Cyprus-Forum.com

would the turkish-cypriots vote yes to annan 3:

http://www.cyprus-mail.com/news/

boulio wrote:would the turkish-cypriots vote yes to annan 3:

http://www.cyprus-mail.com/news/

with a few ammendments, I think we would, if turkey asked us too.

would GC?

that you would have to ask a cypriot-greek.what amendmants would cypriot-turks wants?if turkey asked you to?you cannot come to your own conclusions as a community own your own?

that you would have to ask a cypriot-greek.what amendmants would cypriot-turks wants?if turkey asked you to?you cannot come to your own conclusions as a community own your own?

It doesn't matter whether Turkey asks TCs to vote it "yes" or "no". Prior to the 24th April referandum, AKP(The Turkish political party in power) encouraged TCs to vote in favour of Annan Plan while all other Turkish political parties tried to influence TCs to vote against the Annan Plan. On the other hand when asked to chief of the Security Council of Turkey what his opinions were; he prefered to stay neutral... In the end, %65 of the people of North voted "yes" while the rest voted "no" to the Annan Plan..

thats not what your fellow cypriot-turk said.

Probably the opinion of Turkey will be taken seriously into consideration. This is quite normal and there is nothing wrong with this. The other day Denktash called upon the TC's to reject renegotiation of the A plan, arguing that any modifications will be in favour of the GC's. In no time the turkish foreign ministry told him not to get involved in the Cyprus issue.

If one reads between the lines of what the GC National Council said on Wednesday, Papadopoulos will not embark in talks before October 3 2005. I am not sure how he will behave if he is asked to do so, especially if the initiative comes from Turkey.

My _personal_ view is that Turkey's wishes (the ruling parties wishes) will be almost impossible for TC to ignore. The simple fact is without the support of Turkey we can not survive.

Erol,
This is what I said a few days ago.

There were five (5) Annan plans.
Which of these was (is) the real Annan plan, and what happened to the other four?
Who objected to what in the first plan and who changed what? When I read the first plan, back in November 2002, my first reaction was to accept it right away. Why were it not accepted and what made the last plan, "the plan" to accepted by all" as is" and not the "Annan I". Why were the other plans 1,2,3,4 not given as choices for the people to pick from?

Whatever makes the Annan V the legitimate plan, makes all the other versions, also legitimate. If the four versions are void, then the fifth one is also void.
If the TCs need to have Turkey's permission in order to "breath with their own lungs", then the negotiations should be between the RoC and Turkey directly. It is time for the TCs, yourself included, to stop hiding behind your little fingers. Sit back and let Turkey deal your future.
It is not fair having to deal with paid peons, who are scared to lose their inflated salaries.
I am a firm believer that, had the GCs voted "yes" for the Annan plan, either the "vote keepers" in the north would have shown a "NO" result for the TCs, or the Turkish parliament would have voted the plan as unacceptable, causing the creation of Annan plan 6, and 7 and 8, etc, with every new version forcing the GCs to make new and more concessions.

The "Annan Game" Sequel is over my friend. Turkey needs to deal with the RoC directly, this time, not thru the proxies at the UN and their bosses in London and Washington, but directly.

I am a firm believer that, had the GCs voted "yes" for the Annan plan, either the "vote keepers" in the north would have shown a "NO" result for the TCs, or the Turkish parliament would have voted the plan as unacceptable, causing the creation of Annan plan 6, and 7 and 8, etc, with every new version forcing the GCs to make new and more concessions.

I think the "vote keepers" of South did what you've said above. On 24th of April; in the afternoon around 3 o'clock, a RoC spokesman made a statement and said that the referandum results of South would be made public after the referandum results of North has been made public. We well know whose intention in dream of "European Solution", was to gain time until the RoC has officialy become an EU member. It is Hellen's ruling elites intention to cause creation of plan 6, 7, 8 etc until Turkish side has accepted what they want: "A Hellen dominated Cyprus."

Which of these was (is) the real Annan plan, and what happened to the other four?
Who objected to what in the first plan and who changed what? When I read the first plan, back in November 2002, my first reaction was to accept it right away.

Because Klerides and some other "vips" had edited the Annan 1 especially in favour of GCs, long before it was made public.