Why the negotiations will fail

[kerry 6138]

Interesting article in Cyprus scene by R Jennings about the current and historical reasons why he believes the talks will fail.
Sorry not sure how to create a hyper link, over to you Keith.

[Marions]

Don't know who R. Jennings i,s but I do know Prof Ozay Mehmet, a Turkish Cypriot who is resident mainly in Canada where he is a Professor Emeritus and whose subject is economics.

Had a long conversation with him yesterday and he spoke on the same subject. I cxould write a thousand words for you about what he sai,d but at the end of the day, it is summed up in three words 'Negotations will fail'. He further states that nothing will change and the north will continue as it is, happily progressing and leading a pretty good life style.

What do YOU kibkomers think????????????????

[frontalman]

I totally agree with you Marion. I'm quite an ardent follower of the negotiations and the sideshows that go with them, it is like a never ending soap opera. A common concensus there will never be.

[Marions]

Yes, and the words 'power' and 'greed' come to mind, whereas the important one 'compromise' seems to be missing.
Oh and let's not forget that word 'intransigence' which was the first one i was taught regarding the Cyprus situaiton . Saldy, nothing seems to change, but I DO think this year will be a 'revelation' but not in the way many people hope (or fear!)

[Keithcaley]

Here's your link

[waddo]

I think that either way (Fail/Succeed) this current round of "Peace Talks" has given KKTC some much needed publicity and can only assist its growth. I feel that the only solution that the RoC would agree to, is that they join the Island with Greece and that all the Turkish people leave this Island forever - after paying billions in reparations and restitution's of course. As that will never happen the only possible solution would be for a major power to recognize the KKTC officially to the world. Then a new round of meetings and arguments could commence and last into infinity.

The EU will bemoan the failure, the USA will find another Island to make into a static aircraft carrier, the UK will bury its head as normal, Greece will shout and wave its arms and Turkey will sit quietly and watch what happens with its hand on its Sabre! The world will continue to turn and the KKTC will carry on as normal. The money will continue to flow into the KKTC and be turned into concrete and empty buildings but nothing will really change the way of life, apart from progress, where it happens.

[Marions]

Just about what Ozay was saying and other 'prophets of doom' or is it 'portrayers of reality'.

There may be minor variations to that, and no matter what 'think tank' holds forth as to what will happen, it is likely that nothing will happen! And as fairy tale writers say 'And they all lived happily ever afterwards'. except perhaps the RoC which might well be extremely miffed.

Ah well, today is the time for new life and hope, so let's rejoice in that, and carry on living and hoping. But accoridng to another prophet, the world doe snot have too long anyway before it destroys itself, - so let's all get a life and watch the ';news' with interest.

Of course if they made me President (which of course is no more likely than my becoming the Goddess of Youth_ I would try my damnedest to make my people happy and Akinci is trying his best to fulfil the trust placed in him.

[Sandman]

Raul was right !!

[munchy]

I get the impression that certain Governments are anxious for a "Good News" story in the Middle East to offset the catastrophies that have sent beautiful parts of the Levant into the "Dark Ages".
I agree with "marions", let things develop slowly and maybe other Countries will see that the TRNC has some of the answers to peaceful co-existence.

[kerry 6138]

Thanks Keith, the article does explain who the writer is ,apparently his grandfather is Geeece's most decorated man who assited Attaturk with negotiations ,and is Father founded the friend's of Turkey in the US, he does however put forward some alternative idea's .

[sophie]

It was interesting the read Soners post in News Section re Turkish troops leaving us, but in secret. Not for the reasons down South want them moved but to boost numbers to fight in Turkey when required. It won't matter a jot to down South why they are leaving will it, just as long as they leave!

[Keithcaley]

Sophie, did you notice that the news item you mentioned was actually taken from the Greek Cypriot 'Cyprus Mail' - and that the Government Spokesman referred to was actually a member of the Greek Cypriot Government?

[Groucho]

Raul was right !!

Who was Raul?

[Barney]

Raul was right !!

Who was Raul?

Raul was right !!

Who was Raul?

He probably means Rauf Denktas.

[Barney]

Jenning's article is based on the equality of the two communities and he keeps referring to the 60% Greek Cypriots. When Cyprus became independent in 1960 the populations were 18% Turkish Cypriot and 78% Greek Cypriot, the remainder being Armenian, Latins and others. The majority resented the disproportionate power granted to the minority, it led to lack of co-operation and discord in the newborn administration. Cyprus was the only British colony not granted majority rule. Since 1974 the population in the north has grown as a result of the illegal introduction of settlers from the mainland contrary to the Geneva Convention. Greek Cypriot claims are based on the earlier population ratios not those illegally created by Turkey in the north. They say that accepting a northern federated State is concession enough since it was created by armed force to the cost and disadvantage of the majority.

Jennings goes on about repairing and returning churches in the north as a goodwill measure. Returning Varosha would be a more meaningful gesture, it would require the Greek Cypriots to make concessions to the north although they would be restricted to measures that did not involve recognition of the other State since such a move would bring the current talks to a halt.

According to the EU the whole of Cyprus is part of the Union but the Acquis is suspended in the north since the ROC cannot administer that part of the island. Annexation of the north by Turkey would finish off any chance of Turkey ever joining the EU and would almost certainly result in termination of the Customs Union with Turkey.

Mr Jennings has a very naive and simplistic view of the Cyprus problem.

[erol]

Jenning's article is based on the equality of the two communities and he keeps referring to the 60% Greek Cypriots.

He is referring to the 60% of GC that according to current polls oppose reunification. He does not refer to GC being 60% of the total Cypriot population.

Cyprus was the only British colony not granted majority rule.

It was also the only British colony where what the majority wanted was not independence but in fact a change in foreign colonial ruler.

[DenizIsmail]

Erol, I would like to hear your views on this topics 'Why the negotiations will fail' ? You are in my opinion a very knowledgeable guy and you have given me very sound advice in the past ( I bought a villa in TRNC last year).

[erol]

Erol, I would like to hear your views on this topics 'Why the negotiations will fail' ? You are in my opinion a very knowledgeable guy and you have given me very sound advice in the past ( I bought a villa in TRNC last year).

If past history is any guide to the future then yes this current round of negotiations is doomed to fail. However past history is always a guide to the future right up until the point it is not. The history of the Berlin wall's past existence was a guide to it's continued future existence, right up until the point it was not.

Predicting the future is a fools games. I do think this round of negotiations have more chance of leading to a settlement than any that have gone before. If really pushed to give my personal best guess at what this chance is I would probably put it at around 20-25% chance that it will produce a settlement and 75-80% that it will not. However those are numbers literally just pulled out of thin air.

I personally would like to see a settlement. I personally think it is time.

[Barney]

He deliberately places the current population ratios here:-
"Cyprus became a sovereign country in 1960. Greece, Turkey and the U.K. guaranteed the sovereignty of all citizens of Cyprus. Greek Cypriots outnumber Turkish Cypriots by almost 3:1. The first President was Archbishop Makarios.”
and leaves the reader with the impression that that was the population spread in 1960 when it was in fact more than four to one (just).

Which figure is correct then, 60% or 76%?
"but no real effort is being made to change public opinion among the 76% of Greek Cypriots. Repeated public polling, including recently, shows that 60% of Greek Cypriots are opposed to unification”
The later references to 60% are open to more than one interpretation in my opinion.

The Greek Cypriots wanted to join Greece and the Turkish Cypriots wanted partition. Can’t blame either side for that when you consider how much conflict there had been between Greece and Turkey over the years and how they had both kicked each other out of their homes.

[waddo]

Barney, I keep plugging a site you can find if you put prio-cyprus-displacement.net into the Google search engine, and for good reason. The information has not been produced by either North or South but by an independent body in Norway. Perhaps within you may find the answers to your questions on population numbers.

[erol]

He deliberately places the current population ratios here:-
"Cyprus became a sovereign country in 1960. Greece, Turkey and the U.K. guaranteed the sovereignty of all citizens of Cyprus. Greek Cypriots outnumber Turkish Cypriots by almost 3:1. The first President was Archbishop Makarios.”
and leaves the reader with the impression that that was the population spread in 1960 when it was in fact more than four to one (just).

Which figure is correct then, 60% or 76%?
"but no real effort is being made to change public opinion among the 76% of Greek Cypriots. Repeated public polling, including recently, shows that 60% of Greek Cypriots are opposed to unification”
The later references to 60% are open to more than one interpretation in my opinion.

As far as population % goes he does refer to 3:1 ratio - which would be a % of 75% to 25% (excluding the 2% neither GC or TC). It seemed to me that you were claiming he had said the population % was 60% to 40%, which he was not claiming at all as far as I can see.

As far as % of GC that oppose reunification (according to him) it seems clear to me he is saying 76% of GC who voted in the Annan plan referendum voted no to it. General polls, including recent ones, that ask do you support reunification show around 60% of GC that say they do not. Again this seems pretty clear to me ?

[Barney]

Barney, I keep plugging a site you can find if you put prio-cyprus-displacement.net into the Google search engine, and for good reason. The information has not been produced by either North or South but by an independent body in Norway. Perhaps within you may find the answers to your questions on population numbers.

But it also says- "The project, which is initiated and run by the PRIO Cyprus Centre, is funded by the EU Commission (under the ‘aid regulation for the benefit of the Turkish Cypriot community’; reference: Europeaid/127215/L/ACT/CY)...more"

There's another study on PRIO site by Mete Hatay that asks if the Turkish Cypriot population is shrinking, it may be an independent body but some of the writers have an agenda and are quite partisan.
https://www.prio.org/Global/upload/Cypr ... inking.pdf

[erol]

The Greek Cypriots wanted to join Greece and the Turkish Cypriots wanted partition. Can’t blame either side for that when you consider how much conflict there had been between Greece and Turkey over the years and how they had both kicked each other out of their homes.

You said "Cyprus was the only British colony not granted majority rule."

I pointed out that the reason why Cyprus had a 'unique' settlement post British colonial rule was a function of the fact that it also had a 'unique' situation. It seemed to me your were implying that Cyprus was treated atypically and unfairly - when the reality imo is much closer to Cyprus was treated atypically because the situation in Cyprus was atypical. I personally have no doubt that if what the GC community had wanted had just been an independent Cypriot state post British colonial rule, they would have been treated the same way as all other former British colonies that wanted such.

[waddo]

OK Barney - I see what you are trying to say, just ignore it then and all the other reports issued by the same body.

[Art]

I share the same view has Erol in believing there could be a settlement this year.

Keeping it very simple-most disputes eventually come to an end and as long as there is a genuine will to reach a settlement - it will happen.

Whether this will be for the better is a different question.!

[Barney]

The Greek Cypriots wanted to join Greece and the Turkish Cypriots wanted partition. Can’t blame either side for that when you consider how much conflict there had been between Greece and Turkey over the years and how they had both kicked each other out of their homes.

You said "Cyprus was the only British colony not granted majority rule."

I pointed out that the reason why Cyprus had a 'unique' settlement post British colonial rule was a function of the fact that it also had a 'unique' situation. It seemed to me your were implying that Cyprus was treated atypically and unfairly - when the reality imo is much closer to Cyprus was treated atypically because the situation in Cyprus was atypical. I personally have no doubt that if what the GC community had wanted had just been an independent Cypriot state post British colonial rule, they would have been treated the same way as all other former British colonies that wanted such.

I disagree, there were no typical colonies, most of them contained majorities and minorities some with ethnic links to neighbouring States. Turkey said it wanted Cyprus returned if and when the British left but the majority had long sought the security of union with Greece like other places that had once been under the Ottomans. Britain actually offered Cyprus to Greece in WW1, Greece declined but the fact that it had been on offer encouraged the Greek Cypriots to believe it was attainable. At one stage Britain offered Home Rule to Cyprus leading to independence but later told the Greek Cypriots to accept the Zurich agreement or face partition. It's a shame that Britain didn't threaten partition as an alternative to Home rule before the Zurich Agreement was conceived.
Apparently the seeds of the Zurich Agreement were sown by Greece and Turkey with very little British involvement, no doubt both sides wanted Britain out of the equation, no doubt with a view to ultimately pursuing their own agendas - union with Greece and partition. There's some interesting stuff here I came across,
http://www.ahdr.info/ckfinder/userfiles ... policy.pdf

I too sincerely hope there will be a settlement, both sides know that they there's much to be gained and the alternative will just mean more of the same for years to come.

[Barney]

OK Barney - I see what you are trying to say, just ignore it then and all the other reports issued by the same body.

No, don't ignore the reports but bear in mind that they may contain an element of bias, depending on which community they originate from.
From the PRIO homepage:-

"Research and dialogue for an informed public debate in Cyprus
Since its inception in 2005, the PRIO Cyprus Centre (PCC) has functioned as an independent, bi-communal research centre. The Centre is committed to research and dialogue. Its aim is to contribute to an informed public debate on key issues relevant to an eventual settlement of the Cyprus problem. Its ambition is to achieve this through the establishment and dissemination of information and by offering new analysis, and through facilitating dialogue. The researchers attached to the Centre are both Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots as well as individuals of other nationalities."

[Marions]

Take a look at today's Info from the President's Office, . Another straw for the camel's back and indicator that 'negotiations may fail' or 'will fail'.

But of course, the more publicity that the north gets of the reality of life today , the greater the chances of somewhere, somehow of it b eing accepted that peace has reigned for 40 years plus, and could well continue if the boat is not rocked.

[erol]

.....but the majority had long sought the security of union with Greece ....

The majority of what ? The right to self determination belongs to 'peoples'. Not nation states, not ethnicities and not 'all the people in a given geographical area'. For good reason. There has to be a greater commonality if TC and GC are to be validly, morally and legally considered a single 'people'. The pursuit of enosis destroyed the only commonality that could make the TC and GC together a single 'people' - to just be Cypriot, regardless of what kind of Cypriot we were. TC had every legal and moral right to resist the imposition against their will of enosis (to them foreign colonial rule of their own homeland), just as Cypriots in general had such a right to resist and remove British colonial rule. In a sane world GC would have understood that they could not just use a numerical dominance to force foreign colonial rule on TC against their will in their own shared homeland, as a valid expression of the will of a unitary Cypriot people, because enosis by definition claimed there was no such unitary people, there was only Greeks who lived in Cyprus and other who also lived there who were not Greek.

[jofra]

Tutsi and Hutu - Bosnian and Serb - Hindu, Muslim and Sikh - Catholic and Protestant - black and white.....
the list is endless - always, "I can live here and I can join with my kind, but you can't live here and your kind will not be tolerated..." - instead of "WE live here together...."
What a vile species humanity is, when it is supposed to be a civilised species - animals, insects etc that battle have the excuse of instinct for racial/species survival - we should be past that....
...and words, platitudes, excuses and euphemisms will never change it...

[Barney]

.....but the majority had long sought the security of union with Greece ....

The majority of what ? The right to self determination belongs to 'peoples'. Not nation states, not ethnicities and not 'all the people in a given geographical area'. For good reason. There has to be a greater commonality if TC and GC are to be validly, morally and legally considered a single 'people'. The pursuit of enosis destroyed the only commonality that could make the TC and GC together a single 'people' - to just be Cypriot, regardless of what kind of Cypriot we were. TC had every legal and moral right to resist the imposition against their will of enosis (to them foreign colonial rule of their own homeland), just as Cypriots in general had such a right to resist and remove British colonial rule. In a sane world GC would have understood that they could not just use a numerical dominance to force foreign colonial rule on TC against their will in their own shared homeland, as a valid expression of the will of a unitary Cypriot people, because enosis by definition claimed there was no such unitary people, there was only Greeks who lived in Cyprus and other who also lived there who were not Greek.

Oh come on! The Majority of Cypriots. It's called democracy. Would you be making the same claim if the Turkish Cypriots were 5 or 10% of the population. Why couldn't the Turkish Cypriots see that after 300 years of ottoman oppression the Greek Cypriots wanted the security offered by union with Greece. The other minorities in Cyprus didn't resist the call for union with Greece. The pull and proximity of Turkey and the push from nationalists like Denktash emboldened the Turkish Cypriots to expect and demand more of Cyprus than their numbers deserved - that's where the real problem was.

[erol]

Oh come on! The Majority of Cypriots. It's called democracy. Would you be making the same claim if the Turkish Cypriots were 5 or 10% of the population. Why couldn't the Turkish Cypriots see that after 300 years of ottoman oppression the Greek Cypriots wanted the security offered by union with Greece. The other minorities in Cyprus didn't resist the call for union with Greece. The pull and proximity of Turkey and the push from nationalists like Denktash emboldened the Turkish Cypriots to expect and demand more of Cyprus than their numbers deserved - that's where the real problem was.

No Barney you come on. In the name of a Cypriot people you declare that there will be no Cypriot people, Just Greeks who live in Cyprus. What does the right to self determination of Cypriots mean ? It means Cyprus would be ruled by Cypriots for Cypriots. You can not say in the name of the right of Cypriots to rule Cyprus, we choose to not have Cyprus ruled by Cypriots but to have it ruled by Greece. You can only validly say this in the name of a Greek people. When you do this this, you make TC some 'other' people to GC and as such they have a separate and equal right to self determination. This was and is the reason why the 60's agreements were as they were. It is why unlike other colonies Cyprus did not get 'majority rule' - for if they had it would not have been majority rule of CYPRIOTS but would have been majority rule of GREEKS in mainland Greece OF Cypriots.

GC had every right to want and seek enosis at the end of British rule - for THEMSELVES. They had no right to seek to impose it on TC, without having to pay any regard for the TC's wishes, in the name of a unitary Cypriot people BECAUSE enosis was to seek the non existence of a Cypriot people.

[Marions]

As I have posted elsewhere, this is another interesting read on the subject - not sure if it endorses failure or success??
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/m ... key-and-us

[Barney]

Oh come on! The Majority of Cypriots. It's called democracy. Would you be making the same claim if the Turkish Cypriots were 5 or 10% of the population. Why couldn't the Turkish Cypriots see that after 300 years of ottoman oppression the Greek Cypriots wanted the security offered by union with Greece. The other minorities in Cyprus didn't resist the call for union with Greece. The pull and proximity of Turkey and the push from nationalists like Denktash emboldened the Turkish Cypriots to expect and demand more of Cyprus than their numbers deserved - that's where the real problem was.

No Barney you come on. In the name of a Cypriot people you declare that there will be no Cypriot people, Just Greeks who live in Cyprus. What does the right to self determination of Cypriots mean ? It means Cyprus would be ruled by Cypriots for Cypriots. You can not say in the name of the right of Cypriots to rule Cyprus, we choose to not have Cyprus ruled by Cypriots but to have it ruled by Greece. You can only validly say this in the name of a Greek people. When you do this this, you make TC some 'other' people to GC and as such they have a separate and equal right to self determination. This was and is the reason why the 60's agreements were as they were. It is why unlike other colonies Cyprus did not get 'majority rule' - for if they had it would not have been majority rule of CYPRIOTS but would have been majority rule of GREEKS in mainland Greece OF Cypriots.

GC had every right to want and seek enosis at the end of British rule - for THEMSELVES. They had no right to seek to impose it on TC, without having to pay any regard for the TC's wishes, in the name of a unitary Cypriot people BECAUSE enosis was to seek the non existence of a Cypriot people.

No, you confuse ethnicity with nationality. Cypriots will remain Cypriots regardless of who governs them. The Turks on Rhodes retain their Turkishness but are citizens of Greece similarly Greeks in Istanbul retain their ethnicity but are Turkish nationals. Despite 82 years of British rule Cypriots retained their identity, they never became British.

[kerry 6138]

Barney, through the 300 years of Ottoman "oppression " the Greeks on Cyprus where able to maintain their language religion and culture, unlike the Turkish speaking Cretens when they gained eonosis.
The TC were not looking for union with Turkey during the late 50's early 60's only not to live in enclaves.
It was the intervention of Greece in the affairs of Cyprus which led to the elected GC president seeking refuge in the sovereign base area's not the action of any TC or TC organisation.

[erol]

No, you confuse ethnicity with nationality. Cypriots will remain Cypriots regardless of who governs them. The Turks on Rhodes retain their Turkishness but are citizens of Greece similarly Greeks in Istanbul retain their ethnicity but are Turkish nationals. Despite 82 years of British rule Cypriots retained their identity, they never became British.

What does the right to self determination of peoples mean ? It means that 'peoples' should be free to govern themselves. It really is that simple. GC can choose to want to be governed by Greeks and Greece but they can not validly do so in the name of a CYPRIOT people,. They can only do so in the name of Greek people who happen to live in Cyprus.

This stuff does get me 'angry. I am on the most 'progressive' wing of TC views. I believe in CYPRUS. I want a untied CYPRUS. I personally have only one single simple 'red line'. I would forgo 'bi communality', 'bi-zonality', any special status for the TC community within a united Cypriot nation and state, in return for one single simple thing. That one thing would be the acceptance that if the GC CHOOSE to pursue objectives that are defined by their difference from me as a TC, defined by them being Greek rather than Cypriot regardless of the type, then they accept that they can not impose such desires on me, without any consideration for my desire, as a Cypriot that is NOT Greek. That is it for me. That one single 'concession' and I would sign up to a single unitary Cypriot nation state, based on one person one vote and nothing more.

What I will not accept, what I refuse to accept, is that the principals of 'democracy' and 'self determination of peoples' mean that GC choosing to act not as Cypriots regardless of their ethnicity, but as Greeks despite living in Cyprus, have the right to impose on me and my community foreign rule of my homeland with no consideration for my communities wishes what so ever. Such a claim is not 'democracy' as far as the intent of democracy is that people have an effective voice in the decision that shape and control their lives. Such a claim is not a example 'self determination of peoples', it is an example of the denial of the right of self determination of peoples.

If the majority of GC really do still believe the things that you claim then the chances for a settlement are indeed doomed.

[waddo]

It seems that the GC majority want to be Greek, that Cyprus be a part of Greece, that Cyprus to be governed and led by Greece and that Cyprus be one Island. If that is the case and the obvious answer is that all TC must leave the Island, or at the very least agree to be citizens of Greece, then there will never be a solution to the current problem apart from making Cyprus into two independent Nations.

The Holy Grail of One Nation (Cyprus), one people (Cypriots), one government is beyond reach.

Why not then let the Island split into two and name them accordingly? Why keep the name of Republic of Cyprus? Why not just name it as it actually is and have two Nations on the same bit of land - in the same way that there are two Ireland's? That is just on Island after all and both parts call themselves Irish! Why not end up with a North Cyprus and a South Cyprus officially and have done with the whole thing? Then all can continue to call themselves "Cypriots" and be proud of it.

It will never happen but it remains a dream. Anything else is not achievable when the majority always want to rule - and that is the big problem.

[erol]

If a GC comes to me and says I want Cyprus to be part of Greece then I would say ok, I understand that desire but understand why I as a Cypriot who is not Greek has concerns about that. Let's talk about how we can find a way to meet all our concerns. Lets talk about forms of union of Cyprus with Greece, lets talk about the possibility of Cyprus being a self governed federal element within a Greater Greece and with my community having some representation within that Cypriot federal element.

If they come to me and say I want Cyprus to be part of Greece and what you want is irrelevant because there are numerically more of us and that democracy and the right to self determination means you have no say and no right to a say in if your homeland will even exist as a nation and state in its own right, no say in if it will be ruled by Cypriots or by foreigners 800km away, then we will be in conflict.

[Barney]

Erol, Waddo you know very well that the Greek Cypriots gave up the idea of joining Greece years ago. It was Greece and Greek Cypriot thugs that wanted to join the two together in 1974 not the majority of Greek Cypriots. Turkey has illegally and undemocratically imposed its will on Cypriots and yet you protest because at one stage 80% of the population wanted union with Greece.
As to the detail of the implications of union with Greece on the minority, matters never got that far and it's wrong to assume that such a union would necessarily be detrimental to the minority or they wouldn't be consulted.
What makes me angry is this "equal community" status that Turkey managed to screw out of the Zurich Agreement. Thank you for the "concession", equal as individuals but at four to one equal communities is undemocratic nonsense , where do you draw the line, should 5 or 10% of the population have equal community status?

[erol]

Erol, Waddo you know very well that the Greek Cypriots gave up the idea of joining Greece years ago.

Yet you have not given up on the IDEA that should enough GC decide, once more, that MY homeland will not exist any more as a nation and state and that MY homeland should be ruled not by people from that homeland but by Greece, then they have every right to impose that on me as a Cypriot who is not Greek, with no need for any regard for my wishes at all, all in the name of the 'democratic will' of a CYPRIOT people.

That is the problem. You still insist that actually TC never had any (legal / moral) right or basis on which to resist such a GREEK will being imposed on them in their own shared homeland. You still insist that such a GREEK only desire, was and is an valid expression of the democratic will of a CYPRIOT people.

As I have said for me personally I would compromise on everything, bizonality, bicommunailty, the lot, with the exception of this one thing alone. Yet this would seem to be something that you will not compromise on. So out of the two of us who really is the more intransigent one here ?

[kerry 6138]

Barney, the issue of union with Greece came to the fore in the 60's after independance, what is it you think was happening on the Island in the years leading upto the Turkish" intervention " in 1974.

[erol]

Turkey has illegally and undemocratically imposed its will on Cypriots and yet you protest because at one stage 80% of the population wanted union with Greece.

I protest at your bland assertion that the desire for enosis was a valid expression of the will of a unitary Cypriot people, that included TC. I protest at it because it was not such a will at all. It was the will of Greeks who lived in Cyprus. The attempt to present it then, and as you do now, as the will of a unitary Cypriot people, was the Cyprus problem and STILL IS the Cyprus problem as far as you still claim it today.

I protest at your taking the actions of Turkey that ultimately were a RESULT of the above, out of all the context of the above and seek to treat them as isolated from that as if they were and are unconnected to the above.

As to the detail of the implications of union with Greece on the minority, matters never got that far and it's wrong to assume that such a union would necessarily be detrimental to the minority or they wouldn't be consulted.

This is just nonsense. Firstly how well or badly the TC community may have been treated under enosis is irrelevant. All Cypriots could have been treated like princes under British rule and it would still have not made British rule 'OK' in Cyprus if that was not what the Cypriot people wanted.

Secondly the historical fact is , sensible, neutral individuals given the task of trying to help solve the Cyprus problem, tried the sensible approach of saying 'OK GC want enosis, TC do not - lets try and find out what form of enosis GC are talking about and look to see if a form of enosis can be found that could be acceptable to TC' Indivduals like Galo Plaza the UN mediator in 1965. Such efforts were in vain because Makarios at that time still believed as you apparent do today, that such considerations were unnecessary, that the concerns of TC were irrelevant, that it would be for Greeks who lived in Cyprus and Greece alone to decide such things 'democratically' in any way that suited THEM and at any time that suited THEM.

What makes me angry is this "equal community" status that Turkey managed to screw out of the Zurich Agreement. Thank you for the "concession", equal as individuals but at four to one equal communities is undemocratic nonsense , where do you draw the line, should 5 or 10% of the population have equal community status?

The notion of 'equality of communities' within the Zurich agreements were a direct result of GC trying to claim that enosis was a legitimate will of a unitary CYPRIOT people, as you continue to do here, today. It was not such a legitimate will at all. TC knew this, Turkey knew it and the rest of the world with the possible exception of Greece knew it. If the desire of GC had of been only for independence, for a Cyprus ruled by CYPRIOTS for CYPRIOTS, then there would have been no need for an 'atypical' constitution at all. No need and no way that TC could have got such whatever their desire were.

[JBA]

A couple of points:-

Under the 1960 constitution there was democracy in most matters, it was only changes to the constitution itself that required a majority from both ethnicities. This was to protect the Turkish Cypriots and to prevent Enosis or union with Turkey. The 13 changes to the constitution that Makarios wanted were what caused the start of the hostilities in 1963.

Barney praises the fact that Turks in Rhodes are happily Greek citizens now - but goesn't mention the Cretan Turks. In 1898 Crete became independent from the Ottoman empire - but ruled by Price George of Greece. At the time there were over 100,000 Cretan Turks - 1 year later there were none and many were killed. Turkish Cypriots know this although they don't talk about it - but it must have influenced their opposition to enosis.

Actually it was principally Makarios who wanted enosis to help him to achieve his dream of becoming President of Greece - that is why he dropped enosis as a policy when the Colonels Junta took control in Greece and why the 2nd junta fermented the uprising in 1974 to remove him in favour of Sampson who, as an EOKA B leader, was still pushing for it.

[erol]

Thank you for the "concession", equal as individuals but at four to one equal communities is undemocratic nonsense , where do you draw the line, should 5 or 10% of the population have equal community status?

So is the fact that the RoC with a population of under 1 million has an equal voice on a whole raft of issues within the EU as Grermany with a population of 80 million 'undemocratic nonsense' ? Why are the principals of democracy different between states as within them ? If you can understand why within the EU states have equality regardless of population sizes (on many issues , not all) , indeed why democracy requires they do, then you will be on your way to understanding why ENOSIS was not and could not be the valid will of a CYPRIOT people where as independence of Cyprus was and can only be the valid will of a CYPRIOT people.

If you really want to challenge your own notions of 'equality of communities' in Cyprus , try asking yourself if you think both communities in Cyprus were equally to blame for what happened. Try asking yourself why you do not start from a point that the GC community must be 4 times more to blame because there are 4 times more GC than TC.

[Barney]

Barney, through the 300 years of Ottoman "oppression " the Greeks on Cyprus where able to maintain their language religion and culture, unlike the Turkish speaking Cretens when they gained eonosis.
The TC were not looking for union with Turkey during the late 50's early 60's only not to live in enclaves.
It was the intervention of Greece in the affairs of Cyprus which led to the elected GC president seeking refuge in the sovereign base area's not the action of any TC or TC organisation.

Barney, through the 300 years of Ottoman "oppression " the Greeks on Cyprus where able to maintain their language religion and culture, unlike the Turkish speaking Cretens when they gained eonosis.
The TC were not looking for union with Turkey during the late 50's early 60's only not to live in enclaves.
It was the intervention of Greece in the affairs of Cyprus which led to the elected GC president seeking refuge in the sovereign base area's not the action of any TC or TC organisation.

You really ought to study the history of the Ottomans, their occupation of other peoples was not as benign as you suggest. http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/ent ... man_Greece

As for the "The TC were not looking for union with Turkey during the late 50's early 60's":-

This has been the attitude of the Turkish government. They have never taken the Greek campaign for enosis seriously because they believed that Great Britain's decision not to quit the island was an unassailable answer to the whole question; but they have made it emphatically clear that if Great Britain ever considers leaving Cyprus then the Turkish government has a great interest in the ownership of the island. The Turkish youth in Turkey, in fact, has grown up with the idea that as soon as Great Britain leaves the island the island will automatically be taken over by the Turks. It must be clear to all concerned that Turkey cannot tolerate seeing one of her former islands, lying as it does only forty miles from her shores, handed over to a weak neighbour thousands of miles away, which is politically as well as financially on the verge of bankruptcy.
https://web.archive.org/web/20130602072 ... -1954.html

Zorlu repeated the same thing at The London Conference 1955, Turkey had wanted Cyprus returned when the British left against the will of the majority Greek Cypriots who countered this demand with the pursuit of union with Greece.
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Plc ... 55&f=false

[kerry 6138]

I'll leave the studying and semantics to you thanks, while I enjoy the sun.

[Barney]

I'll leave the studying and semantics to you thanks, while I enjoy the sun.

Good idea, stick to what you do best.

[kerry 6138]

Ok I fell for it just read some of your back posts, obviously you like to poke the dog that bit you has a child with a sharp stick, each to his own.

[laptatony]

If true another reason why the talks will fail, the greek side will want to extend the land they want past Famagusta

http://famagusta-gazette.com/top-offici ... 264-69.htm

[Barney]

Thank you for the "concession", equal as individuals but at four to one equal communities is undemocratic nonsense, where do you draw the line, should 5 or 10% of the population have equal community status?

I ask again where would you draw the line?

Erol wrote,
So is the fact that the RoC with a population of under 1 million has an equal voice on a whole raft of issues within the EU as Grermany with a population of 80 million 'undemocratic nonsense' ? Why are the principals of democracy different between states as within them ? If you can understand why within the EU states have equality regardless of population sizes (on many issues , not all) , indeed why democracy requires they do, then you will be on your way to understanding why ENOSIS was not and could not be the valid will of a CYPRIOT people where as independence of Cyprus was and can only be the valid will of a CYPRIOT people.
Barney replied:-
A rubbish argument I’m afraid. Members of the EU CHOOSE to join and in doing so accept the rules. The Cypriots did not choose their “atypical” constitution, Greece and Turkey set the rules and the recipients were told take it or else. Besides there are three bodies in the EU where authority lies with its Parliament and “surprise, surprise” the majority in that body has the right of veto. Furthermore comparing rights of the two unequal communities squaring up to each other, with the rights of twenty-eight unequal sovereign States where there are bound to be alliances, pressure groups and horse trading is, in my view, nonsense.

Erol wrote:-
If you really want to challenge your own notions of 'equality of communities' in Cyprus , try asking yourself if you think both communities in Cyprus were equally to blame for what happened. Try asking yourself why you do not start from a point that the GC community must be 4 times more to blame because there are 4 times more GC than TC.

Barney replied:-
I can’t see the logic of the above but just so we can at least agree on something I’ll go along with you – if you will accept that with regard to Cyprus and its problems Turkey is 70 times to blame and Greece 11 times – fair enough?