is a much easier way to do away with all these problems, and that is to do away with ethnic political parties altogether in Cyprus and have ONLY Political Parties based on Political ideology. How can anyone then have any concerns who lives where and how many, since all the political parties would include people from all ethnicity. That is the way how civilized countries have done it in a multi ethnic places, like Switzerland for example, as well as all the multicultural societies across the Democratic West.

http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.p ... &start=130

lovernomore wrote:

Kikapu wrote:

Not so fast, VP.

The answer depends on what options you present the GCs with, in whether or not they want to be accommodating to allow the north state to remain majority TCs. If the overwhelming GC refugees land is returned to become part of the south state, then the answer is a "NO", but if you want to keep the overwhelming GCs land to become part of the north state, then the answer is a possible "YES". You would control the outcome based on how much GC land you want to keep. You cannot keep their land and then not expect them to try and get it back in anyway they can. By returning only 7-8% land back as per AP, you are not even returning the land of 50,000-60,000 GCs, which would then leave about 120,000 GCs land in the north, which they will have the right to move into under freedom of movement, even if they are all not able to return back to the same houses, but will be able to return back to the villages they once lived before. With 120,000 GCs already in the north state, it will be very easy to increase their numbers by more GCs moving to the north, just because they will have security through their numbers. If on the other hand the north state is reduced to 18%-20% and most TCs would live in the north, then only a very smal number of GCs would have their property in the north, less than 30,000 GCs. Even if they all would move to the north, which I doubt more than 5,000 moving, the TCs would maintain the overwhelming majority and still have a Democratic system.

I had also stated in my BBF thread, that if the TCs were to make good compromises on land to be returned back to the GCs where the overwhelming majority of the GC land is returned, then the TCs can ask for derogation from the EU and the GCs to only allow those GCs who still have land in the north state to become the "Grandfathered-in Population" with all their Democratic rights protected. What that would mean is that, lets just say 30,000 GCs still has property in the north state, that those 30,000 GCs would then have the right to be in the north state, whether they actually live in the north state or not. They would become the "Grandfathered-in Population" of the north, against the population of the TCs at around 70,000-80,000 and 50,000 allowed settlers to total around 140,000-150,000 TCs plus more TCs coming from abroad to settle in the north as time goes by, which would push the north's TC population to a potential 200,000. The derogation would be, that the number of potential GCs wanting to live in the north state can grow ONLY at the same rate as the growth of the TC population in the north (Cypriot citizens only). If the TC population grows at 2% per year, then the north's potential maximum GC population can only grow at 2% also, based on the "Grandfathered in Population" numbers, which is 30,000, allowing growth rate of about 600 more GCs to be added to that 30,000 number to become 30,600 for that year whether or not they are actually living in the north. This new number, 30,600 will then become the next "Grandfathered-in Population" for that year. The smaller the north state is with as little GCs properties as possible, the smaller the "Grandfathered-in Population" number will be.

These are the option you need to decide on. I don't believe you will get that many GCs living in the north however, therefore the above derogation would be only academic and redundant and may never be used, but it will secure the TCs keeping the north majority TCs as well as keeping the upper house seats in the TCs hand in a Democratic way, agreed to by all sides.! If you want the same derogation to apply by keeping the north state to be around 30%,then the GCs may not be so accommodating and will tell you "NO". Why would they let you keep their land in the north state when they want to be in the south state. Even if they said yes, then the "Grandfathered-in Population" would start from around 120,000 GCs with an increase of 2,400 per year at 2% vs. the population of the TCs in the north at around 150,000, assuming all the TCs would move to the north state. As you can see from the numbers, you will create a lot of problems for yourselves in trying to keep the north a majority TC and keeping the upper house in the hands of the TCs. There is no free lunch, VP. You choose, but be prepared to live with the consequences when things start going wrong for you in the north politically if you want to keep most of the GC land to remain in the north state.

But there is a much easier way to do away with all these problems, and that is to do away with ethnic political parties altogether in Cyprus and have ONLY Political Parties based on Political ideology. How can anyone then have any concerns who lives where and how many, since all the political parties would include people from all ethnicity. That is the way how civilized countries have done it in a multi ethnic places, like Switzerland for example, as well as all the multicultural societies across the Democratic West.

http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.p ... &start=130

For you to think on thse terms for Cyprus tells me only one thing, YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT CYPRUS OR GC'S, you claim to be TC and I say YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT TC's.

Kikapu wrote:

lovernomore wrote:

Kikapu wrote:

Not so fast, VP.

The answer depends on what options you present the GCs with, in whether or not they want to be accommodating to allow the north state to remain majority TCs. If the overwhelming GC refugees land is returned to become part of the south state, then the answer is a "NO", but if you want to keep the overwhelming GCs land to become part of the north state, then the answer is a possible "YES". You would control the outcome based on how much GC land you want to keep. You cannot keep their land and then not expect them to try and get it back in anyway they can. By returning only 7-8% land back as per AP, you are not even returning the land of 50,000-60,000 GCs, which would then leave about 120,000 GCs land in the north, which they will have the right to move into under freedom of movement, even if they are all not able to return back to the same houses, but will be able to return back to the villages they once lived before. With 120,000 GCs already in the north state, it will be very easy to increase their numbers by more GCs moving to the north, just because they will have security through their numbers. If on the other hand the north state is reduced to 18%-20% and most TCs would live in the north, then only a very smal number of GCs would have their property in the north, less than 30,000 GCs. Even if they all would move to the north, which I doubt more than 5,000 moving, the TCs would maintain the overwhelming majority and still have a Democratic system.

I had also stated in my BBF thread, that if the TCs were to make good compromises on land to be returned back to the GCs where the overwhelming majority of the GC land is returned, then the TCs can ask for derogation from the EU and the GCs to only allow those GCs who still have land in the north state to become the "Grandfathered-in Population" with all their Democratic rights protected. What that would mean is that, lets just say 30,000 GCs still has property in the north state, that those 30,000 GCs would then have the right to be in the north state, whether they actually live in the north state or not. They would become the "Grandfathered-in Population" of the north, against the population of the TCs at around 70,000-80,000 and 50,000 allowed settlers to total around 140,000-150,000 TCs plus more TCs coming from abroad to settle in the north as time goes by, which would push the north's TC population to a potential 200,000. The derogation would be, that the number of potential GCs wanting to live in the north state can grow ONLY at the same rate as the growth of the TC population in the north (Cypriot citizens only). If the TC population grows at 2% per year, then the north's potential maximum GC population can only grow at 2% also, based on the "Grandfathered in Population" numbers, which is 30,000, allowing growth rate of about 600 more GCs to be added to that 30,000 number to become 30,600 for that year whether or not they are actually living in the north. This new number, 30,600 will then become the next "Grandfathered-in Population" for that year. The smaller the north state is with as little GCs properties as possible, the smaller the "Grandfathered-in Population" number will be.

These are the option you need to decide on. I don't believe you will get that many GCs living in the north however, therefore the above derogation would be only academic and redundant and may never be used, but it will secure the TCs keeping the north majority TCs as well as keeping the upper house seats in the TCs hand in a Democratic way, agreed to by all sides.! If you want the same derogation to apply by keeping the north state to be around 30%,then the GCs may not be so accommodating and will tell you "NO". Why would they let you keep their land in the north state when they want to be in the south state. Even if they said yes, then the "Grandfathered-in Population" would start from around 120,000 GCs with an increase of 2,400 per year at 2% vs. the population of the TCs in the north at around 150,000, assuming all the TCs would move to the north state. As you can see from the numbers, you will create a lot of problems for yourselves in trying to keep the north a majority TC and keeping the upper house in the hands of the TCs. There is no free lunch, VP. You choose, but be prepared to live with the consequences when things start going wrong for you in the north politically if you want to keep most of the GC land to remain in the north state.

But there is a much easier way to do away with all these problems, and that is to do away with ethnic political parties altogether in Cyprus and have ONLY Political Parties based on Political ideology. How can anyone then have any concerns who lives where and how many, since all the political parties would include people from all ethnicity. That is the way how civilized countries have done it in a multi ethnic places, like Switzerland for example, as well as all the multicultural societies across the Democratic West.

http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.p ... &start=130

For you to think on thse terms for Cyprus tells me only one thing, YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT CYPRUS OR GC'S, you claim to be TC and I say YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT TC's.

You already told me that you would rather have an uncivilized system based on ethnic groups, apartheid system, ethnic cleansing and a system of division. I'll bear you in mind next time I put another "peace plan" together just so to make you happy.!