Cyprus-Forum.com

Alexandros Lordos wrote:The big problem is troop presence. I am afraid TCs (i.e. the majority of TCs) would not tolerate total dimilitarization, while GCs (i.e. the majority of GCs) would not tolerate a permanent Turkish troop presence. That's the tough nut to crack.

Do GCs tolerate total demilitarization of Cyprus or they only object the Turkish miltary presence?

insan wrote:I completely second the set of ideas Mr Norton presented in a conference, February 2004, Newyork. I'm not a military and security expert but his ideas regarding a comprehensive solution to the security concerns of all parties, impressed me a lot that could be the real solution.

Insan,

Mr Norton's work sounds very interesting indeed, especially the way he provided for three contingents, Southern Command (SCOM), Central Command (CCOM), and Northern Command (NCOM), the commanders of which will meet daily. Also, the fact that the army would have only one flag ...

My concerns about the proposal are:

a. It would be under NATO. I think the "lefties" of Cyprus would hate the prospect of turning Cyprus into one large NATO base.

b. Secession from the joint command would be "too easy", whenever the going went rough.

c. Foreign troops would be stationed in Cyprus indefinitely, and we will never be sovereign in our defense.

For all the above reasons, I think the majority of GCs (I can not talk about the TCs) would reject the proposal ...

But his key idea of a joint command is, I think, certainly the best (and only) avenue of approach ...

Alexandros Lordos wrote: The big problem is troop presence. I am afraid TCs (i.e. the majority of TCs) would not tolerate total dimilitarization, while GCs (i.e. the majority of GCs) would not tolerate a permanent Turkish troop presence. That's the tough nut to crack.

I think most TC would be happy with no Turkish troops in Cyprus - as long as they feel safe (am not so sure about Turkey though?). So to em the question then becomes how do we make TC feel safe without Turkish troops. Some possible answers to that are a dimiltrisation of the south as well. Also a stage withdrawal that happens in conjunction with an increasing sense of security under the new arrangments (what ever they turn out to be).

insan wrote:Do GCs tolerate total demilitarization of Cyprus or they only object the Turkish miltary presence?

Well, in theory, GCs say that they favor total dimilatarization. If you dig a little deeper though, you will see that dimilitarization makes them insecure too: "We will disband our national guard, and then Turkey's troops and aircraft will only be fifty miles away?"

erolz wrote:Ultimately if a country is determined to try and sieze land by force no 'piece of paper' will stop them . However I believe the issue here is about Turkey having _rights_ to intervene (ie bits of papaer saying they can). In that sense a right to intevene but only in the TC component state has to be better than the current 'piece of paper'?

Yes, that's the thorny issue, the 'piece of paper that says she can'.
And yes, what you are suggesting is better than the existing piece of paper, no argument there...

Insan wrote:I completely second the set of ideas Mr Norton presented in a conference, February 2004, Newyork. I'm not a military and security expert but his ideas regarding a comprehensive solution to the security concerns of all parties, impressed me a lot that could be the real solution.

Umm... Insan, Mr. Norton's ideas don't sound so thrilling to me...
One is that NATO chain of command, being in charge of all forces in Cyprus, would probably cause resentment among Cypriots (at least GCs) before it even took over (thus, it might just create more problems/implications than it solves).
Two is that this guy is worried about losing the army too fast... I think he may just have the wrong idea. He probably thinks that the armies here actually do something, or serve some real function... I don't think he's got the story right. (this applies at least to the GC army)

erolz wrote:I think most TC would be happy with no Turkish troops in Cyprus - as long as they feel safe (am not so sure about Turkey though?). So to em the question then becomes how do we make TC feel safe without Turkish troops.

Erol, I would have thought so too, the results of the survey however surprised me ...

Also, from other qualitative data I have seen, TCs tend to think as follows: "a few thousand troops are enough, after all Turkey is only fifty miles away, yes, a few thousands are enough ..."

Besides, as I have analysed in the above post, I don't think GCs would accept total dimilitarization either, when they come to really think about it.

My concerns about the proposal are:

a. It would be under NATO. I think the "lefties" of Cyprus would hate the prospect of turning Cyprus into one large NATO base.

In the begining lefties of South were against the EU membership, too but then agreed with Tassos for the sake of "National Cause"(Whatever means)

b. Secession from the joint command would be "too easy", whenever the going went rough.

We can focus upon this to find out how the secession could be prevented. I have no idea at the moment.

c. Foreign troops would be stationed in Cyprus indefinitely, and we will never be sovereign in our defense.

Would Cyprus ever be sovereign in its defence when its EU membership(perhaps will be a Nato member when united), strategic location, small size have been taken into consideration?

For all the above reasons, I think the majority of GCs (I can not talk about the TCs) would reject the proposal ...

If their ruling elite guide them in right direction I'm sure majority of GC would accept such a security structure for United Cyprus.

i think norton's proposals do not favor cypriots but the anglo-americans at best.it creates a large nato base in the eastern med.

as for security i would like total demiliterazation and allow either greece or turkey to internven in each constituates state it represents with formal notification to the other side that it will be intervening,and with certain guidlines.

1)to protect all people of that constituant state(greek or turkish),quell the unrest dont cause more.

2)it would have to be truly civil unrest(not some kid throwing eggs at someones house,and landing a whole division kyrania)

3)the british should be regulated to one of the two bases on a 25-50year lease that will go to the federal govt.,the other would be given back to the people of cyprus,the british will have only intervenntion rights on there base and personel.

Insan,

EU is different in the minds of leftist GCs, they see the EU as a counter-force of sorts to American Hegemony and are therefore willing to tolerate it: Even be inspired by it. NATO is different, however: NATO is the bombing of Serbia, Clinton, Bush, the invasion of Iraq, American Imperialism etc. etc.

An EU force would be acceptable for GCs, but I doubt if Turkey would accept this unless she too was already an EU member - and I don't know if TCs will feel secure with a European Force.

Similarly, for GCs, a permanent European presence would be seen differently to a permanent NATO presence, since we are a part of the EU anyway ... but the same will not apply for a permanent Turkish presence, even if Turkey is a part of the EU ...

As to the "secession problem" ... do you have any particular ideas?

My view on security is that Cyprus should have its own defense force. If we end up with a federation as the solution then the north should have army units commanded by TC's and the south by GC's. These should be under a central command answerable to the federal government. This force could perhaps be jointly run by NATO so as to allay the fears of the respective communities.

I would prefer to not see Turkey or Greece interfering in our defense structure. The only way is through NATO and as such Cyprus should be a member of this organisation. This should allay the fears of both Turkey and Greece.

Perhaps the other thing to have is a professional army rather than a conscript army. This would also have the effect of limiting the size of such an army.

Looking at demilitarisation, how could that work? I mean we would be just sitting ducks. We don't know what will happen next year, let alone 10 or 20 years down the line.