Today's development on the counterstatement...

-mikkie2- · Mukhtar/is Joined: 29 Aug 2005 Posts: 603

In my view, the issue is not really formal recognition of the RoCy, but for Ankara to fulfill the obligations it signed up to when signing the protocol and that is to allow the customs union to fully function. Barring Cypriots vessels and aircraft or any other EU vessels and aircraft that go to Turkey via Cyprus is the key issue. This is an obvious hindrance of trade and the EU must address this and show it has teeth to go with the bite.

The recognition issue will simply come as negotiations progress (or not) because each and every chapter needs unanimity to be opened and to be closed. This means that the pressure will keep piling up. In my view, the sooner Turkey accepts that the Annan plan as is, can't be forced on us the better.

cannedmoose · Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2005 2:37 am Post subject:

erolz · Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2005 2:47 am Post subject:

Really I find this most depressing :(

When you have some 'leverage' on the other side that is when you should be offering the most concession yourself, if you want a settlement.

However what always happens in Cyprus is when one side gains somes 'leverage' over the other they try and use that to not make any concessions and that is why we never get a settlement.

The talk should be imo, if we are serious about a settelment, is what movement both Turkey / Republic of Northern Cyprus AND the Republic of Cyprus are willing to make in order to get an agreed settlement. Instead I am hearing from 'pro Greek Cypriot' elements is 'how much can we squeeze Turkey'. Not Turkey can be forced to move so we should sieze this opportuinty and make movement oursleves and we may be able to reach agreement.

I just do not see this happeneing Sad

cannedmoose · Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2005 3:12 am Post subject:

erolz · Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2005 3:43 am Post subject:

Let me try an anlaolgy first.

I want to buy your house. You want to sell your house. You wanted 200k. I offered 150k. You moved to your 'final position' of 185k. I made my final offer of 165k. For years we stuck to these and no sale was made. Then I get wind that you have had some financial difficulties and that now your need to sell is greater. What do I do? Do I seize this opportuinty and put in my best offer even of say 170k or even 175k? Or do I go back to offering 150k or less?

The sad truth is that what always happens in Cyprus in such a senario is the latter.

For the Republic of Cyprus to demand formal recognition of the Republic of Cyprus as it exists today by Turkey, without having to make a single concession or movement on an agreed settlement at all, is to me and in my analogy terms like them offering '100k' vs the 150k 'best offer' they put out when they did not have any leverage.

This is what is making me depressed. There is unique opportuinty for settlement because of the 'leverage' on Turkey. Yet all I see is not an effort to use this to secure a settlement at all. What I see is an effort to use this leverage to move the 'final offer' backwards. :(

gabs · Villager Joined: 15 Aug 2005 Posts: 98

looks like its Turkey is obliged to recognise Republic of Cyprus. Turkey will view this positively, if Republic of Cyprus is obliged to work for a solution.

swings and roundabouts - on this basis they can continue to come up with much more of this "obligation" stuff all the way until either full entry is granted or a group of nations decide to use their vetoes.

Bananiot · Deputy Joined: 13 Aug 2005 Posts: 1214 Location: Nicosia

Here is another reason why the "Cyprus Mail" is an oasis in the Cyprus desert.

"FOLLOWING the past week’s efforts to thrash out a counter-declaration to Turkey in Brussels, one could be forgiven for thinking we were involved in a war, judging by the language used by our politicians and much of our media.

We have allies and enemies, betrayals and triumphs, and plenty of perfidious plots; it is a battle swinging from one side to another – one moment our backs against the wall, our argument appears lost, the next, the justice of our cause becomes clear to all, dashing the underhand manoeuvres of our foes.

Make no mistake about it: this is a zero sum game in which our national survival is at stake… Or so you would think, hearing the bellicose discourse coming from our leaders.

This dashing stuff plays well on local television sets. But does it serve our cause in the corridors of the Commission? While our diplomats at the sharp end of discussions are certainly playing a more subtle game, surely the echoes of some of the more lurid ranting – especially against the British presidency – do little to improve the climate and facilitate their task.

Worse still, the maximalism of our posturing invariably sets us up for failure, because a decision taken between 25 countries can only ever be a compromise. In this game, we should be cultivating allies, instead of alienating all and sundry by portraying them as lackeys of Ankara.

The reaction against France is a case in point. With Paris supporting many of our positions, we triumphantly paraded our trump card against the ‘Turk-loving’ British presidency, almost giving public opinion the impression that Turkey would be forced to recognise the Republic ahead of October 3. This was never going to happen. Yet when France engaged in bilateral talks with the UK to hammer out a compromise draft, we turned on our erstwhile ally crying treason.

Suddenly we were furious that we had been left out of a discussion concerning us. Yet we were the ones insisting that the Cyprus problem should become a European problem. From the moment the Cyprus problem becomes a European problem, we have to accept that we can no longer draw the red lines, that it becomes an issue concerning not just ourselves but 24 other countries, who may be more inclined to compromise than us.

Ironically, a great deal has been achieved. The issue of formal recognition will be firmly on the table, enshrined in a political declaration issued by the 25. This is marked progress on the vague language of last December. But instead of working on our alliances to achieve the best possible in what will be a long and arduous process, we run the risk of alienating those most inclined to help us with the strident rhetoric and bitter invective we seem so keen to unleash."

erolz · Posted: Fri Sep 16, 2005 5:18 pm Post subject:

I have to say to me it seems that all the 'effort' on the part of the Republic of Cyprus is to try and force recogition from Turkey and not to get an agreement with Turkish Cypriots. This to me is such a wasted opportunity, as I have expressed elsewhere. The pressure on Turkey should make reaching an agreement more possible. Instead all I see comming from Greek Cypriot admin is an unconstructive desire to negate the need for an agreed settlement by getting Turkey to recognise the Republic of Cyprus - which is just not going to happen. This is so disapointing imo Sad

Kifeas · Posted: Fri Sep 16, 2005 7:41 pm Post subject:

erolz · Posted: Fri Sep 16, 2005 10:29 pm Post subject:

Kifeas · Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2005 8:33 am Post subject:

Kifeas · Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2005 9:27 am Post subject:

-mikkie2- · Mukhtar/is Joined: 29 Aug 2005 Posts: 603

The Turkish mask is now slipping. Why talk of unification when what the Turks really want is partition? Why all this deception? The Cyprus problem will not be solved if the Turkish attitude remains like this. As Cypriots, should we accept this? As a Cypriot I say NO.

This is a report in Politis with respect tot he meeting between Erdogan and Papadopoulos.

The creation of two States in Cyprus declares that he wants says Recep Tayyip Erdogan
The Turkish Prime Minister declared that if President Papadopoulos does not accept the creation of two states in Cyprus then there will be no agreement to the Cyprus Problem.

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan declared that he discussed the Annan Plan with President Tassos Papadopoulos at their short informal meeting, at the UN. He supported at the same time that if President Papadopoulos does not accept the creation of two states in Cyprus, then there will be no resolution to the Cyprus Problem.

Regarding the activities in Brussels for the counter-declaration of the EU (to Turkey’s non-recognition of Cyprus) and the start of entry negotiations, he said that no concessions will be made by Turkey before 3 October, emphasising that “it is impossible to happen''.

Answering to a question of KYPE for the meeting with President Papadopoulos, he said that “we spoke about the Annan Plan, we spoke for the existence of one state in the north, one to the south and for confederation. I said that this should be accepted by Mr Papadopoulos, otherwise we cannot reach an agreement”, it reported, adding that “on one side exists Mr Talat, on the other Mr Papadopoulos and if they want they want to talk then sure Turkey can also talk and its possible for Mr Karamanlis to come also”.

Answering in question for the membership course of Turkey, he said that Ankara does not have a problem with 3 October, however he added “there exists some people that want to import new conditions in the EU response to Turkey and that this should not be attempted because the decision on 3 October was taken last December.”

“There will be no concessions from Turkey up to 3 October, this is impossible “, he said, claiming that Ankara already has met all that was asked by EU in regard to the beginning of membership negotiations.

Bananiot · Deputy Joined: 13 Aug 2005 Posts: 1214 Location: Nicosia

I have seen the report by KYPE too. If indeed Erdogan was quoted correctly then we have a problem. However, I have a strong suspicion that Erdogan was misquoted by the same journalists that play second fiddle to Papadopoulos in order to get him out of difficult situations and to appease the public opinion in the Greek Cypriot community. Simply, I cannot see how Turkey can publicly declare that she cares only for two states. This is Denktash talking and sure enough, the likes of Papadopoulos are missing Denltash badly.