Is Cyprus in a coma?

joseph


Joined: 17/04/2008
Posts: 709

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 16:55

Do you think Cyprus is in a coma with the varying factions trying to wake her up to a consciousness exclusive to what are her best interests?



When Britain was the major super power in the 19th century and Greece, Italy Belgium and Germany were unknown as sovereign states Britain knocked heads together, placed one of Victoria's cousins on the throne, formed a country and told them to get on with it; albeit Metternich and Cavuto played major parts in Germany's and Italy's formation, Britain never the less was the driving force behind both.



Would this strategy work today or do the geograhically located powers of today ,ie Turkey and Greece, inhibit such action, are they too culturally and historically different to find common ground for a solution. On the other hand can the indigenous people of Cyprus ever find their own solution or will Athens and Ankara ever hold sway?



If so... will Cyprus remain as it is and therefore a two state island be the only answer?



Regards Joseph

Macha


Joined: 18/01/2009
Posts: 650

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 16:58

Too complex for about 70% of the membership, Joe ;) But I will say that apart from a token military force, Athens has been out of the picture regarding Cyprus for many years now and has no wish to get involved again.

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 17:04

Macha msg 2



"Athens has been out of the picture regarding Cyprus for many years now and has no wish to get involved again."



Do you accept that the RoC would never have gained membership in the EU without a settlement, which you have said should never have happened, without the support, lobbying and threats to impeed futher EU expansion made by Athens ?

Nastynipper


Joined: 08/06/2008
Posts: 171

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 17:10

Terminal decline with 2 communists running the show,



what's next blame the foreigners and have a pogrom ??



Seems that is parr for the course when you look at communist regımes around the world.



Could be why they refer to comrades in arms so much ??

joseph


Joined: 17/04/2008
Posts: 709

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 17:13

Hi Macha, Hi erolz...



For the sake of argument... let us imagine a situation where both Athens and Ankara agree to step back and allow both sides (north/south) to continue talks and see where it takes them.



Again for the sake of argument ...

Macha is advising the GC' side

And Erolz the TC' view.



Where would both of you find common ground and make concessions in order to advance the cause of ALL Cyprus and all it's peoples?



Regards Joseph

joseph


Joined: 17/04/2008
Posts: 709

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 17:15

Nastynipper... re msg4



I was discusssing Cyprus ... not problems back here in the UK



Regards Joseph

joseph


Joined: 17/04/2008
Posts: 709

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 17:19

Macha erolz...



Think this through... would not expect an answer off the cuff...

Serious question this ... asking you both to bite the bullet and actually think of the other side as it were.



Regards Joseph

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 17:26

Joseph I am not sure I understand the question ?



Is the question 'could a viable solution to the Cyprus problem be imposed on it from the outside' or have I got it wrong ?

Nastynipper


Joined: 08/06/2008
Posts: 171

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 17:28

joseph



irony bit deep for most on here

Macha


Joined: 18/01/2009
Posts: 650

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 18:29

joseph,



First off, I have no support for the ROC government nor the Turkish administratiion so I could never favour one side over the other. If anything my sympathies would lie with the Turkish Cypriots as being the true underdogs, i.e. the Greek Cypriots lost half of Cyprus but the Turkish Cypriots lost it all and cannot control their destiny and true democratic will like the citizens of any normal country can.



But if I had to advise the ROC side I think the best lesson would be one of equality. There is a deep-rooted feeling among many GCs that they are the true Cypriots and the TCs are merely 400-year visitors. Some also have a superiority complex with which they see TCs as second-class citizens. This too has to change through education and cultural contacts. With two leftists in power on both sides, IMO the chance of a common Cypriot identity has a better chance of developing then before. But then an election may change things as usual...

joseph


Joined: 17/04/2008
Posts: 709

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 19:37

Hi Guys... sorry was out this afternoon... just back



erolz...

I am imagining a situation where there was no outside influence, ie both Athens and Ankara say: Right get in there, talk and look to neither of us to impose a solution but remember the longer any talks last (years) the further away a solution will become.



The presumption being that such outside influence as you mention could end up being the only viable solution to the Cyprus problem. If such talks find no common ground on which to move. Which may well be where we are today with EU courts, Orams etc which in turn seems to push the sides further apart.



Hence I use the analogy of Cyprus being in a coma.

Once the patient awakes he can only recall as matters were...

Whereas in truth he would have to accept the situation as is today...

In this scenario he cannot turn the clock back...



So... I asked you both if you were advisors either side what common ground/concessions would u offer for progress?



Joseph

joseph


Joined: 17/04/2008
Posts: 709

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 19:39

Sorry guys... have to go out again, but will log in when back... apologies



Regards Joseph

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 19:58

Joseph.



"I asked you both if you were advisors either side what common ground/concessions would u offer for progress?"



I will try and answer this when I ge tthe time. It will not be a short post I am afraid.

ilovecyprus


Joined: 08/05/2007
Posts: 2880

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 20:14

Hi Joseph



The patient isn't in a coma, it's awake. It's internal issues i.e ending embargoes (TC's) or regaining land (GC's) means it is engaging with the wider system (other countries) to resolve these.



It is being forced to be fully alive because it's actions or inaction is creating problems in the wider system i.e between NATO and the EU.



Greece and Turkey are part of the Cyprus system. Greece is involved in Cyprus, it's agreed joint educational reforms with Cyprus, it's foreign minister has recently and often blamed Turkey for the cyprus issue, it is involved in military affairs in cyprus and it's likely that it influences the EU through informal networks.



I think the CEPS report has made some sound recommendations for bringing the sides together. It's worth reading. The issue between the two sides is trust, which is very much lacking. I don't think they can solve all the issues themselves. The UN has to get involved and play a big part even to agree a suitable divorce.

joseph


Joined: 17/04/2008
Posts: 709

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 20:38

Hi ilovecyprus;



Re prgh 3,

this is my point in that whatever influences are being brought to bear they can but be in the interests of those who are influencing, ie Greece and/or Turkey.

I am not saying this is good or bad, right or wrong. Simply they are there.



I am trying to imagine a scenario where both these interested parties stood aside...hypothetically... to see if the people... north and south... could find common ground and concessions in order to move forward, the goal being towards a recognised independent Cyprus. If not , would that leave such an impasse that the growth of two independent and or separate states would become the status quo?



So ilovecyprus having put forward what is your fair and balanced view of the current status and given my question... how would you advise either side to proceed, what common ground could you lay and what concessions fair, remaining at all times neutral and honest... difficult as this is given past issues?



Regards Joseph

joseph


Joined: 17/04/2008
Posts: 709

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 20:46

Hi erolz, thanks, I look forward to your reply.



Please remember this is not some kind of trick question in order to lay traps on minor points here and there, but rather your thoughts on the major issues vis a vis how you would set about bringing the Cypriot people together given the recent past under an independent Cyprus.



Regards Joseph

joseph


Joined: 17/04/2008
Posts: 709

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 20:57

Hi Macha...



Aesthetically you are right ...but a neutral would find this all rather nebulous.

I agree wholeheartedly in what you would propose re education and cultural exchange etc but surely would agree the biggest thorn is the land issue?



So how would you advise on this, could you find a common ground in order to make progress and would you advise moving towards concessions re land issues by what is seen by the other side as rigid uncompromise?



Regards Joseph

dodger



Joined: 29/07/2007
Posts: 1895

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 22:09

Joseph,

Great thread very difficult for the north in the talks though as they do not carry any clout.The south has already made its mind up and wont be prepared to make concessions,why should they when they hold all the aces.The turkish troops are a massive issue as well.A lot of the issues are like the irrestible force and the immovable object.I am assured though that one way or another it will be sorted by the autumn of this year,as it is last chance saloon.Watch the courting of Turkey by Russia that will be interesting,

Paul.

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 23:11

Joseph.



"I asked you both if you were advisors either side what common ground/concessions would u offer for progress?"



I'll break down my thoughts into the main different areas.



first off Property.



I'll start by outlinging my views on what should be the right basis for a settlement re property and then translate that into the 'advice' I would offer each side.



For me an approach that starts with the absolute that pre 74 owners must have first priority and first choice in every case is inherently unfair in that given the % involved and the different desire of each community it places an unfair burden on the TC community. If you accept that both communites are responsible for where we are today then for me correcting that should share any 'pain' as equally between them as possible. In this sense 'pain' would represent not getting your first choice over property but having being compelled to take a second choice



(cont)

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 23:21

In all cases where 'first choice' can be given without affecting another persons 'first choice' it should be given.



The 'hard part' is where two parties first choices are not compatible with each other and one party will have to be compelled to take a 2nd choice option. In these cases I think there has to be a case by case indpendent assesment. In some cases where a GC (or TC) that only wants return and nothing else, they should get this but in others they may have to give way and accept a 2nd best option of their choice, be it monetary compensation, similar property in same area or different property elsewhere.



To give an couple of extreme examples then using these principles. Pre 74 owner wants return on their property and nothing else. The property is land and a family home that the pre 74 owner grew up in and has been in their family for generations and they wish to return and live there once more. The current occupier is



(cont)

joseph


Joined: 17/04/2008
Posts: 709

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 23:24

Hi Dodger



To be honest Dodger I was trying to find some common ground between what I read on our forum as two opposing factions set in concrete. It seems to me that is exactly what hinders the politicians in the current talks and proves how difficult this question is.

So rather than knock, accuse,make historical points, accurate or otherwise,

I was asking a simple question... put yourself in the opposing teams ranks and honestly tell us what you would do?



If both sets of hardliners had to put themselves in a postion of advisor how would they go about their jobs; not to gain the advantage for one side or the other but rather to compromise and find the common ground suggested in order to move the debate forward.



So far... Wynwardman ... on another tag... has been the only one to stick his neck out and say how he would advise both sides without once mentioning past issues re armies, atrocities etc.



Not for a minute belittling such concerns.



Regards Joseph

joseph


Joined: 17/04/2008
Posts: 709

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 23:27

Sorry erolz... will stay off



Joseph

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 23:27

someone who has only been living in said property for a few years and has made little improvement to it. In this case the pre 74 owner should get the return they want and the current owner should be compensated either in monetary value of its current value in the north or an alternative property that is acceptable to them. The other extreme would be a pre 74 owner who wants return of their property and nothing else but where the property was unused land with little emotional connection and where they do not intend to return to live on this land. The current owner is someone displaced in 74 who has made a major emotional and financial investment in the land and wants to be able to continue to live there. In this case I believe the current occupier of the land should have thier first choice and the pre 74 owner should be compelled to take a 2nd choice option of thier choice.



(cont)

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 23:32

How the above principles would translate into my 'advice' to first TRNC and then the RoC is as follows.



Advice to TRNC



If the above principle can be accepted then be as flexible as possible in the details. Look to solve as many cases as possible within the territorial adjustments of component states and do not get hung up on % size of these states. The Annan plan solved a vast number of property disputes in reducing the size of the TC component state from 34% to arounf 19%, with minimal (ish) impact on current owners in the North. If large numbers of property disputes can be solved by accepting a TC component state of say 27% rather than 29% in the Annan plan then do it. Do not get overly hung up on 'bizonality' being undermined by property settlement using the above principal.



(cont)

Macha


Joined: 18/01/2009
Posts: 650

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 23:34

josepth: "So far... Wynwardman ... on another tag... has been the only one to stick his neck out and say how he would advise both sides without once mentioning past issues re armies, atrocities etc."



If you haven't been around the North Cyprus BBs for very long, it may be an idea to factor in things like hypocrisy and inconsistency.

Macha


Joined: 18/01/2009
Posts: 650

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 23:38

Erolz: "For me an approach that starts with the absolute that pre 74 owners must have first priority and first choice in every case is inherently unfair in that given the % involved and the different desire of each community it places an unfair burden on the TC community."



For you that may well be the case, but doesn't the fact that you came from the UK to occupy property seized from a Greek Cypriot colour your judgement somewhat?

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 23:39

Advice to RoC (re property)



Accept the princpal that where someone can not have their first choice the pre 74 owner will NOT always and automaticaly get what they want but that it should be assed on a case by case basis that seeks to cause the least emotional hamr to either party. Prepare yopur population for this as a basis for a fair settlement re property. Be as flexible as possible in the details.



That then would be my summary re 'property' aspect.



I will try and do the same when I have time re



Political equality of communites, bizonality and bi communality.



Security (external guarantors).



Cypriot citizenship / settlers.

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 23:45

Macha msg 26



"For you that may well be the case, but doesn't the fact that you came from the UK to occupy property seized from a Greek Cypriot colour your judgement somewhat? "



First off I was aksed for my views, colored or not.



Secondly to characterise me as 'someone who came from the UK to occupy property siezed from a Greek Cypriot' is worthy of someone who claims to specialise in 'information warfare'. It is typical Macha in style and appraoch and says way more about you than me.



Thirdly my proposed basis for property settlement is based on trying to seek the fairest equity for ALL concerned in a very complex and difficult situation, where there have to be some 'loosers' (people who do not get first choice) and not based on what servers my personal interest best, no matter how much you try and create that impression with you ad nauseam, ad hominly attacks on me.



(cont)

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 23:51

finally Macvha let me say this, whihc I have said before many times in the past. If a property settlement was to be reached on the basis above and it was decided that I should be able to remain in my property and have a clean legal title to it, I would support and be more than happy that the increase in value that it would accrue going from a property in the north with disputed title to one in a unifed Cyprus with clean title should be paid by me into a central fund that can be used for compensation in other cases. It was bought as a property on disputed title in unrecognised North. Value increase over that related solely to a solution is not mine as far as I am concerned.



So how about you Macha, would you support a settlement that said the increase in value YOUR property would gain, through no effort on your part, for going from being in the unrecognised North to a unifed Cyprus should not accrue to you but should go to a fund to aid general settlement



(cont)

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
05/03/2009 23:54

You bought a property in the unrecognised North, priced as it was because it was in the unrecognised North. If there is a settlement it will increase in value simply because of the settlement. Do you think this increase in value, that is nothing to do with your efforts, should accrue to you or to Cypriots in general so it can be used to offset compensation in other cases. Or are you still looking for your quick buck of Cypriot suffering and refuser to accept that such a windfall belongs to anyone but yourself ?

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
06/03/2009 00:07

In the interests of clarity I have combined my multipart posts re 'property' into a single page that can be viewed here



http://www.visionmatters.co.uk/cyprus/property.htm



This forum is not the best for long text documents. I will do the same for my views on the other aspects of a settlement needed to answer Josphes question in full when I have time.

joseph


Joined: 17/04/2008
Posts: 709

Message Posted:
06/03/2009 00:12

erolz,



Thanks for your reply ... and yes you were asked... I will take my time to read through your thoughts. Thankyou.



Macha,

What concrete proposals would you advise re the land issues if you could? As I said.. how would you advise on this, could you find a common ground in order to make progress and would you advise moving towards concessions re land issues by what is seen by the other side as rigid uncompromise?



Regards Joseph



P.S. Macha ... I think Wynwardman gave a fair and honest reply to how he would go about giving advice., so rather unkind of you to suggest hypocrisy; after all everyone has a view and it is bringing views together that will move Cyprus forward, yes?



Joseph

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
06/03/2009 04:15

my views on political equality of the two communites can be seen here



http://www.visionmatters.co.uk/cyprus/Politicalequality.htm



I'll try and keep going and cover the other main areas needed in a settlement but it may take some time. Bear with me.

pinkchilli


Joined: 30/11/2008
Posts: 689

Message Posted:
06/03/2009 08:26

Some excellent posts.



Everyone who has bought here will gain financially if there is a settlement. All our properties will rise in value.



If this increase in value was for the sake of an argument, 50%, we, and I include all property owners, regardless of title, nationaility, could take out a mortgage for this increased amount, from the EU, who could use this amount (albeit on paper) to fund a solution.



None of us would have to make any repayments, and there would be no added interest. But when we come to sell, we would then have to re-pay the mortgage to the EU.



I appreciate this will probably stop many people selling their current home and buying another here, but that would be the price of a solution.

fire starter


Joined: 19/06/2008
Posts: 3401

Message Posted:
06/03/2009 09:32

joseph

re post 32

wyn is only looking after his own interests, he is the first to whine he didn't know his land was previously gc owned. come on!

the threads about it , go on and on.



my personal feelings are that if you owned the land /property pre 74 it should be returned.

it doesn't matter if you are a tc or gc, whats yours is yours.

its down to both goverments to pay compensation to the then newly displaced people,after all they either sold it or developed it.

they were warned years ago and now will have to face the music.

Macha


Joined: 18/01/2009
Posts: 650

Message Posted:
06/03/2009 13:12

Erolz: "So how about you Macha, would you support a settlement that said the increase in value YOUR property would gain, through no effort on your part, for going from being in the unrecognised North to a unifed Cyprus should not accrue to you but should go to a fund to aid general settlement."



i think it's only fair that those occupying GC property should either vacate it or pay some kind of compensation/lease the place. However, those like myself who did things legally and by the book, our properties have nothing to do with the unification process. So any rise in value - and the gap between pre-74 and "exchange" is wider than ever - is ours to keep. After all, I bought my house from its legal TC owner, handed over the cash and we shook hands on it. That's the way it should have been for everyone, so those now facing hardship have only themselves to blame.

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
06/03/2009 15:37

Macha msg 36



"i think it's only fair that those occupying GC property should either vacate it or pay some kind of compensation/lease the place."



The reason this is not fair in terms of s ettlement is that it places by far the greater burden of a property settlement on the TC community and TC indivduals than it does on the GC community and GC indivduals. Both sides bear a responsibility for the creation fo the mess we find ourselves in and thus it is fair that both share the burden of fixing these problems.



"those like myself who did things legally and by the book"



Do the RoC deeds show you as the legal owner ? Did the RoC interior ministry approve your purchase ? Did you permission to purchase from the Roc?



"So any rise in value [snip] is ours to keep"



So you see no moral issue in you a non cypriot through no effort on your part benefitting from a settlement windfall that would exist only as a result of years of Cypriot suffering.



(cont)

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
06/03/2009 15:43

At the same time you constantly seek to undermine anyone who offers a view that does not support your agenda on the basis 'well you have disputed land your views must be biased and only concerned with your own personal gain'.



"so those now facing hardship have only themselves to blame."



A property settlement based on your approach would mean that vast numbers of TC, probably in excess of 50% of the population, would be forced and compelled to once again become refugees , some for the third time, and have to start their lives anew or at best live as 'tennants' in their own homes with no long term security vs maybe 10% of GC that are similarly compelled. And you say this hardship, that would fall vastly more on the TC community, is 'thier fault' and they have only theirselves to blame ?

Aussie


Joined: 17/06/2007
Posts: 657

Message Posted:
06/03/2009 17:31

If the original GC owners get unfettered first choice to return the probability of a settlement deal being approved is virtually zero as any realistic Cypriot on both sides knows.



It would make a mockery of the idea of separate GC and TC bi communal/ federal states after all the TC state could have a majority GC population if this was the case.



Arguable supporters of such a proposal are really supporters of permanent division/ partition but aren't brave enough to call for it directly but would rather have an unworkable proposal rejected by the TC voters. I suspect both sides have a lot of people trying to influence the talks to ensure that the other side is seen to be the one rejecting it so they can be seen as the good guys by the international community



A lot of TC's have also traded or bought second or third properties since 1974 and aren't going to want to risk losing these properties.



Aussie

Macha


Joined: 18/01/2009
Posts: 650

Message Posted:
06/03/2009 17:52

Erolz: "The reason this is not fair in terms of s ettlement is that it places by far the greater burden of a property settlement on the TC community and TC indivduals than it does on the GC community and GC indivduals."



I agree with you, it is unfair. Turkey will have to pay for resettling its own citizens and Turkish Cypriots. British settlers/Londralis like you will be in an uncertain position, as you came here of your own free will and took over properties that didn't belong to you.



Erolz: "Do the RoC deeds show you as the legal owner ? Did the RoC interior ministry approve your purchase ? Did you permission to purchase from the Roc?"



I have the original 1957 British Cyprus deeds and the ROC Interior Ministry has me listed as the current owner, hence the Certificate of Ownership and Residency Card I got from them in 2005. Have YOU told them you are living in Cyprus?



Regards the moral issues, my hands are clean. I didn't take over someone else's property as others have do

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
06/03/2009 18:17

Macha msg 40



"I agree with you, it is unfair."



So your proposed basis for a property settlement in Cyprus is one that you think is unfair to the TC community? I prefer one that is as fair as possible to all cypriots myself and have outlined what I think the basis of such should be , as I was asked to do in this thread.



"Turkey will have to pay for resettling its own citizens and Turkish Cypriots."



Says who? Are you now the sole definer of a Cyprus property settlement. This was not the case under the Annan plan and is unlikely to be the case under any future settlement as thanks hevens you are not the one who mandates what should and will happen.



"I have the original 1957 British Cyprus deeds..."



Do these show you as the legal owner ?



"and the ROC Interior Ministry has me listed as the current owner, hence the Certificate of Ownership"



Do the RoC deeds show you as the legal owner or not ? If not why not? Where you granted permission to purchase as the RoC law

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
06/03/2009 18:20

requires before you can get legal deeds in your name?



"Regards the moral issues, my hands are clean. I didn't take over someone else's property as others have do "



Living on disputed property in the North is not the ONLY moraly ambiguous act a person can make. One can make a very strong case that someone who invests in property in a war and conflict ravaged place in the hopes of securing a large finacial windfall for themselves is not behaving in the most moral of ways.

fire starter


Joined: 19/06/2008
Posts: 3401

Message Posted:
06/03/2009 19:38

erolz

i don't think i have ever heard macha say he purchased here to make a large profit.

we also didn't buy exchange land the reason for this was that we were not happy to invest in a property which could be subject to a claim later.

it was never about making money, if we wanted to make money the trnc would be the last place we would have looked.

lets face it the state of play here with the ongoing orams case, dodgy builders and the aga saga, who would invest here?

you either have to love the place or be on the run!

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
06/03/2009 19:50

Fire Starter msg 43



"i don't think i have ever heard macha say he purchased here to make a large profit."



He has not stated it but he stands to make a substantial profit through no effort on his own part should there be a settlement none the less and he knows that. He has also made it clear that in his view he believes this increase in value, should it be realised, is his by right. I on the other hand do not believe that any increase in value between what my father bought and paid for and what it might become after a settlement is mine by right. Yet it is Macha that constantly states or implies that my views on Cyprus and any settlement are a result of my desire to personally benefit from disputed land and his are entirely independant and unbais.



"it was never about making money,"



and you think my decision to come and live in Cyprus in a property built on dispute land that my father bought and I inhereted is about 'making money' ?



cont

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
06/03/2009 19:53

Or that my views re a settlement as laid out here are motivated not by a genuine desire to see a settlement acheived but actually only a reflection of my desire to benefit personally from disputed property at the expense of GC as Macha constantly implies or states ?