www.talkcyprus.org

Dhavlos · Joined: 13 Aug 2005 Posts: 4697 Location: Birmingham

i was wondering, after speaking to some other people (elsewhere) on the issue...and it occured to me, that the whole package of a reunification plan, is quite a lot for people to accept in one go, cos just one bit may make them say no to a solution, even if the rest of itis perfect(exhagerated, but you get what i mean)

What if the solution was slit into sections that were solved seperately, and so can be manageable and understandable to all?

Ie.
1) solve teh property issue/compensation
2)political makeup (governmetn structure)
3) security
4)implimentation
etc etc

does that kind of make sense....after all, if we can discuss these issues seperately, wouldnt it make the whole process easier?

once one bit is solved, than the next bit can be dealt with (whilst teh first one is being implimented for exapmle)

than you have gradual change as well, cos even the annan plan was too 'dramatic' for many people.

what do you lot think? it sort of makes sense now, but i am thinking out loud.

zan · Joined: 31 Dec 2005 Posts: 962

Agree with you on a gradual proccess but first on the agenda should be to win back the faith of the Turkish Cypriots. This cannot be done with Tpap in place. The Greek Cypriot people will have to think hard on who they elect next.

Get Real! · Joined: 28 Dec 2006 Posts: 325 Location: Nicosia

Zan...

Quote: ... first on the agenda should be to win back the faith of the Turkish Cypriots.

I wonder if winning back the faith of 700,000 odd Greek Cypriots makes your agenda at all.

Quote: This cannot be done with Tpap in place. The Greek Cypriot people will have to think hard on who they elect next.

It doesn't really matter who takes over the office. Once in power the pre-determined agenda of the Republic of Cyprus will pick up where it left off.

With Turkey constantly interfering and threatening, the Republic of Cyprus can never relax her defensive stance.

It's pretty much a Merry-go-round. :(

repulsewarrior · Joined: 06 Jan 2006 Posts: 1740 Location: Canada

DHAV, first on that list, the settlers and all (from before enclaves) the displaced. All the others will follow.

zan · Joined: 31 Dec 2005 Posts: 962

Get Real! wrote: Zan...

Quote: ... first on the agenda should be to win back the faith of the Turkish Cypriots.

I wonder if winning back the faith of 700,000 odd Greek Cypriots makes your agenda at all.

Quote: This cannot be done with Tpap in place. The Greek Cypriot people will have to think hard on who they elect next.

It doesn't really matter who takes over the office. Once in power the pre-determined agenda of the Republic of Cyprus will pick up where it left off.

With Turkey constantly interfering and threatening, the Republic of Cyprus can never relax her defensive stance.

It's pretty much a Merry-go-round. :(

The whole idea is that the Republic of Cyprus is trying to win back the Turkish Cypriots and the land that the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus is holding. As it stands the Turkish Cypriots have no reason to win back the Greek Cypriots they just need the recognition of a few more countries. I am not being provocative here, that is just the way it is. So if unification or a BBF is the RoCs aim then I cannot see what choice they have.

stavrizatz · Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 3:28 am Post subject:

:bow: :cupwinner: The best post imo, and I hope this is understood also by our politicians.

Thanks very much Davlos, it is exactly what I beleive, that any plan for a solution should be splitted up in different sections. For example I was in favour of NO for different reasons than my friends. Certain parts I liked but other parts I didn't. Eg why would a plan for a solution of Cyprus would include a clause that requires Britain to give land from the bases in exchange of expanding its water boundaries - totally irrelevant to a solution!

That is why I support the work of Unite Cyprus Platform because they view the problem from a different prespective. The aim is not to find an immediate solution, MBUM and done. UCP acknowledges a cultural transormation process prior a 'solution', it recognises different phases and it separates the different aspects of the conflict.

Thanks again Davlos for this beautiful thread.

stavrizatz · Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 3:48 am Post subject:

Aaa yes I would also like to add the steps that I think are necessary for a solution

Step 1: Culrural transformation (agreed version of history, healing the past, develop unity, trust and common vision)

Step 2: Recognise and resolve the issues (property, settlers, military, equity rights and discrimination issues, ,maintainance of cultural identity)

Step 3: Scenario Plans for solution (create a realm of possibilities for harmony, trust, integration)

Step 4: Agreed political makeup (government structure)

Step 5: Implication and commitment to the master plan

Dhavlos · Joined: 13 Aug 2005 Posts: 4697 Location: Birmingham

exactly stavratz,

splitting it up will also hopefully make it look like something is happening, so the 'apathy' isnt there, that is now.
Plus it makes a solution more managable, plus it makes the framework for a new politcial setlement easier to inact and keep, because most likely, by the time it comes about, a whole load of children will have been taught the common history, the resepct for one another etc...so the will for a lasting and workable soltuion would hopefully be there.

you line of events is good....at least it can leave out the politicians for thefirstsection...that can all be done through independant commissions and NGOs i would imagine.