www.talkcyprus.org

[zan]

Enjoy.

__________

Dear Mr. Birand,

I refer to your article “EU should be ashamed on Cyprus” published on the 2 November 2006 online edition of the Turkish Daily News. While I concur with your contribution’s title, I fear that some of the most critical aspects of the Cyprus issue have not weighed in on your analysis of Cyprus, Turkey’s European Union (EU) bid, and broader Turkish-Greek relations.

To suggest that the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (KKTC) would exist after a successful Annan Plan is inaccurate. If both sides had accepted the Annan Plan, the KKTC would no longer exist as a sovereign political entity. By the very nature of sovereignty and the international state system, subsidiary states or provinces do not posses sovereign authority and, for all intents and purposes, do not exist. The central authority of government is where sovereignty lies and where the master of the sovereign domain is located. A United Republic of Cyprus (URC) would have a Greek sovereign and been a Greek entity. Using the EU’s fundamental three freedoms as the rationale to reject restrictions on the free flow of Greek residents into north Cyprus (not to mention land claims and legal action against Turkey and the Turks residing in northern Cyprus), the Greek sovereign would be able to deconstruct and disassemble the Annan Plan – based ‘safeguards’ as un-European and void. Any semblance of a safety measure to protect the Turks of Cyprus could not be maintained and Turkey would not have the ability to intervene when injustices were committed against the Island’s Turks.

Lest we forget how difficult it was for Turkey to intervene during the 1960s and it took the near colonisation of Cyprus by Greece’s junta for Turkish troops to land on Girne’s shores. Let us neither forget that Tassos Papadopoulos was the second in command of Akritas, a constitutional legal expert, and now the elected leader of the Greek Republic of Cyprus (GROC) and enjoys the approval of his nationalist electorate. To entrust the safety and security of the Turks of Cyprus or Turkey’s interests in Papadopoulos or another Greek leader is a recipe for disaster.

To further assume that a URC would have cleared a major obstacle in Turkey’s way into the EU is another hasty conclusion drawn upon faulty presumptions. Recalling that a URC would be a Greek entity without a Turkish veto, why would Papadopoulos or any other Greek leader in Cyprus support Turkey’s EU membership? Has Cyprus ever produced a Greek leader of significance in the post-Ottoman era that has remotely supported Turkish interests? Has the anti-Turkish tendencies of Greek political parties in Cyprus been reversed? Or, have the past two years post Annan Plan proven that all major Greek political parties in Cyprus work against Turkish interests, be they in Cyprus or the EU?

The Cyprus issue is only one factor, albeit a major concern in the broader Greco-Turkish conflict. A political alternative to a two-republic solution would not be a guaranteed end to the Greco-Turkish conflict in Cyprus. Cyprus’s Greek political leadership has never considered the Turks as their political equals, even though the original 1960 Republic of Cyprus was founded as a bi-communal state of two nations with guarantees and veto powers that were to provide checks and balances that protected the interests of the island’s Greek and Turkish nations.

The EU already has more than 2.5 million Turkish residents and citizens. Would an additional 200,000 really make a material difference on the EU’s perception of Turkey or treatment of Turkish interests? If the EU were to fulfil its obligations as a proper union that represented its constituent countries and people, then Turkish should already be an official language of the EU because the 1960 Republic of Cyprus was tri-lingual republic. But instead of adding Turkish as an official language, fulfilling promises made to the Turks of Cyprus, and improving relations with Turkey, we have seen an increased anti-Turkish sentiment across the EU and the EU has not upheld its promises to the Turks of Cyprus that voted in favour of the Annan Plan. Nobody ought to therefore conclude that a URC would remove obstacles to Turkey’s EU accession or make Turkey’s accession process easier.

The problems experienced by the Turks of Cyprus, the KKTC and Turkey since April 2004 prove that the EU and Papadopoulos view KKTC as an integral part of the Greek Republic of Cyprus (GROC) and the GROC’s accession only acts to support the Greek cause. In addition to the existing British sovereign bases on the island, Greece’s military presence in the south and the Joint Defence Doctrine between the GROC and Greece, France too has recently negotiated the establishment of a military facility in Greek Cyprus, while the Greek Cypriot political establishment calls for the unconditional withdrawal of Turkish troops for the KKTC. Talk EU members regretting the GROC’s accession or being misled by Greece and the GROC is empty rhetoric – are we to naively believe that nobody within the EU realised what GROC membership would result in? It is simply a matter of turning a blind eye and endorsing a situation that would inevitably lead to restrict Turkish interests and Turkey’s EU bid, while the Turks of Cyprus continue to suffer international isolation and an unjustifiable set of never-ending embargoes.

Instead of voting in favour of the Annan Plan, the Turks of Cyprus should have overwhelming rejected the Annan Plan because endorsing the referendum only weakened the Turkish position. The Greeks of Cyprus now argue that the Annan Plan was not a fair or just option and lasting solution requires greater compromises on behalf of the Turks. The likes of the “Yes” camp, be it Mehmet Ali Talat, the Republican Turkish Party (CTP), or any other personality or political party in the “Yes” camp that is willing to negotiate with Papadopoulos and the Greek leadership, will lead to the paralysis of the KKTC, the Turks of Cyprus, and Turkey’s interests across the eastern Mediterranean.

Turks often site the proverbial wisdom of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk as principles to abide by. As such, every rational person should aspire to live in peace, at home and abroad. However, Turks should also recall that the founder of modern Turkey and our role model fought to free our nation from particular groups of occupation and accurately stated sovereignty is not given, it is taken.

[zan]

Sorry should have posted this first:


EU should be ashamed on Cyprus
02 11 2006

Mehmet Ali Birand

Before the vote on the Annan plan, I personally believed the Turkish Cypriots were faced with a historic opportunity and did everything I could to ensure that the plan was a success. I believed that, with the plan, the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (KKTC) would be able to stand on its own two feet. The KKTC would enter the European Union with Greek Cyprus and consequently, the Cyprus issue would no longer be an obstacle to Turkey's EU aspirations. I am still of the same opinion.

The reason I believed this was that I took the EU seriously on the issue. EU institutions and member countries had made promises to the Turkish side. If the plan had been approved, we would now face a world of opportunities.

This belief made Turkish Cypriots overwhelmingly endorse the plan at their referendum. I still believe Turkish Cypriot support for the plan was correct because it allowed Turkey to start EU membership negotiations; Turkish Cypriots argue that they have done everything they could.

The Greek Cypriots, on the other hand, are out to win through cunning. They rejected the Annan plan during the referenda and slammed the door in the EU's face.

They deceived the EU while securing EU membership. They now want the Turkish side, which believed in the EU, to be punished.

This is too much.

Yes, legally Turkey needs to abide by the agreements it has signed and eventually open its ports. However, that day is not today. It cannot accede to the demands through such coercion.

No, the EU can't implement such a childish policy.

If the only objective is to ensure negotiations with Turkey are suspended, they need not use such amateurish ploys. They can find other excuses just as easily and get the same result.

The EU is losing its credibility.

They may not realize it, but what they are doing is pushing Turkey out of Europe and losing EU support from the Turkish people.

The policy followed by Greek Cypriot leader Tassos Papadopoulos today is obvious for all to see. Turkish Cypriot leader Mehmet Ali Talat's request is limited to the easing of the KKTC's isolation.

Turkey should not show any flexibility over such an idiotic policy.

If Europe has an iota of vision or self respect, it should end the current disgrace. It should stop threatening Turkey to make it open its ports. It should postpone the problem until a solution is found. If not, we will see its true intention is not to establish a mutually beneficial relationship with Turkey but to harm it.

Papadopoulos wants to take over the KKTC:The president of Greek Cyprus, Papadopoulos, is a very lucky individual.

He won the presidency at such a time that he can enjoy the post to the full. He also intends to win a second term by capitalizing on certain issues that he had nothing to do with.

The only other leader who was able to blackmail Europe into doing his bidding, I believe, was Malta's Don Mintoff in the 1980s.

If we can summarize Papadopoulos's policy after his country became an EU member in one sentence, it is: “Take over the KKTC.”

If we just list the statements he has made up until now and assess his relations with the Turkish side, we reach the same conclusion. His only objective is to facilitate the surrender of the Turkish side.

Papadopoulos may be justified in pursuing such a policy. He is right to exploit the developments to his country's benefit.

However, it is Turkey that needs to ensure he doesn't get what he wants.
We can take no more.

Turkey opening its ports and airports to Greek Cypriot shipping without the end of the isolation of the KKTC, or at least some easing of it, would be tantamount to Papadopoulos taking over.

Talat is right.

Turkey must resist.

If necessary, it should risk harming its relations with the EU in order to resist the pressure. It should not allow these small games to reach fruition.

Papadopoulos should not win a second term so cheaply.

Turkey should not leave the entire island to Papadopoulos' mercy.

[cypezokyli]

who wrote the first letter ?
it sounds like an astreme nationalist, hidden behind legalistic / or a veil of political correctness. :roll:
and thats leaving aside, the rediculous legal and historical conclusions he draws :roll:

as for birand. in times before "crisis" what do you expect even from progressive journalists to write ? if you read politis from example in this time, they too often accuse tpap for reducing the cyppro on the matter of the protocol and for not following a "demanding" policy.

[pg]

zan wrote:
... to negotiate with Papadopoulos and the Greek leadership, will lead to the paralysis of the KKTC, the Turks of Cyprus, and Turkey’s interests across the eastern Mediterranean.


I wonder what the writer means by the last part...

[zan]

cypezokyli wrote: who wrote the first letter ?
it sounds like an astreme nationalist, hidden behind legalistic / or a veil of political correctness. :roll:
and thats leaving aside, the rediculous legal and historical conclusions he draws :roll:

as for birand. in times before "crisis" what do you expect even from progressive journalists to write ? if you read politis from example in this time, they too often accuse tpap for reducing the cyppro on the matter of the protocol and for not following a "demanding" policy.

Of course he is a nationalist but does that make all he says wrong. If so then can you point out the parts that are. As for protocol, how else can we make any sense of what is going on. Tpap cannot realistically think that the boarder can just come down and every Has a mad free for all so why are we not getting some realistic solution proposals if not for protocol. We all know that every one is jostling for position but He and his government are still on the same policy as they were when this whole thing started. Where is the sense and practicality in that. The nationalist might be pushing things a little too far but at least some of the arguments make sense.

[zan]

pg wrote: zan wrote:
... to negotiate with Papadopoulos and the Greek leadership, will lead to the paralysis of the KKTC, the Turks of Cyprus, and Turkey’s interests across the eastern Mediterranean.


I wonder what the writer means by the last part...

I think you are reading intrigue into something that has already been stated a thousand times. Turkey has interests in Cyprus. If you mean that that is a veiled message to say that they are planning to take over all or part of Cyprus then you have either forgotten that there is a state called Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus there or are convinced in the fact that Greece no longer has ANY interests in Cyprus.

[Kifeas]

zan wrote: pg wrote: zan wrote:
... to negotiate with Papadopoulos and the Greek leadership, will lead to the paralysis of the KKTC, the Turks of Cyprus, and Turkey’s interests across the eastern Mediterranean.


I wonder what the writer means by the last part...

I think you are reading intrigue into something that has already been stated a thousand times. Turkey has interests in Cyprus. If you mean that that is a veiled message to say that they are planning to take over all or part of Cyprus then you have either forgotten that there is a state called Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus there or are convinced in the fact that Greece no longer has ANY interests in Cyprus.

Zan, it is clear that by seating in London and farting with your British /EU passport, as a British national that you happen to be, you have the luxury not to want a solution in Cyprus, but only partition, presumably because you grabbed some stolen good peace of land belonging to a Greek Cypriot. I wander with whose right you so audaciously try to patronise the real Turkish Cypriots living in Cyprus, and which live under occupation in the north? Not just you but also all those others in the forums that, by using foreign asses –i.e. based on their British citizenships and their British generated incomes, they fart-out in the forums their super-nationalistic, super-chauvinistic and super intransigent claims, and even make themselves appear as if they represent the views and desires of the actual Turkish Cypriots that permanently live in the north. I ask you Zan, if based your super-fascist sloganeering and distant super-farting, we end up having a war in Cyprus one day (a most likely scenario, if all Turkish Cypriots choose to follow your line,) will you move your good ass from London where you seat and enjoy all the privileges of a citizen of an economically advanced society, and come to Cyprus to fight on the side of those you patronise so much, or at least, will you send your son to do this?

Because if you think with your little mind, that the Greek Cypriots will ever seat back and suck the fait accomplices of your motherland's aggression, theft, ethnic cleansing and occupation, i.e. the spoils of an illegal war and an illegal occupation, without doing anything to reverse them, you are bloody mistaken! I suggest to you (and to some others) to stop farting with other people's asses, because I firmly beilive that the majority of the real Turkish Cypriots that live in Cyprus, want peace and want a solution, and they do not adopt your super-patriotic and super-fascist pro-partition sloganeering, and I am sure they are all sick and tired seeing people like yourself, claiming to be speaking on their behalf on what is good for them and what is not!

PS: And when you post in the forum, letters written for Rauf Denktash’s pen, like the one you posted above, at least cite the author and /or the source, and do not make it appear as if you have written it!. Because even though it talks a lot of nonsense in this letter, still I doubt you are of the capacity to have written it yourself!

[turkkan]

Quote: and which live under occupation in the north?

How can we be occupied, if in the 60's we begged turkey everyday to come and rescue us? Or are you suggesting that the turkish cypriots have now changed their mind and want the turkish army to leave and be left alone with you, so that we can go back to the 1960 constituion, with a few modifications such as those that makarios proposed? Would that make you happy?

Quote: Because if you think with your little mind, that the Greek Cypriots will ever seat back and suck the fait accomplices of your motherland's aggression, theft, ethnic cleansing and occupation, i.e. the spoils of an illegal war and an illegal occupation, without doing anything to reverse them, you are bloody mistaken!

Ive met plenty of greek cypriots who stated clearly they wanted partition, or simply didnt care. Isnt the number of people trusting every year during the 20th july decreasing by the year? I will for the sake of courtesy beleive you though. Hows the weight lifting go btw? Have you started on teh protein shakes yet? :D

[zan]

Kifeas, I have been wondering where you have been the last week or so, although deep down I knew all along. Your employers have put too much faith in you to carry out a mans job. You have now been advised to attack my nationality as the new line of defense. Why it has taken a whole week for your briefing I do not quite understand because in that time I would have thought that a better veil could have accompanied the deception.

First of all there can be NO war in Cyprus what ever your romantic notions of victory and glory are. Your entry and our omission into the EU has made sure of that. If you think that the EU is going to let you attack the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus or Turkey or for that matter allow Turkey to attack a member of the EU then you are even more simple than I thought you were. Your prospects for a medal or the more likely case of getting your ass shot off will have to be put on hold indefinitely.

What the Greek Cypriots will have to do is to sit people like you down and confess to them that they have been lying to them all along and that there will be no return to times gone by and the future looks bleak for those that wish to return to their homes in the south. It will have to spend a lot of money in building a future for its people in housing and infrastructure and stop messing about with the truth so that he does not have to face these realities.


As for your perception of what is going on around you, you always give us examples of its inadequacy. I did not put my name to that letter and if you bother to read a little further down the thread you will notice that I have started a post with "Of course he is" which in most peoples minds would indicate that I am speaking of a third person.

Now I think you need to report back to base to come up with a new line of attack because the letter is written by a person who does live in Cyprus and whether he is real or a figment of my imagination is of no real consequence. Yes, he is a nationalist and yes he wants partition for his own reasons as well as those that he clearly has stated in his letter. Deal with these issues.

[Kifeas]

I will say only one thing! If the majority of Turkish Cypriots end up adopting your immoral, fascist, criminal and pan-turanist ideas, and feeling that I express the thoughts and feelings of a very large portion of the Greek Cypriot society, I promise you that we will do everything possible and feasible to make your community and Turkey regret every minute of it, and one day bitterly regret the whole of it! This is all I have to say! I still feel and hope that the majority of Turkish Cypriots do not share your ideas, and that you only represent a fascist minority! I just want to remind the members of the Turkish Cypriot community that the consequences the Greek Cypriot community paid in 1974, and still continues to pay up to this day, are to a large extent due a very similar Greek Cypriot and mainland Greek fascist minority.

[pg]

zan wrote: pg wrote: zan wrote:
... to negotiate with Papadopoulos and the Greek leadership, will lead to the paralysis of the KKTC, the Turks of Cyprus, and Turkey’s interests across the eastern Mediterranean.


I wonder what the writer means by the last part...

I think you are reading intrigue into something that has already been stated a thousand times. Turkey has interests in Cyprus. If you mean that that is a veiled message to say that they are planning to take over all or part of Cyprus then you have either forgotten that there is a state called Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus there or are convinced in the fact that Greece no longer has ANY interests in Cyprus.

You last sentence is really confusing...

My point was to discuss what the "interests" are, and to what degree these should be allowed to influence the lives of the Cypriots.

Not that I understood your last sentence, but yet, I believe Greece has no interests in Cyprus - and indeed they would prefer if the island sunk tonight. The reason Greece are still spending money on defending the Republic of Cyprus is mainly that the democratic government of Greece still feels in debt due to the crimes committed by the junta.

Back to the "interests". I do believe that Turkey's wish to dominate the island militarily is a large root of the Problem. Either Turkey wants to control the Cypriot government with a veto, or militarily as now. The reason is said to be that the Turkish Armed Forces are not able to protect Turkey if another power gets hold of Cyprus. That is rather pathetic, IMHO. I also think it is sick to allow such a pathetic idea to ruin the lives for many Cypriots.

[erolz]

pg wrote: My point was to discuss what the "interests" are, and to what degree these should be allowed to influence the lives of the Cypriots.


What are the USA's interests in Cuba and to what degree should these be allowed to influence the lives of Cubans?

pg wrote:
Not that I understood your last sentence, but yet, I believe Greece has no interests in Cyprus - and indeed they would prefer if the island sunk tonight. The reason Greece are still spending money on defending the Republic of Cyprus is mainly that the democratic government of Greece still feels in debt due to the crimes committed by the junta.

And if Cyrpus lay 50km of the coast of Greece and represented the last in a chain of island under Turkish control that would seal off Greeces access to the worlds seas and was under the sole control of a Turkish Cypriot numerical majority, do you still believe that Greece would have no intrest in Cyprus or who controlled it ?

pg wrote:
Back to the "interests". I do believe that Turkey's wish to dominate the island militarily is a large root of the Problem. Either Turkey wants to control the Cypriot government with a veto, or militarily as now.

You do not control something with a right to veto (which in any case is held by the Turkish Cypriot community not Turkey). If this was the case then the Republic of Cyprus would control the EU. What a right of veto gives is protection not control. Numerical dominance of the organs of state is what gives control. What Turkey wants in Cyprus is to know it is not in the sole control of the Greek Cypriot community.

pg wrote:
The reason is said to be that the Turkish Armed Forces are not able to protect Turkey if another power gets hold of Cyprus. That is rather pathetic, IMHO. I also think it is sick to allow such a pathetic idea to ruin the lives for many Cypriots.

To ignore the reality of Turkeys Cyprus strategic interests in Cyprus re who and how Cyprus is controlled and to simply dismiss these concerns of Turkey as 'pathetic' is the kind of myopic approach that got us into this mess in the first place. A sensible approach would be to try and understand these concerns and find agreed ways to minimise them that are acceptable to all. A stupid way to appraoch the issue is to dismiss and ingnore Turkeys concerns (whihc are not different from any other country) and then actively pursue polices that increase Turkish fears and concerns and behave as though Turkey does not matter or exist.

What happens in Turkey affects Cyprus and what happens in Cyprus affects Turkey. That is a plain reality. You appreantly believe that Cypriots (ie Greek Cypriot) should be able to do anything in Cyprus they want without any regard for Turkeys concerns at all. I think that is no more reasonable than the idea that I should be able to do anything I like in my house regardless of how it affects my neighbours - with no regard for them ot their interests. Such an attitude is what leads to conflict.

[pg]

You claim Turkey has the right to control a neighboring country - if Turkey feels like it - and you also claim that it is best for the Cypriots since if we are not controlled by Turkey we may do something stupid that upsets Turkey.

Sorry, but I can not agree with you there.

[pg]

erolz wrote:
And if Cyrpus lay 50km of the coast of Greece and represented the last in a chain of island under Turkish control that would seal off Greeces access to the worlds seas and was under the sole control of a Turkish Cypriot numerical majority, do you still believe that Greece would have no intrest in Cyprus or who controlled it ?


What if Turkey would seal off Russia's access to the seas from the Black Sea...

Big Fish eat small fish, right?

As a small country it is obviously in our interest to have good and friendly relations with all our neighbors - which we indeed have (with one exception) and which is rare in this part of the globe. However, we do it because we want to - and on democratic terms.

[Kifeas]

Cyprus is an independed and a sovereign state and an equal member of the UN, the EU and the CoE! It is not a province of Turkey, nor a Turkish protectorate, neither one of Greece or the UK! As such -a UN member, it is obliged to abide by, respect and honour the principles and provisions of the UN Charter (which is the pinnacle of international law, rule and order.) If the UN Charter says that Cyprus must be obliged to lay tribute to another country, just because this other country has certain megalomaniac complexes, it is big, it has a large army and it is situated 40 miles close to our shores, (like it was also attempted by Turkey and the Anglo-Americans in the illegal monstrosity called the “Annan plan,”) then so be it! We will honour only whatever the UN Charter says!

The Ottoman empire ended 90 years ago, and the last Sultan also died since then! If some people wish to revive the ottoman empire's mentality in their international relations, it is their problem!