www.talkcyprus.org

[Kifeas]

British Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott calls Turkish occupation of Cyprus an illegal one.

CNA wrote: Cypriot President Tassos Papadopoulos signed a memorandum of understanding with British Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott, with a view to begin a structured dialogue on bilateral matters.

Speaking after the signing of the memorandum, President Papadopoulos said ``our relations with the United Kingdom recently have suffered`` and expressed certainty that the dialogue ``will be a sound foundation to achieve understanding between our two countries and I look forward to cooperation, both in the framework of Europe and in efforts made by the UN for a settlement of the Cyprus problem, which as well-known is under the UN umbrella, and we seek to see the solution with the more active participation of the EU.``

Prescott said the first meeting in the context of the dialogue will take place in January 2006 and noted that ``we have a great deal in common, an awful lot to discuss, as we have today, even your concerns about the difficulties Cyprus has experienced since the illegal occupation of this island by Turkey and in those circumstances we wish to improve and develop and it is hopeful that one can find an agreement under the UN framework.``

President Papadopoulos said he had talks with Prescott ``on a series of issues concerning bilateral relations and of course the Cyprus problem.``

.............

Referring to the memorandum of understanding, Prescott said he was ``absolutely delighted of course to hear the views on the memorandum that the President has just expressed, which we thoroughly enjoy and agree and indeed follow from the Prime Minister`s meeting with the President in July, wishing to improve on our relationships, which have been there an awful long time.``

``We share common views, common values, and the memorandum emphasises how we can improve on that. And indeed I very much welcome your action plan. It is not just signing a memorandum. You have already made clear we want to get off to a flying start and of course our first meeting will be by the end of January 2006. We will be out of the presidency there, but during our presidency and out of it we wish to improve our relations with Cyprus,`` Prescott noted.

He added that ``we have a great deal in common, an awful lot to discuss, as we have today, even your concerns about the difficulties Cyprus has experienced since the illegal occupation of this island by Turkey and in those circumstances we wish to improve and develop and it is hopeful that one can find an agreement under the UN framework.``

``You have expressed your views about that since the referendum here in Cyprus and indeed you are now within the EU framework of course, which makes quite a substantial change. We have exchanged views about that and I shall be delighted to tell our Foreign Secretary about some of those indeed the Prime Minister,`` Prescott said.

Replying to questions, Prescott said that ``when we took over the presidency of the EU for the last six months of the year up to December, we inherited certain responsibilities and obligations as the presidency and not as Britain.``

``One of those obligations, agreed by all members of the EU, was to open negotiations with Turkey and also, if the conditions we had laid down can be satisfied, with Croatia also. Both those conditions have been satisfied. They were the requirements of our presidency imposed upon us by the EU and of course we have carried that out as indeed is our responsibility to do so as the presidency of the EU and we find no difference between that and the British positions,`` he noted.

He added that ``by Turkey entering into that agreement of course it enters also into obligations itself in regard to recognising all the countries within the EU and the obligations they have signed up to.``

Asked about Turkey`s policy to block Cyprus` entry into international organisations, Prescott said ``the obligations are clear, you enter into European negotiations, there are obligations and responsibilities on every one of us, both in the Republic of Cyprus and indeed the United Kingdom, any member of the EU, they are the obligations entered into, they are the ones everyone has to satisfy if you want to be a member of the EU.``
........

http://www.cna.org.cy/website/english/announcedisplay2.asp?id=1

[erolz]

I (recurring) small moan. Can you please not copy and paste whole article when there is a link available. An extract and link is more than sufficent. Thanks

A rather different take on this visit with no mention, let alone highlighting of 'illegal occupation' can be found here

http://www.cyprusweekly.com.cy/default.aspx?FrontPageNewsID=304_5

Personaly I think sending 'two jags' sums up how important the UK government thinks Cyprus! He is also at 'war' with the rest of the UK cabinet of proposed changes to UK schools. They probably sent him to Cyprus to get him out of the way.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1838902,00.html

There have also been allegations about 'improper' connections between John Prescott and Greek businessmen in the past. I will try and dig some of these up.

[brother]

Prescott is a complete :jerk: at the best of times and imho i would not piss on him if he was on fire.

[Alexios]

Kifeas,Erolz and the rest.I know what i will say may sound like Kafene talk,but i think we pay too much attention to what this or that British official publicly says.The real decisions are taken in the backrooms of Westminster and to be honest i havent figured out what Britain is yet up to.For certain however, whatever they do (which doent always match to what they say) always takes into account her Majesty,s interests first....

[erolz]

Some of the connections between John Prescott and current labout party and Greek Cypriot 'lobbyists'.

http://www.red-star-research.org.uk/sopho.html

http://www.hri.org/news/cyprus/cmnews/1998/98-09-16.cmnews.html#10

http://www.whatnextjournal.co.uk/Pages/Back/Wnext25/Osler.html

[Kifeas]

Erol, the Cyprus weekly article that you mentioned above, was written last week and before Prescotts’ visit. It was a report pronouncing /proclaiming Prescotts' visit and not what he was going to say, set aside what he in fact said during his visit, which was done only yesterday.

I just cannot figure out how you got confused on this.

Now, whether Prescott is at odds with his colleges on any other issues or not, this is irrelevant. He is the deputy prime minister of the UK government and to my little understanding of politics, he represents the views and policies of the British government.

Similar remarks and comments have also been heart from the mouth of late Cooks, the previous foreign minister of the UK.

Now on the substance, do you claim that the occupation of the north part of cyprus is not an occupation, or it is an occupation ideed, but a legal one?

[Kifeas]

Alexios wrote: Kifeas,Erolz and the rest.I know what i will say may sound like Kafene talk,but i think we pay too much attention to what this or that British official publicly says.The real decisions are taken in the backrooms of Westminster and to be honest i havent figured out what Britain is yet up to.For certain however, whatever they do (which doent always match to what they say) always takes into account her Majesty,s interests first....

Did I say anything diffrent?

[Alexios]

No.My comment is a general one.
What do you think Britain is up to??

[erolz]

Kifeas wrote: He is the deputy prime minister of the UK government and to my little understanding of politics, he represents the views and policies of the British government.

If you think that what comes out of Prescotts mouth are the views and policies of the British Government then your understanding of of British Politics is indeed limited ;) John Precott is a marginal figure in British Politics and in the current Labour Government. The 'role' of deputy Prime minister is effectively a non role that carries no power or influence hence why it was given to prescott rather than any real cabinet role ;)

Kifeas wrote:
Now on the substance, do you claim that the occupation of the north part of cyprus is not an occupation, or it is an occupation ideed, but a legal one?

In this regard my views on weather the presense of the Turkish army in Cyprus is an occupation or not or leagl or not are irrelevant. Just as my views on if the presence of UK and US troops in Iraq is an occupation or not or legal or not. The troops are there. That is the reality. Some claim their presense is a peacekeeping operation, some occupation. Some claim their presence is leagl and justifed others claim not. None of this actualy changes anything.

What I would like to know is how you as a Greek Cypriot consider the British Government with regards to the Cyprus problem. Is it the 'enemy' and 'great satan' of the Greek Cypriot cause, doing all in it's power to undermine Greek Cypriot internationaly and taking every opportunity to 'stitch up the Greek Cypriots' or is it your freind and allie, that supports your views and positions on Turish presense in Cyprus and the ways and means to resolve this? Some times it ios hard to know which is your position.

[erolz]

Kifeas wrote: Erol, the Cyprus weekly article that you mentioned above, was written last week and before Prescotts’ visit. It was a report pronouncing /proclaiming Prescotts' visit and not what he was going to say, set aside what he in fact said during his visit, which was done only yesterday.


I have no idea when it was written. the article is listed as a a 'top article' under the todays edition (26th Oct).

[erolz]

And the Cyprus Mails report on this event also from today (and again I do not know when the article was written) can be found here

http://www.cyprus-mail.com/news/main.php?id=22515&cat_id=1

with a brief mention of the refferal by Prescott to 'illegal occupation'.

[Kifeas]

erolz wrote: If you think that what comes out of Prescotts mouth are the views and policies of the British Government then your understanding of of British Politics is indeed limited ;) John Precott is a marginal figure in British Politics and in the current Labour Government. The 'role' of deputy Prime minister is effectively a non role that carries no power or influence hence why it was given to prescott rather than any real cabinet role ;)

The fact remains that he is the deputy prime minister and he is there in order to take over the running of the country in the absence of Tony Blaire, which means that he is or will be potentially above the foreign minister as well. Are you saying that the current British government is so amateurish to have, in your words, such a corrupted and incompetent person in such a role?

erolz wrote: In this regard my views on weather the presense of the Turkish army in Cyprus is an occupation or not or leagl or not are irrelevant. Just as my views on if the presence of UK and US troops in Iraq is an occupation or not or legal or not. The troops are there. That is the reality. Some claim their presense is a peacekeeping operation, some occupation. Some claim their presence is leagl and justifed others claim not. None of this actualy changes anything. .
Then why you reacted negatively to Prescotts "claims" and decided to play down what he said by resenting him as a corrupt and insignificant political figurehead, if for you the essence of what he said makes absolutely no difference?

erolz wrote: What I would like to know is how you as a Greek Cypriot consider the British Government with regards to the Cyprus problem. Is it the 'enemy' and 'great satan' of the Greek Cypriot cause, doing all in it's power to undermine Greek Cypriot internationaly and taking every opportunity to 'stitch up the Greek Cypriots' or is it your freind and allie, that supports your views and positions on Turish presense in Cyprus and the ways and means to resolve this? Some times it ios hard to know which is your position.

The British government (all British governments) looks and cares only about their interests and irrespective of morals, international legality and justice. This is a proven fact, not only with the case of Cyprus but with many other cases. This is why I was surprised with Prescott's -in no uncertain terms- assertion that there is an illegal Turkish occupation in Cyprus. The reason I posted his statements is due to this surprise and not because I do not know my self whether there is an illegal Turkish occupation of north Cyprus or not.

[Kifeas]

Erol, the Cyprus weekly, is a weekly newspaper and is published every Friday. The Cyprus Mail is a daily newspaper. In case you was not aware of it.

Now, what date appears on their website is not the criterion, because they are not continues on-line updated media but mere re-productions of their print editions.

[erolz]

Kifeas wrote:
The fact remains that he is the deputy prime minister and he is there in order to take over the running of the country in the absence of Tony Blaire, which means that he is or will be potentially above the foreign minister as well. Are you saying that the current British government is so amateurish to have, in your words, such a corrupted and incompetent person in such a role?

If Tony Blair were to die tomorrow or get abducted by alines then it is true that john Precott may end up with some poilitcal power. Until this happens the reality is he has less political power in the cabinet than minsters with a 'real' portfolio. He has about as much power and influnence currently in the British Government as Dan Quale had in the US as vice president and a similar public image as well.

Kifeas wrote:
Then why you reacted negatively to Prescotts "claims" and decided to play down what he said by resenting him as a corrupt and insignificant political figurehead, if for you the essence of what he said makes absolutely no difference?

I was reacting to your decision to focus on and highlight the use of the phrase 'illegal occupation'. You chose to highlight this aspect of the visit. I in turn chose to higlight the power and influence that JP has in the UK government and his known links to his Greek donors and friends who have paid for his trips to Cyprus in the past.

Kifeas wrote:
The British government (all British governments) looks and cares only about their interests and irrespective of morals, international legality and justice. This is a proven fact, not only with the case of Cyprus but with many other cases.

This is a trait of the British Goverment but not other Governments?

Kifeas wrote:
This is why I was surprised with Prescott's -in no uncertain terms- assertion that there is an illegal Turkish occupation in Cyprus. The reason I posted his statements is due to this surprise and not because I do not know my self whether there is an illegal Turkish occupation of north Cyprus or not.

Well you may be surprised at his statements but I suggest that if you knew Prescott as I know him and in light of his personal connections to Greek businessmen and his historic positions realtions with them then the comment is not at all suprising. What is suprsing, to me at leas,t is the idea that these comments from this man matter in any material way.

[cannedmoose]

Kifeas wrote: erolz wrote: If you think that what comes out of Prescotts mouth are the views and policies of the British Government then your understanding of of British Politics is indeed limited ;) John Precott is a marginal figure in British Politics and in the current Labour Government. The 'role' of deputy Prime minister is effectively a non role that carries no power or influence hence why it was given to prescott rather than any real cabinet role ;)

The fact remains that he is the deputy prime minister and he is there in order to take over the running of the country in the absence of Tony Blaire, which means that he is or will be potentially above the foreign minister as well. Are you saying that the current British government is so amateurish to have, in your words, such a corrupted and incompetent person in such a role?

Although Prescott is a popular figure amongst the Labour Party rank-and-file, in the halls of 'New Labour' he is perceived as a dinosaur, hence why he was appointed Deputy Prime Minister. Originally, he also used to be responsible through this office for Environment, Transport and the Regions, but even this was taken away from him. Yes, in the event of Tony Blair's absence, he does take over the reigns of power, but live in the real world Kifeas, wherever Blair is in the world, he IS PM and can have meetings, discussions via secure phone and video communication. In such circumstances, the Foreign Minister, Chancellor et. al continue with the running and oversight of their own departments... unlike the Cypriot system where Ministers seemingly can't take a crap without TPap's express permission, in the UK system Ministers do have a high level of autonomy on standard policy. Should a calamity happen to Blair, I am in no doubt that a Labour leadership election would be swiftly arranged, one in which 2Jags wouldn't stand a chance against Gordon Brown.

In his defence, I wouldn't say Prescott is either corrupt or incompetent, he's just 'old Labour' trying to be 'new' and that just doesn't work for him. He's like a vestige of the 1970s dropped into the 21st century Labour party. He IS a very marginal figure in British politics and Blair manoeuvred him into that position very deliberately early in his reign. He was so marginalised during the last two election campaigns that he only appeared on TV on election night, did not feature in the campaign launch and in the last election was relegated to travelling around the country in a coach... meaning 90% of the time he was out of the media's eye.