Cyprus-Forum.com

Alexandros Lordos wrote:a.Security

The Annan Plan approach – that the Treaty of Guarantee and the Treaty of Alliance should continue to apply “mutatis mutandis”, is unacceptable. An integrated security system needs to be devised, which will involve as little mother-land interference as possible, and which will eventually evolve into an all-Cypriot sovereign defense system, part of a future European Common Defense. Greece and Turkey will maintain "last resort" rights to protect the GCc and TCs respectively, only if the Cypriot security system breaks down.

I can live with changing the Treaty of Guarantee and the Treaty of Alliance to more in favor of GCs. On the other hand I will never accept any solution that involves keeping any military establishment on the island be it Turkish Army, Greek Army, or United Cyprus Army. So therefore the whole concept of “sovereign defense system” is not acceptable to me, unless it involves things other than forming a RoC army or military.

b.Implementation Guarantees

The Annan Plan does not offer any particular guarantees for implementation, except for vague generalities by the EU and the UN that they will “oversee the implementation of the Solution”. What we need are particular guarantees, for particular aspects of the Solution, with particular and severe penalties for non-implementation.

No objection. But again devil lies in the details.

c.Legal Status

The “virgin birth approach” of the Annan Plan would create, legally speaking, a big mess, and would also inhibit communication of Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots about their past. It should be replaced with a clear formula for Continuity, but in such a way as will also be acceptable to Turkish Cypriots. More particularly, the new state of affairs will be "the evolution of the Republic of Cyprus into a Federation", the GC administration up to today will be officially known as the "temporary caretaker government of the Republic of Cyprus", while the TC administration up to today will be officially known as "the temporary Turkish Cypriot administration"

As long as there can be found a legal way of enforcing everything that 1960 constitution asked for if the new state affairs fail I do not think I have an objection to this.

d. Social Integration

The Annan Plan institutes segregation of the two communities on every level: Segregated voting, segregated education, segregated economies, ethnically pure constituent states. Various adaptations should be made to encourage the mixing of populations and the co-operation of the two communities in all pursuits of everyday life, leading to a future harmonious integrated state.

No problem in general, but detail has to be sorted out. I do not think in the long run segregation is good for us anyway.

e. Property Rights

The “fundamental exceptions to Property Restitution” (i.e. protection of refugee current occupants and of highly invested properties) will be maintained as per the Annan Plan, but beyond these exceptions the right to free enjoyment of property should be respected. Owners of derelict properties will be entitled to grants for the restoration of their home to its original state, while owners who shall be obliged to defer to current occupants, will be entitled to a new home in the same town or village.

Property rights has a huge implication on political participation. As long as this two issues can be separated legally, it is acceptable.

f. Compensation

The Property Board will still be in charge of compensation for the value of exchanged properties, but the responsibility for “compensation for loss of use” should be transferred to Turkey and the GC constituent state respectively. Compensation for loss of use could be agreed on a lower base than that defined by the European Court in the Loizidou case.

No problem there as well, but it should be TC state and GC state instead of Turkey and GC state. Because you are asking us to give promise to you on behalf of others. What can be done is to keep TC state responsible and Turkey to pay TC state for the compensation only.

g. Governance

The basic structure of the Federal Government will be maintained as per the Annan Plan, but cross-voting for the Senate and direct elections for the Presidential Council should be instituted, to encourage increased co-operation and limit the potential for deadlocks. Also, the tie-breaking role of the Supreme Court should be given over to a specially instituted political organ, a “council of wise elders”, comprised only of Cypriots.

Cross voting as you defined it in your previous posts are not acceptable for me. If there is going to be cross voting then there has to be some sort of elimination by the communities first about who should run.

Also that idea of “council of wise elders” is a dead idea already, because it too has a huge chance of creating deadlocks. Seriously the only way out is to appoint an outsider. It can be from EU so that GCs can feels more comfortable I guess.

h. Education

The responsibility for Education will still remain largely in the hands of the constituent states, but a Federal Ministry of Education should also be instituted to oversee integrated schooling and cross-state schooling. The curriculum for the teaching of History should also be a Federal responsibility.

The issue of education should be decentralized as much as it can be. And the federal and constituent states governments should stay away from it as much as they can.

i. Territorial adjustment

The boundary between the two constituent states could be amended, to satisfy on the one hand the Turkish Cypriot demand for a “straighter border”, but also the Greek Cypriot demand for “a greater proportion of coastline to fall within the Greek Cypriot constituent state”. A Federal zone should also be considered, which will cover environmentally sensitive areas such as Akamas and Karpas.

There should be more territory given back to GC state so that there will be less thread to political equality in the future. I do not even mind giving back 11% more to GC state so that we can have 18% in TC state only, but any GC person who moves to TC state after solution by buying land, should forget about participating in political process no more than French participates in the political process in UK.

j. Residence Rights

Timetables for the right to become a resident of the other constituent state could be shortened, without affecting the permanent residence limits meant to protect bizonality. Having said that, political, cultural and property rights are also de facto aspects of the right to residence, so all these matters should be seen in an integrated way, in order to make the “overall package” more attractive to refugees who might wish to exercise the right of return.

Very much related with the above post. See above.

k. Economics

The barriers to investment in the other constituent state should be made more permeable, in order to facilitate economic convergence and integration. Furthermore, the Federal Government should be granted oversight of constituent state fiscal policy, and the cost / income distribution of the Federal Government to the two constituent states should become as equitable as possible.

The first part related to investment is very acceptable but the second part about federal interference in states fiscal policy is completely rejected. The only thing that can be accepted in that level is setting a limit on state borrowing in relation to their economic size and in relation to time.

l. Settlers

Various small amendments in the law on citizenship could be instituted, such that will ensure that only the 45,000 that are “on the list” will be able to remain in Cyprus. Furthermore, stronger incentives could be offered so that a large number of those who are on the “45,000 list” will depart voluntarily, such as Green Cards to emigrate to the USA. Settlers, however, will not be allowed to remain on Greek Cypriot properties, and Turkey will be responsible to build new homes for those who will remain.

The first part about making sure only 45k stays is acceptable. The part about giving green cards for them to go to USA is dreaming, which USA will never accept. The third part about settlers not being able to stay on GC properties, should be amended so that they can stay only if they pay the full price for it. The ones who choose not to pay or who can not afford to pay, should go and rent if they can at whatever they find of open market. Or build themselves new homes.

I do not understand why any government should be forced to make them new homes anyway. It is like I emigrate to another country say USA and then turn back and ask to either USA or ROC where I emigrated from to also build me a house. Nobody had told them to come to Cyprus in the first place, now that they are here they are given citizenship, but why anybody should be building them homes as well, I do not understand.

turkcyp wrote:the whole concept of “sovereign defense system” is not acceptable to me, unless it involves things other than forming a RoC army or military.

Such as what? Why is having an army such a bad idea in your estimation?

turkcyp wrote:Cross voting as you defined it in your previous posts are not acceptable for me. If there is going to be cross voting then there has to be some sort of elimination by the communities first about who should run.

I think you've misunderstood the process: For a TC to get elected to the Federal Senate, he will first and foremost have to satisfy the TCs as an acceptable representative, and only then satisfy the GCs as a co-operative politician. This is because the weighting will be such, that 75% of the votes for TC senators will always come from TCs. There is no chance that a TC politician that "bows down to GC demands and betrays the TC people" would ever be elected by cross voting.

turkcyp wrote:Also that idea of “council of wise elders” is a dead idea already, because it too has a huge chance of creating deadlocks. Seriously the only way out is to appoint an outsider. It can be from EU so that GCs can feels more comfortable I guess..

Well, it all depends on how they are chosen, and what the context is. Don't forget that their specific mandate will be to resolve deadlocks, and nothing else. I envision them serving one long term in office (maybe 10 years) after which they will NOT be liable for re-election. Also, they will be at the end of their political career, with no further aspirations to be elected to any other office. They will therefore have every motive to resolve deadlocks.

turkcyp wrote:The issue of education should be decentralized as much as it can be. And the federal and constituent states governments should stay away from it as much as they can.

Hmm, I think you are talking here as a libertarian rather than as a Turkish Cypriot in particular. What you say sounds ideal, but I don't think it would work in post-Solution Cyprus. There will be too much flux, too much tension, and such sensitive matters as education will need to be clearly planned in advance - and I wouldn't trust local government with such foresight.

turkcyp wrote:There should be more territory given back to GC state so that there will be less thread to political equality in the future. I do not even mind giving back 11% more to GC state so that we can have 18% in TC state only, but any GC person who moves to TC state after solution by buying land, should forget about participating in political process no more than French participates in the political process in UK.

There is logic behind what you are saying, but frankly I can not see the difference between your suggestion and a Two State solution. If this is your proposal for what should happen "on the ground" in terms of bizonality, we might as well go straight to the part where we agree for partition and mutual recognition, in the process saving ourselves from the headache and the trouble of having a central government.

turkcyp wrote:The only thing that can be accepted in that level is setting a limit on state borrowing in relation to their economic size and in relation to time.

This sounds interesting. Can you explain this a bit more?

turkcyp wrote:The first part about making sure only 45k stays is acceptable. The part about giving green cards for them to go to USA is dreaming, which USA will never accept.

Actually, the USA has been sounded out on this, and they think it is an interesting idea. Some while ago, the Americans have asked Denktash if he would accept it, but he was adamantly against. It is not the USA that has a problem with this ...

I know Turkcyp voted No, but could I also have some feedback from the other TC who has so far rejected the proposal? What was the problem?

Alexandros wrote:
owners who shall be obliged to defer to current occupants

How will it be decided who will be "obliged" to defer?

turkcyp wrote:I can live with changing the Treaty of Guarantee and the Treaty of Alliance to more in favor of GCs. On the other hand I will never accept any solution that involves keeping any military establishment on the island be it Turkish Army, Greek Army, or United Cyprus Army. So therefore the whole concept of “sovereign defense system” is not acceptable to me, unless it involves things other than forming a RoC army or military.

I can't help but be suspicious about this turkcyp. WOuld you prefer Cyprus to be demilitirized because Turkey's military is so powerful that in the unfortunate event of a breakdown or whatnot they can come and take over again?

magikthrill wrote:

Alexandros wrote:
owners who shall be obliged to defer to current occupants

How will it be decided who will be "obliged" to defer?

Refugee current occupants will take priority, if they are willing to exchange their own original property for the one they are currently using.

Also, properties that have been invested heavily (i.e. their value increased by more than 50%), may remain in the hands of current occupants, so long as they pay the value of the property, plus a compensation fee, to the original owner.

Alexandros Lordos wrote:I know Turkcyp voted No, but could I also have some feedback from the other TC who has so far rejected the proposal? What was the problem?

I haven't voted yet. Before voting, there are things need to be clarified in my mind.

magikthrill wrote:I can't help but be suspicious about this turkcyp. WOuld you prefer Cyprus to be demilitirized because Turkey's military is so powerful that in the unfortunate event of a breakdown or whatnot they can come and take over again?

Do you really think in the event that Turkey decides to 'take over' Cyprus (which to me is as likely as current RoC delcaring enosis) that any military force in Cyprus would be able to stop them? To me without an army and a Turkish determination to take over Cyprus - Turkey would sucseed. With an army they would still sucseed - just more people would die in the process.

I 'hear' Aleaxndros' argument that a military force might be able to hold on for long enough so that 'help' from outside Cyprus could arrive - if it were subject to external attack. Firstly this assumes that external military aid could and would come 'quickly' - which is not obvious to me. I do not think Cyprus needs an army. Then again I do not think any country needs an army - excpet if the objective is to impose it's power externally.

insan wrote:In order to balance and approximately keep the amount of privately owned properties and lands proportionate to the number of permenant TC residents of TCCS; exchange of properties should be encouraged. Let's say there are 100 private properties and 100 donum private land within the TCCS. 12 of the private properties and 12 donum of the land belonged to TCs pre- 74. 88 of private properties and 88 donum of the private land belonged to GCs. At least 50-52 of the private properties and 50-52 donum of the private land which belong to GCs should be exchanged with equal amount of private TC property and private TC land that left in South; thus we approximately can balance the amount of privately owned properties and lands in favour of permenant TC residents of TCCS. In the end, 12+50 = 62 privately owned properties and lands will be owned by permenant TC residents of TCCS and the rest of the private properties and lands will be owned by permenant GC residents of TCCS and the foreign residents. This also means that a part of TCs who may chose to stay or return to GCCS should own %4 of the private properties and private lands of GCCS. I hope you could have understood what I'm trying to say. The private land and property ownership of TCCS should approximately be proportionate to the number of permenant TC residents of TCCS.

Insan,

I undertstand where you are coming from. What you are expressing is one of the key TC concerns on the issue of property, that the TC state should not be economically dominated by GCs, a concern that was eventually translated, in the Annan Plan, to the "1/3rd restriction" to property restitution.

However, you know that this provision cannot work for GCs ...

What I did in this proposal was to abolish this 1/3rd restriction, and trust the property exchange system to lead to a situation whereby the majority of property will end up in TC hands. How? If most TCs choose to exchange their original properties in the south for equivalent properties in the north, then the 10% or so of the land of Cyprus that was TC owned in the south, will translate to 10% that is TC owned in the north.

Furthermore, the various GC properties that have been heavily invested by TCs, as homes and as businesses, will also remain in TC hands, so long as they pay the value of the property to the original owner.

Finally, all state-owned land of the RoC will revert to ownership of the TCCS.

Also note, many GC refugees will lose their property entitlement in the north, because they will elect to hold on to the TC properties they are currently using in the south instead.

Adding all these up, it should be clear that the TCs will own the bulk of property value in the north. I felt it was unnecessary to further restrict the rights of GCs to "one third", since they will be forced to give up much of their property anyway because of the above rules.

Alexandros, now the issue has completely been clarified in my mind and I'm going to vote "yes" for your draft proposal. Thanks for clarification.