Why the Hell should Turkey pay out Greek Cypriot property claims?

Tenakoutou



Joined: 27/07/2009
Posts: 4110

Message Posted:
17/03/2010 20:07

Personally, I don't see why Turkey should have to shell out to GCs who claim, yet TCs who

claim apparently have no redress. No doubt, if the GCs had succeeded in

killing all the TCs, the world would happily have wrung its hands and

cried crocodile tears - and then do absolutely nothing about it. Like

the UN at the time stood by and allowed the GCs to murder TC women and

children. We live in a cynical world. And, in my experience, Greeks of

all feathers view money like flies view rotten meat - theirs by right.

Right and wrong don't enter the equation. I have to say, in my dealings

with them, the way they regard themselves as 'something special' really

gets up my nose! I don't think they should have been accepted into the

EU, and DEFINITELY not into the Euro. Their 'straight as a corscrew'

accounting methods no doubt conned the EU bankers into accepting their

entry into the Euro, and now Europe is paying the price.

Tenakoutou



Joined: 27/07/2009
Posts: 4110

Message Posted:
17/03/2010 20:10

Msg 1/Cont'd: But Greece's money problems, it seems, are all down to the Germans occupying Greece

in WWII; couldn't possibly be of their own making, could they? I had

some respect for them - until I had business dealings with them, and saw

what they are really like. Grrrr!!



I'd better stop, before the steam starts coming out of my ears!



But I'm sure you get the gist....

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
18/03/2010 00:06

john,



nobody feels totally happy about this but it is good news for property owners in north cyprus



the alternative would have been an orams-type being xxxx on from a great height, as it were



but if turkey pays "something" that's much better for many on this forum than losing a uk home



your friends the greek cypriots are heartbroken by this sudden reversal on the part of the echr,

so probably it is good for trnc and implies a certain de facto recognition the island is partitioned,

whatever the court may say to the contrary



ideally turkey would show the spongers the door but the long term result could be disadvantageous



recognition of the ipc is wonderful news or to quote mrs thatcher "just hear that news and rejoice!"



andre

Tenakoutou



Joined: 27/07/2009
Posts: 4110

Message Posted:
18/03/2010 09:09

andre -am I naive in the assumption that Turkey intervened to save her Turkish 'brothers', or was it for territorial expansionist aims?



For whatever reason, it was Turkey, alone, that prevented further 'ethnic cleansing' (I hate that crass euphemism!) of the TC's.



Therefore, I think the other guarantor powers, Greece and Great Britain should share the burden of compensation payment - not Turkey, because Turkey took action while the other two guarantor countries ignored Cyprus.



Will the RoC find some devious way of wriggling out of the IPC 'order' - they generally flout so many EU directives, anyway?

deecyprus4


Joined: 27/07/2008
Posts: 3452

Message Posted:
18/03/2010 09:24

Tenakoutou..well said and I 100% agree with you.

tiff60


Joined: 27/04/2009
Posts: 12

Message Posted:
18/03/2010 09:41

If Turkey buys out the GC land in the North, it can and will sell it on, (I know some is already sold & they will not make a profit), thus solving 2 problems in one ie The GC's then have no dispute over the property rights and the property is then occupied legally by TC's ,Turks, Brits , Russians and any other potential buyers. This then boasts the economy and the populous.

The alternative which was envisaged was for occupiers to pay compensation.

I do agree that TC's will have problems trying to claim from the ROC & that this needs to be addressed politically. The Turks have shown the way ahead and now will occupy the high ground politically.

wanderer


Joined: 05/02/2009
Posts: 1653

Message Posted:
18/03/2010 09:58

Interesting article in Cyprus today a GC has accepted land in the South in exchange for his former property in the Ercan area

The land office in the South won't do the transfer as its TC land and cannot be transferred until a settlement

The GC says he could have had cash and was not forced into the deal he will take the ROC government to the EHCR for stopping him having the land granted by the IPC

The roc are in serious trouble on this case

Rauf Denktaş stated that the exchange land was exactly that ready to exchange but as usual the roc reneged on the deal

The cost of the payoff to the roc will not be great had the TRNC hold a lot of land in the south for the "exchange deeds" in the North

As to the accounting to get into the euro not just roc &GR lied Italy has only had a stable currency since entering the euro The whoe concept of the euro is flawed the european economies are too diverse

Tenakoutou



Joined: 27/07/2009
Posts: 4110

Message Posted:
18/03/2010 10:06

tiff60/Msg 6: 'The alternative which was envisaged was for occupiers to pay compensation.'



Most expats bought their properties in 'good faith', irrespective of the fact that most were lied to by advocates and estate agents. Why should the onus be placed on them for compensation?



Also from Msg 6: 'The Turks have shown the way ahead and now will occupy the high ground politically.'



Just because they appear to have accepted the Strasburg ruling re IPC, this single act of 'contrition' won't 'cut much ice' with EU and UN - they would have to withdraw their troops from TRNC and be seen to be actively addressing 'Human Rights' reforms on their 'own turf' to be accorded any international political 'recognition'.

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
18/03/2010 15:00

so many issues!



as regards human rights, many many countries stand accused:

eg the anglo-americans showering fragmentation bombs etc

(but at least they apologise after bombing wedding parties)



even that kernal of universal brotherhood the eu

as a ragbag of separate states led by you know who

faces accusations of corruption, favouritism overseas and racism at home



as regards occupying the high ground, the metaphor is usually applied morally

rather than politically (since all politicians regard themselves in the right)



and please no improper use of the "s" word "should"...

sad to say the world just don't operate according to a universally agreed "should"



what I was looking forward to though was one of our more dissident members

explaining just how the gc's will wriggle out of this properties commission blow:

they only have until end 2011 so had better start squirmin' very soon

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
18/03/2010 20:00

re msg 3



Andre_514



>>nobody feels totally happy about this but it is good news for property owners in north cyprus <<



I hardly think 'nobody' is accurate



re msg 1 etc, .



We have discussed this MANY times .. Why are you asking the same question? Turkey and Greece didn't leave the sovereign territory of another nation and didn't have a UN Mandate to initiate a military soln... in fact TR and GR had mandated the UN to keep the peace ..( whilst covertly importing arms)



I wonder if you can answer this question - how many TCs lost their lives in between the Greek Military sponsored Coup kicking off and the first TR troops landing .......?



Simply, IPC is the ECHR's prescribed local remedy for Turkey to offer a solution for ethnic cleansing.



The 'rump' RoC claim they have appointed a guardian of TC properties and can't sort things out until a solution.. this is now 'under review'



They - unlike Turkey - have largely forbidden the sale of TC property for private

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
18/03/2010 20:02

This ECHR ruling is GREAT as it will FORCE both sides to talk about a political solution... neither TR or the 'rump' RoC can afford the scale of payouts that might ensure...



COMPROMISE is sort of 'forced upon 'em....

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
18/03/2010 22:21

or ensue, even...

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
18/03/2010 22:37

mark,



the echr descision long-predicted by your good self to be significant,

is very good news for north cyprus and its peoples:

that you may not think so, is for reasons that are important to you

which none of us have ever succeeded in understanding fully

despite your long-standing interest in the cyprus "problem" as it were



I share your view that it will add a push to the cyprus talks:

and all we need for an agreement now,

is an acceptance of the security guarantee, and restitution of homes

formerly occupied during the previous greek cypriot historical period

...evicting existing families without mercy as appropriate



as regards body counts of your gc's I cannot supply any reliable statistics

but think you would share my view that the tc's never suffered

a wholesale genocidal massacre,

perhaps to put words in your mouth, "that it would never have ocurred",



or in my opinion that it was only prevented by the 1974 peace operation



you pays your money and...

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
19/03/2010 10:59

Dear Andre_514





The ECHR decision reinforces that much of the land / properties that are disputed ARE still owned by the Greek Cypriot.. and asks Turkey to 'sort' it.



I am at a loss to understand how this large financial burden is going to 'benefit' TCs during a world wide recession..unless a deal can be done to avoid paying out ..applies to 'rump' RoC, too ! This will inevitably mean cutbacks in support from Turkey.



Hope that clears up any 'confusion' ;)



As you say, pre the TR invasion / 'peace movement' there were no massacres of TCs .. in fact it was GCs who were killed in large numbers, defending the arrival of the TR forces... GCs who had been fighting each other the week before... TR managed to unite extreme right wing 'coupists' and pro-rapprochement GCs....quite a feat.. :(



Many GC units watched the TR troops go by, in the first hours - ordered NOT to open fire as they believed the UN would get a cease-fire sorted.



Who could know what would have happened?!

Lincsman



Joined: 02/04/2008
Posts: 117

Message Posted:
19/03/2010 14:42

To Mark mmmmmm, I've spoken before about massacres of TC's between the "coup" in 74 and TR landing however, whilst there were no killings, that probably was because of the GC infighting. If the Pro Sampson faction had "won" and TR hadn't intervened, who knows what would have happened to the TC's with Nikos Sampson at the head? Again this is conjecture the same as with the TR breakout in August after the initial ceasfire. Turkey cites the reason was because of the continued "attacks" on the TC enclaves in Famagusta, Paphos and Limassol by GC forces, the GC side say they were attacking the enclaves because so believed they would be used as "bridgeheads" for further TR attacks, so one action propagated another. Again with the massacres that were perpetrated in 74 by GC forces(EOKA B)? in the TC villages, Tochni, and the ones near Famagusta, these were on the day of the TR breakout, which event caused the other? Obviously no one fully knows what would have happened if TR hadn't cont

Lincsman



Joined: 02/04/2008
Posts: 117

Message Posted:
19/03/2010 14:44

Cont,



intervened. But past history suggests the TC's would have got the worst of it as the minority.

Tenakoutou



Joined: 27/07/2009
Posts: 4110

Message Posted:
19/03/2010 17:55

Msg 15: Weren't the GC's fleeing anyway - they likely thought they could get away with slaughtering as many TC as possible in their retreat?



If only they'd been flys on the wall in Kissinger's office - they'd have realised what mugs they'd been!

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
19/03/2010 20:12

mark message 14:



"at a loss to understand to how this large financial burden is going to benefit tc's"



taking your statement at its face value I'll explain

although my original phrase was "very good news for north cyprus and its peoples"



firstly property investors are protected from any individual claim, and the market will be boosted



secondly although there were remarks by the echr in support of the gc property position,

the court appears to be washing its hands of the intractible cyprus dispute



thirdly the court recognises an institution the IPC which is situated within trnc territory not turkey

and acknowledges property disputes where cypriot turks and foreigners are established residents



fourthly gc's say existing awards are inadequate: and new applications end in december 2011



fifthly the IPC mostly granted cash payments but not the restitution the gc's still dream of



sixthly south cyprus' government is in disarray over the decision, its public shocked

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
19/03/2010 22:41

mark message 11:



but both sides have already been talking about a political solution



...since september 2008!



nonetheless let's not be churlish, and raise a glass to their efforts



andre

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
19/03/2010 23:37

you couldn't make this up:



christofias has just gone on tv, says the famagusta gazette online,

to tell his fellow citizens to "ignore the ipc in the national interest"



and of course if they even try to arrange an amicable exchange

through the now internationaly-recorgnised ipc in north cyprus,

they will already find they are refused pemission to register

their new exchange home in the roc ...by the gc land registry



what a carry-on!

sporty


Joined: 06/12/2007
Posts: 685

Message Posted:
20/03/2010 02:17

unbelievable!

they just launched another court case in the kangaroo court against Turkey,they tell all their citizens not to claim via the local remedy (ipc),even after the ruling from the ECHR!The UN and EU are without doubt going to wield a big stick at them soon,if they already havnt.I think the main problem relates to the fact that they've been telling their people that they will get their properties back and now with the ECHR ruling this has been taken out of their hands and any sign of acceptance of the IPC will completely go against what they've been promising their people.Its really sad,why not accept compensation?2 generations have come and gone,do they really think that going against the ECHR is going to get them what theyve wanted for years?Half of the former owners arnt even alive anymore!Most of the GCS wouldnt want to uproot and live in the north anyway!I totally understand their frustrations but please WAKE UP! its 2010!Talk to your people,see what they really want!!

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
20/03/2010 12:53

sporty,



the gc's will continue to use the immovable properties commission of course,

despite christofias' plaint



it is rather that an amicable exchange cannot happen due to the barmy south cyprus laws

as the recent timvios debacle clearly illustrates



perhaps it's just as well for north cyprus our friends in the south are growing increasingly

out of touch



andre

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
21/03/2010 11:08

re msg 15



1/ Why inverted commas around the word coup ?!



2/ You seem to be acknowledging there were no massacres of TCs during the first four weeks of the Turkish military landing... am I correct in that assumption ?!



3/ It is not disputed, internationally, that Turkey broke off the agreement of August 14th



Anyway.. the Q was way does TR have to pay? Do you understand why ?

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
21/03/2010 11:36

re msg 18 Andre_514



MM: >>"at a loss to understand to how this large financial burden is going to benefit tc's" <<



Andre: >>firstly property investors are protected from any individual claim, and the market will be boosted ..<<



not exactly how I would interpret the ruling.. nor it's immediate effect on prices .. Turkey will have to pay out leaving less money to support 'TRNC'..



Andre: >>secondly although there were remarks by the echr in support of the gc property position,

the court appears to be washing its hands of the intractible cyprus dispute <<



No, it is quite clear that Turkey must provide a remedy



Andre: >>thirdly the court recognises an institution the IPC which is situated within trnc territory <<



'interesting' interpretation.. but we both know it means noting of the sort .. I hardly think the ECHR would expect GCs to travel to Turkey !

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
21/03/2010 19:03

mmmmmm message 24:



I'm not sure that your interpretatation is required,

the ruling is clear that no individual would be forced to pay off claims

only turkey... (and we will both believe that when we see it!)



prices in cyprus and to the south of europe, one of the great unknowns I grant

think of bulgarian scams, 1.6 unsold spanish holiday flats, roc developer loans,

and especially british buyers still very short of cash



but yes, the less uncertainty and the less chance of being personally clobbered

and the more the market in north cyprus will be helped,

only necessary now to sit back and await the inevitable recovery



and less money to support "trnc"?

if the trnc doesn't exist as you claim turkey will continue to fund its people

as you accept cyprus is in process of acquiring a turkish majority:

...so no problem there then!



the only recognition problem is the gc's are now forced to recognise

the futility of rejecting land-for-peace compromises eg anan 2004

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
21/03/2010 21:40

corrections to message 25:





line one: "your interpretation is not required"



line five: "1.6 million"



while line fifteen could be even better written as:

"for self-delusion the gc leadership has no peer having thrown away all hope of bargaining land-for-peace"



andre

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
22/03/2010 11:36

Dear Andre_514

re 26



"not sure your interpretation is required" ( !!)



Sadly, for you - your offered yours.. and it was legally flawed and had no basis in fact.... ;)



If you are now claiming TR won't pay up, then the ECHR could and would receive applications from aggrieved parties and have to say that the 'local remedy' route was 'exhausted'... Come on, matey... the only way out of THAT one would be some sort of political settlement - which is EXACTLY what TR wants.. ( needs ?) .... Resolution may be possible if the 'rump' RoC feels it is in the same 'boat' ...





YES - I believe there may be more TR nationals ( claiming 'citizenship' of 'TRNC' ) than 'real ' Cypriots of Turkish ethnicity - but does Turkey really want to pay the price for some sort of 'say' in Cyprus? ... You forget that TR is a member of the Council of Europe and bound by the 'rules' .. simply leaving the 'club' isn't an option.

mpusa


Joined: 23/08/2010
Posts: 2

Message Posted:
23/08/2010 11:26

My mothers family worked hard and purchased property in North Cyprus prior to the Turkish invasion. Today that land would be worth millions if we had access to it. YES we expect to be compesated if we are not going to have use and enjoyment of our land!

Jetski


Joined: 21/07/2008
Posts: 584

Message Posted:
23/08/2010 11:32

And what is your attitude towards Turkish Cypriots? - what was you families attitude to them before 1974?

ScubaBoy9


Joined: 19/07/2010
Posts: 87

Message Posted:
23/08/2010 11:57

mpusa



As you rightly expect to be compensated, have you applied to the IPC? Obviously from what I see that is probably the quickest way to get the solution you want.

measey


Joined: 07/02/2009
Posts: 1037

Message Posted:
23/08/2010 12:07

Mpusa. so do the TCs its not all one sided.

Troodo


Joined: 12/06/2008
Posts: 1002

Message Posted:
23/08/2010 12:11

Only recently, a GC officer has admitted that his orders were to attack TC enclaves rather than the Turkish army during the opening part of the peace operation.

It would seem more and more GC’s are doing the right thing and leaving many with egg on their face. Perhaps this is the way forward.

Troodo


Joined: 12/06/2008
Posts: 1002

Message Posted:
23/08/2010 12:15

As for Turkey not being able to afford the compensation, they will get most of their money back from selling on the unoccupied land to speculators.

emineden1


Joined: 22/12/2008
Posts: 512

Message Posted:
23/08/2010 12:41

mpusa, Turkey did not INVADE, thankfully they intervened to prevent further Turkish Cypriot deaths.

catalkoykid


Joined: 15/02/2009
Posts: 1190

Message Posted:
23/08/2010 12:51

any one thought the army have all the prime land on the coast,do you think that wont be sold on at some time lol



and who will get the money lol

BrightonJim


Joined: 27/07/2010
Posts: 145

Message Posted:
23/08/2010 13:08

It is accepted that GCs should be compensated for the loss of their land in TRNC and that it would be good business for Turkey to pay compensation for land with development value which they could sell at a profit once planning permission been granted.



But what about compensation, by way of example, for a typical 25 house development owned by Brits which is built on Greek land? Why should Turkey foot the bill for this?



Am I missing something?

fiendishpaul


Joined: 18/05/2008
Posts: 1720

Message Posted:
23/08/2010 13:14

Jim



Who do you suggest does foot the bill then ??



The TRNC gave planning permission for the development, should have issued TRNC deeds for the properties and will have received taxes as a result of the sale. The TRNC aka Turkey should therefore foot the bill.



Or are you suggesting that the Brits should pay as per the Orams case ??



Paul

ilovecyprus


Joined: 08/05/2007
Posts: 2880

Message Posted:
23/08/2010 13:50

to add to msge 37



If no purchase permission was granted to Brits, then no Brits would have purchased. There would be zero Brits living in the North (other than those whom are related to TC's).



The TRNC gave permission for Brits to purchase and to populate the North. Why?



The unscrupulous saw an opportunity to make money for themselves and their family, the realists and idealists saw it as a practical way to augment the government coffers, so that, the TRNC could sustain itself as a vibrant and autonomous community. Presumably, all this was done with the full knowledge of Turkey.

BrightonJim


Joined: 27/07/2010
Posts: 145

Message Posted:
23/08/2010 15:16

Thanks for two good replies.



I was fishing with my question "why should Turkey foot the bill" and it is corrrect that morally it should.



The real question is will they and if they do not, who will have to?



The only answer must be, to the extent that Turkey does not pay, it will be the home owner.



That may not be as disasterous as it first seems because the value of the land on which an estate is built shared between the home owners on the estate may not be that much, especially if the taxes paid are deducted. Of course it would be different if your house overlooked the harbour at Girne or another exceptional location



As a TRNC property owning Brit, that appears to me to be the absolute downside of a settlement of the land issue.



What do you think?

Tenakoutou



Joined: 27/07/2009
Posts: 4110

Message Posted:
23/08/2010 17:02

Great Britain and Greece were supposed to be guarantor powers, also.



Greece started the problem, while the British sat in their bases, drinking cups of tea, feigning oblivion as to the plight of the Turkish Cypriots.



So, I reiterate: why the Hell should Turkey [alone] pay out Greek Cypriot property claims?

fiendishpaul


Joined: 18/05/2008
Posts: 1720

Message Posted:
23/08/2010 17:30

Tenakatou



Because they (the TRNC) are the ones that have profitted (monetarily) from the wholesale exploitation of land in the North following the intervention of 1974. I would be more sympathetic if the TRNC had utilised only land equivalent to that lost in the North and protected the remainder. Additional land could have been leased to 'settlers' until there was a prospect of a solution. Many TC's have become extremely rich due to the land gifted to them by the government. Whilst many may have received it deservedly because of land lost in the South, there are also many who received land purely because of who they knew and who they paid.



Just my opinion of course



Paul

fiendishpaul


Joined: 18/05/2008
Posts: 1720

Message Posted:
23/08/2010 20:25

Apologies



Second sentence should read:



I would be more sympathetic if the TRNC had utilised only land equivalent to that lost in the South and protected the remainder.



Paul

MUSIN M


Joined: 26/06/2008
Posts: 1352

Message Posted:
23/08/2010 21:10

tenakoutou

msg 40



looks like you have it all sussed ,well done i take my hat off to you.



musin



long live the KKTC

ang1706


Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 570

Message Posted:
23/08/2010 21:23

The way things are going with all the property scams here, Turkey might have to PAY OUR COMPENSATION due to rogue builders.



Latest scam is to ask us to cough up about 25k for our deeds, I thought this was just my builder but have heard that others are in on it too, some being quoted £31k.



Turkey have got to step in and sort this lot out otherwise it is going to cause a major embarrasment for them.

The TRNC Government seems unwilling to assist (for various reasons) so this may be another unwanted hurdle for Turkey to contend with unless it does something, regarding joining EU!!

Tenakoutou



Joined: 27/07/2009
Posts: 4110

Message Posted:
23/08/2010 22:54

It's obvious that Turkey have their own 'agenda' by not interfering with TRNC law that allows these property scams to be perpetrated on foreigners and TC's, alike - otherwise, if it were not in Turkey's long term interest, they would have stepped in and prevented the whole situation. No one should be naive enough to think that Turkey doesn't monitor everything that goes on in TRNC.



It seems increasingly likely that there will be a lot more disenchanted foreigners, together with quite a few TC's, as they succumb to similar scams as are being perpetrated now on both 'Esdeger' and pre '74 Turkish Title property.



The *British government and *EU parliament knows that EU citizens willing to gamble on TRNC property acquisition, against the advice of their governments, have gambled and lost and, therefore, are not deemed worthy of *their consideration.

Tenakoutou



Joined: 27/07/2009
Posts: 4110

Message Posted:
23/08/2010 23:02

Cont'd:



Who is to say that the TRNC government, by allowing current 'practices', perhaps think it is 'pay back time' for the British for ignoring them in their long years of plight and suffering at the hands of the Greek Cypriots?



Or, who is to say that Turkey, who were forced to intervene, don't thoroughly agree with the sentiments of successive TRNC governments?



Practically, although regrettably for those disaffected property purchasers [including myself, having bought pre '74 TT], there are always two sides to a story.

fiendishpaul


Joined: 18/05/2008
Posts: 1720

Message Posted:
24/08/2010 07:18

If this is the case then the government is even more stupid and short-sighted than I first thought.



Paul

Tenakoutou



Joined: 27/07/2009
Posts: 4110

Message Posted:
24/08/2010 07:33

Cont'd:



The latest austerity measures, yet to be implemented in TRNC, but firmly insisted on by Turkey, will almost inevitably cause a spate of further 'sharp practice' aimed at current property owners without title deeds, especially since the construction industry has all but ground to a standstill.



The very fact that Akfinans Bank's financial 'manipulations' were allowed to proceed unchecked and completely unregulated, coupled in the aftermath of the auction with the ensuing [allegedly] illegal repercussions aimed at their victims to effect their early eviction, should now be setting an extremely worrying precedent for a great many vulnerable British expatriates.

BrightonJim


Joined: 27/07/2010
Posts: 145

Message Posted:
24/08/2010 12:57

Sadly, I agree with Tenakoutou that Turkey ALONE should not be expected to pay out Greek Cypriot property claims and the reality is that TRNC property owners will probably have to foot a proportion of the bill.



We have all bought against the advice of our Governments and knew or aught to have known that there may be a price to pay.



The up-side is that should the Greek Cypriot claims on property in the TRNC be settled, there should be an increase in buyers which should boost property prices.

ilovecyprus


Joined: 08/05/2007
Posts: 2880

Message Posted:
24/08/2010 13:15

Turkey is expected to pay alone, because the International community has decided she has been the sole antagonist in the conflict. She has been tried and found guilty.



What I would like to know is:



Has Turkey tried to defend its position on the world stage? If not, why not?



Greece is just as culpable, with it's aggressive intentions on the island. Mind you, not much chance of them providing any funds, not unless Germany wants to get involved.



Britain has got off lightly. By keeping a low profile she has not been asked to defend her dormancy in the conflict.



msge 49



There would be an increase in the TRNC property prices, but these can't be as high as most people expect. The days of inflated property assets fuelled by cheap credit and bountiful equity are over. Well certainly for the time being anyway, not perhaps, until the current crisis is a distant memory.

fiendishpaul


Joined: 18/05/2008
Posts: 1720

Message Posted:
24/08/2010 13:47

Sorry but I disagree.



Why should the Greeks pay for land that was 'illegally' sold by the TRNC/Turkey.



Agreed, it was a Greek sponsored military coup that was the catalyst for the Turkish intervention BUT during the 'peace' that has followed, it is the TRNC/Turkey that has sold land that does not belong to them. The TRNC recognise this fact because in the past 2 years there have been a few occasions when the TRNC 'government' in an attempt to reassure expats, have stated that any compensation to be paid as a result of ECHR/IC rulings would be met by the TRNC government. As to whether they will follow through with their promises is anyones guess although I would give good odds against them honouring this pledge



Just my opinion of course



Paul

BrightonJim


Joined: 27/07/2010
Posts: 145

Message Posted:
24/08/2010 14:57

Of course the Greek Government should not be expected to pay compensation to the Greek Cypriots for the loss of their land.



But, who will pay?

Troodo


Joined: 12/06/2008
Posts: 1002

Message Posted:
24/08/2010 15:19

Of course the Greek Government should not be expected to pay compensation to the Greek Cypriots for the loss of their land.



Why not!!! It was the GC's trying to make themselves Greek at the cost of the TC's, and the Greek led coup, which started all this in the first place.



Patientia est a donum superum

ilovecyprus


Joined: 08/05/2007
Posts: 2880

Message Posted:
24/08/2010 15:29

msge 51



"Agreed, it was a Greek sponsored military coup that was the catalyst for the Turkish intervention"



If they did indeed trigger events why should they not pay some sort of compensation, not necessarily compensation for loss of land, but towards the development of the island. Of course, they may have done this indirectly through the EU, however it is not been done with an admission of guilt. (not that I know of anyway)



As regards to the 'illegal' selling of the land. This an emotive issue, it's exactly why the problem has not been solved and may never get resolved. . The question is 'Could the TRNC have survived as an entity without selling Greek land? I don't know the answer. If the politicians believed that they couldn't and no solution was in sight then they may have decided that they could not live off the 20% of the land in the North. To leave the 80% untouched may have been not viable. Of course, to an idealist this argument would sound preposterous and insultin

ilovecyprus


Joined: 08/05/2007
Posts: 2880

Message Posted:
24/08/2010 15:31

insulting (run out space)

fiendishpaul


Joined: 18/05/2008
Posts: 1720

Message Posted:
24/08/2010 16:16

Ilovecyprus



"If they did indeed trigger events why should they not pay some sort of compensation, not necessarily compensation for loss of land, but towards the development of the island."



Using the above analogy, should we therefore expect Germany to recompense the rest of the world for everything that followed the start of WW2 ? After all, they started it !! Of course not.



I have no problem with refugees being recompensed with exchange land for the loss of their land in the South, it is what went on after this where the problem lies. Could the TRNC have survived without selling GC owned land ?? - a difficult question I agree but seeing as the TRNC has been bankrolled by the Motherland since 1974, I am confident that the state would have survived if Turkey wished it so.



One thing that cannot be denied is that the TRNC state has profitted financially from the sale of GC land and therefore they should be responsible for any restitution.



Paul

BrightonJim


Joined: 27/07/2010
Posts: 145

Message Posted:
24/08/2010 19:11

Paul, morally TRNC should be responsible for restitution but all property owners in the TRNC should be aware that in due course they may have to put their hands in their pockets to help settle the land issue.



How much would that be? If the land on a typical development of 25 houses is worth £250,000 it's £10,000 per house, less any contribution from TRNC/Turkey. I don't really know.



Not good news but there is no point beint an ostrich.

ilovecyprus


Joined: 08/05/2007
Posts: 2880

Message Posted:
24/08/2010 19:21

msge 56



1) Yes I agree that Turkey/TRNC has profited from GC property. It is compensating through the IPC.



2) Greece has not profited from the Cyprus affair but it has caused collateral damage.



From your German analogy, I think what you are saying is, that any country who starts a war should not be punished? I am not hearing you say that the winner should get the spoils, but the perpetrator should not pay a price.

I also hear you and the international community saying that Greece should not be apportioned any blame for the Cyprus conflict. This seems very unfair to me.



As it happens, I think Germany paid quite a heavy price. They lost half their country and many of their young citizens have lived with the guilt for many years. Like the first world war Germany may very well have been punished, but the Wests greatest fear was the spread of communism. I would be interested to know if Greece has paid it's dues? They may well have, but I suspect not.

Tenakoutou



Joined: 27/07/2009
Posts: 4110

Message Posted:
24/08/2010 19:26

One point that you proponents of 'No' miss, is the fact that had the TC's not been the victims of ethnic cleansing and had been left alone to get on with their lives, there would have been no TRNC - no Turkish military intervention, either.



After 1960 - Cyprus independence - the Greeks, Brits and Turks were collectively mandated to keep the peace. The only country to live up to that responsibility was Turkey!



Most Greek Cypriots were brainwashed into believing that 'Enosis' with 'Motherland Greece' could be their only salvation. How misguided and misled they all were!



Through their actions, or the actions of their democratically elected leaders, what they lhave lost, they have deserved to lose.



So, why should Turkey, alone, be expected to pay [compensation] for the Greek 'skulduggery' and British inaction?

fiendishpaul


Joined: 18/05/2008
Posts: 1720

Message Posted:
25/08/2010 08:00

ILoveCyprus



I do not condone in any way what Greece did by initiating a coup and of course blame should be apportioned and no, I do not believe that any country that starts a war should not be punished. However, WW2 occurred 70 odd years ago and the countries involved have managed to move on and have even forged strong links with one another - the blame game no longer exists. The Cyprus problem if my history is correct, has its' roots in the 1950's, not that long after WW2 but still we have each side blaming the other, it is time to move on.



I am in no way excusing the actions that lead to the 74 'intervention' but thousands of people lost their land/properties which are still internationally 'recognised' as being theirs. Unlike the RoC, the TRNC has KNOWINGLY taken part in the WIDESPREAD sale of this land and should therefore pay compensation. The fact that the IPC has been formed is tacit recognition of this.



Regards



Paul

fiendishpaul


Joined: 18/05/2008
Posts: 1720

Message Posted:
25/08/2010 08:07

I appreciate that the RoC may have also partaken in the illegal sale of TC land in the South, however I have seen no evidence that the practice is widespread hence the reason for the use of capitals in my previous post. I also believe that the RoC should pay compensation to TC refugees who lost land/property in the South.



Paul

Tenakoutou



Joined: 27/07/2009
Posts: 4110

Message Posted:
25/08/2010 10:49

I am afraid, that on this occasion, I cannot countenance your logic, 'fiendishpaul'.



Re-examine the causal problems of the GC/TC conflict - couple that with 'Enosis at all costs', then add the catalyst of deliberate British inaction.



For your information, most of Paphos was Turkish - much has been built on, title deeds falsified and subsequently sold.

fiendishpaul


Joined: 18/05/2008
Posts: 1720

Message Posted:
25/08/2010 11:49

Tenakatou



I am no expert on the Cyprus problem and fully concur with the view that Greece/GC were the intitial cause of the problem. Could the British have intervened ? Maybe, but history tells us that they chose not to. Does this therefore make them liable for the deliberate actions of the TRNC state 30 odd years later ?? Personally, I don't think so.



As I stated in my previous post, I have no evidence that there has been widespread misappropriation of TC land in the South, but if, as you state that this is the case, then it should be pursued through legal channels. Two wrongs do not make a right.



Like yourself, I have lived on both sides of the island and have no axe to grind with either side of the 'ethnic' divide. Maybe I am looking at the problem too simplisticly or maybe there is a simple answer to a complex question ?



Regards



Paul

fiendishpaul


Joined: 18/05/2008
Posts: 1720

Message Posted:
25/08/2010 12:30

Tenakatou



Meant to ask on previous post but hit the 'transmit' button too soon.



I assume from the title of the thread that you agree that compensation should be paid ??



Regards



Paul

BrightonJim


Joined: 27/07/2010
Posts: 145

Message Posted:
25/08/2010 13:21

As a matter of interest I am reliably informed that Britain did not fulfil its obligations under the 1960 Treaty of Guarantee in return for the Greek Cypriot promise to allow Britain to retain her militiary bases on the island.



The Treaty can be read on http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Guarantee



The issue of what happens if Turkey/TRNC does not pay compensation has not been addressed in the threads.

Crumpy



Joined: 05/06/2010
Posts: 419

Message Posted:
25/08/2010 13:41

Most of us on this forum agree that "Greece and GC were the intitial cause of the problem". And, quoting Tenakoutou, Britain was partly responsible by its "inaction" in 1974. However, outside Turkey, KKTC and a few parts of Hackney and Harringey, everyone else has decided that Turkey was the bad boy in all of this ... and unfortunately, after 36 years, it's going to be almost impossible to persuade them otherwise :-(



In the event of reunification (albeit with bilateral states) the flood gates will open with claims, from both sides, for compensation. However, the claims from the south are likely to be far greater :-(



As an example, according to an elderly TC friend of mine, pre-74 80% of the land from Karsiyaka to Catalkoy was GC, and almost 100% of Alsancak was. In the late 80s much of that land was distributed to TCs (who had been displaced from the south) and in many cases, this land has subsequently been sold on, with many of those TCs making a tidy profit on it.

Crumpy



Joined: 05/06/2010
Posts: 419

Message Posted:
25/08/2010 13:43

(Continued from above)



Contrary to what Tenakoutou states, my elderly TC friend, tells me that most of the TC-owned land in the south has in fact been left untouched. I'm sure there are indeed a few cases where land has "been built on, title deeds falsified and subsequently sold", but was the RoC government complicit in those dealings? Here in the north, the KKTC government certainly were, and moreover it is possible that some politicians at that time benefitted more than most from some of deals involving the land allocation ... but that should be the topic of another thread



Getting back to the topic of this thread, I know Muhsin and a few others feel that the future lies to the north ... and moreover KKTC becoming the 82nd il of Turkey. If indeed that is the case, then for Turkey to be accepted into the EU and more generally, for it not to become the Eastern Mediterranean pariah, then, as in the first scenario, those GC compensation claims will have to be paid.

Molly


Joined: 30/08/2008
Posts: 299

Message Posted:
25/08/2010 15:10

The title of the thread implies that Turkey should not foot the compensation bill.



As the figurehead and financier of the TRNC, who else is responsible? Bearing in mind that the illustrious leaders here are incapable of running a company let alone a state.



Irrespective of who "started the war", it appears that Turkey's goal is another Enosis, uniting the TRNC with Turkey.



Just look at the recent substantial investment coming from Turkey - it does not make sound economic sense in the current climate. Hence the decision to make the Karpaz available for mass development.



The TRNC government are puppets and it's Turkey who are pulling the strings.

Tenakoutou



Joined: 27/07/2009
Posts: 4110

Message Posted:
25/08/2010 19:30

What is currently happening are the CONSEQUENCES of Greek provocation and British inaction, so why should Turkey be the scapegoat?



I fail to see the other side of the arguement - but, of course, I am prepared to be convinced otherwise.



Molly is, no doubt, correct in her assessment of the overall situation. The TC's, however, do not consider themselves beholden to Turkey, and from the ones that I have talked to, their comments regarding their Turkish 'brothers' would be unprintable on this forum!

Crumpy



Joined: 05/06/2010
Posts: 419

Message Posted:
25/08/2010 20:23

Re : msg 69



Tenakoutou ... We, on this forum, agree with you - Turkey's intervention in 1974, was indeed a result of "Greek provocation and British inaction", but unfortunately everyone outside Turkey and the KKTC think Turkey was "the bad boy" ... and after 36 years, they are not going to be persuaded otherwise.



Therefore, no international court will agree to the Greek or British governments funding the compensations to those GCs who have lost their land in the north.



Crumpy

MUSIN M


Joined: 26/06/2008
Posts: 1352

Message Posted:
25/08/2010 22:38

some people on this forum ,blame turkey for all ,however ask yourselves this where would we be today had

the british complied with the treaty of guarantee and went into this conflict with turkey ,would turkey still be in cyprus or would we have a settlement by now .



the british are as much to blame ,if not more .





musin





long live the kktc

Crumpy



Joined: 05/06/2010
Posts: 419

Message Posted:
25/08/2010 23:06

Re : msg 71



Muhsin wrote "some people on this forum blame turkey for all" - But we don't Muhsin - virtually everyone ON THIS FORUM believe Turkey did the right thing in 1974 - the problem is that THE REST OF THE WORLD don't believe that :-(



Crumpy

MUSIN M


Joined: 26/06/2008
Posts: 1352

Message Posted:
25/08/2010 23:22

crumpy



i did say some people ,and some people do.









musin



long live the kktc

fiendishpaul


Joined: 18/05/2008
Posts: 1720

Message Posted:
26/08/2010 07:31

Whilst in the past Turkey has been seen as the bad guy, I think that the tide has shifted somewhat and will continue to do so in the future. However, I still do not think that the reason for the intervention can be used as a justifiable excuse for the wholesale selling of GC land which took place long after 'peace' was achieved and which, despite the full knowledge of how this type of behaviour is perceived by the international community, continues today.



I am also somewhat surprised by the attitude towards the Motherland that Tenakatou states in message 69. I appreciate that the TC's would wish the TRNC to remain 'Cypriot' but talk about 'bite the hand that feeds you' !! Maybe they are concerned that if the TRNC does 'officially' become a Turkish state, then greater political control will be exerted by the Motherland and the wheels will come off the TC gravytrain.



Regards



Paul

Troodo


Joined: 12/06/2008
Posts: 1002

Message Posted:
26/08/2010 08:40

I am also somewhat surprised by the attitude towards the Motherland that Tenakatou states in message 69.



Don't believe what one particular newspaper says, the owner has a personal grudge against the TRNC and often exaggerates or misleads, to the joy of the GC's.

Crumpy



Joined: 05/06/2010
Posts: 419

Message Posted:
26/08/2010 13:13

Re : msg 74



Freindishpaul wrote "Whilst in the past Turkey has been seen as the bad guy, I think that the tide has shifted somewhat and will continue to do so in the future."



I sincerely hope so Paul, but I've not seen much evidence of that. True there was the €259 million aid package from the EU ... http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/turkish_cypriot_community/aid_implementation_en.htm ... but what other evidence is there ?



In any case, for the tide to really shift, Turkey and the KKTC governments need to start making some serious reassurances to the GCs, who lost the their land, that they will be compensated.

apc2010


Joined: 28/07/2010
Posts: 1689

Message Posted:
26/08/2010 13:20

the answer to the original question is because the european court of human rights told them ..

Hector


Joined: 26/08/2008
Posts: 2352

Message Posted:
26/08/2010 13:21

"In any case, for the tide to really shift, Turkey and the KKTC governments need to start making some serious reassurances to the GCs, who lost the their land, that they will be compensated."



Isn't that what the IPC is doing? I thought the IPC had paid out millions already. What happens though when the IPC closes, next year I think?

Crumpy



Joined: 05/06/2010
Posts: 419

Message Posted:
26/08/2010 13:35

Re : msg 74



Freindishpaul wrote "Whilst in the past Turkey has been seen as the bad guy, I think that the tide has shifted somewhat and will continue to do so in the future."



I sincerely hope so Paul, but I've not seen much evidence of that. True there was the €259 million aid package from the EU ... http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/turkish_cypriot_community/aid_implementation_en.htm ... but what other evidence is there ?



In any case, for the tide to really shift, Turkey and the KKTC governments need to start making some serious reassurances to the GCs, who lost the their land, that they will be compensated.

Crumpy



Joined: 05/06/2010
Posts: 419

Message Posted:
26/08/2010 13:39

Sorry about that last message - when I restarted the computer, I must have pressed "post reply" again :-(

fiendishpaul


Joined: 18/05/2008
Posts: 1720

Message Posted:
26/08/2010 13:47

Crumpy



I based my statement on a number of issues, namely the progress made with the possibility of direct trade links, the EU aid package, the tacit recognition by the US/UK of Turkey's strength in the region and just a general feeling that with the talks having stalled for so long, the UN are now taking a much closer look at the reasons for the delays. Whilst both sides have been blamed to a degree, one can't help but feel that the RoC's continued intransigence will maybe come to the fore. Whether this will have any effect on the result of the talks remains to be seen.



Paul

girne 29


Joined: 06/12/2007
Posts: 1488

Message Posted:
26/08/2010 13:49

tenakoutou



'The TC's, however, do not consider themselves beholden to Turkey, and from the ones that I have talked to, their comments regarding their Turkish 'brothers' would be unprintable on this forum! '





Maybe ,but they dont seem to mind living off the Turkish taxpayer!

Wonder what the comments from some Turks on normal wages regarding their TC 'brothers' would be if you told them how much their taxes were subsidising the TRNC and where that money was going, Perhaps also 'unprintable'. If I was a hardworking Turk ,I would be saying 'sell your Humvees and Merc's and support yourselves.

Crumpy



Joined: 05/06/2010
Posts: 419

Message Posted:
26/08/2010 13:49

Hi Hector,



Re : msg 78 - Compensation to the GCs



Hector wrote "Isn't that what the IPC is doing? I thought the IPC had paid out millions already."



There is still a lot lot more that needs be paid out. I'm sure mpusa in msg 28 of this thread will agree :-(

fiendishpaul


Joined: 18/05/2008
Posts: 1720

Message Posted:
26/08/2010 13:50

Hector



Re the IPC, I would agree. Not sure how long the IPC is 'valid' for and whilst I understand that millions of euros have been agreed as compensation, I am not sure whether any money has yet been paid. I believe that a while ago there was an article in one of the papers in the South stating that nothing had been paid so far - that is if a South newspaper is to be believed.



Paul

apc2010


Joined: 28/07/2010
Posts: 1689

Message Posted:
26/08/2010 13:55

http://www.northcyprusipc.org/





not sure how old this is?

Crumpy



Joined: 05/06/2010
Posts: 419

Message Posted:
26/08/2010 14:07

Re : msg 81



Hi Friendishpaul ... I'm not so certain that the rest of the world is so happy with Turkey's strength in the region, especially if we have another episode like the Mavi Marmara.



Granted, the Green Line Agreement (ie. direct trade of Cypriot produce between the north and south) is an example of warmer relations ... as is the right of all Cypriots to traverse the "border", the right of TCs to an EU passport and the right of TCs to make use of health services in the south.

apc2010


Joined: 28/07/2010
Posts: 1689

Message Posted:
26/08/2010 14:24

crumpy re msg 79 another 25 million allocated



http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/press_corner/whatsnew/turkish-cypriot-community_en.htm

Crumpy



Joined: 05/06/2010
Posts: 419

Message Posted:
26/08/2010 14:37

Thanks for all these articles apc2010



It would be nice now if Turkey and the KKTC reciprocated with a goodwill gesture of paying some compensation to the GCs and/or withdrawing a few troops.

Tenakoutou



Joined: 27/07/2009
Posts: 4110

Message Posted:
27/08/2010 10:34

And when this €25 million is eventually paid, I'm sure *Mercedes, BMW & Porsche will be very grateful to the EU!



After all, the ashtrays must now be full to overflowing on the 'old' *ones!

Troodo


Joined: 12/06/2008
Posts: 1002

Message Posted:
27/08/2010 11:14

When the GC's removed the thirteen articles from the constitution and removed the TC rights of shared government, making themselves an illegal state, they must have missed the rights to passports and health - an oversight I am sure.



Patientia est a donum superum

fiendishpaul


Joined: 18/05/2008
Posts: 1720

Message Posted:
27/08/2010 11:31

Tenakatou



So true !!!!!



Paul

Tenakoutou



Joined: 27/07/2009
Posts: 4110

Message Posted:
27/08/2010 20:41

Only a cynic might pose the question: 'Why the Hell should Turkey pay out on Greek Cypriot property claims when they know that maybe thousands of foreigners properties being auctioned can nett them the necessary cash to cover all Greek Cypriot claims?'



Until Turkey steps in and prevents all these property scams in TRNC, one can only remain suspicious of their motives - what else?



One question, which nobody seems to be mentioning is: do Cypriot property scams constitute a violation of 'Human Rights', irrespective of the laws of individual countries, which the EU are using as an excuse for its uninvolvement and inaction in these matters?