www.talkcyprus.org

[murataga]

stavrizatz wrote: murataga wrote: to govern themselves in their own zone in security is the utmost respect and desire for peace for all humans living in Cyprus.

That contradicts the ideals of the global peace philosophy.

No, it just contradicts the ideals of Hellenizing the island of Cyprus.

stavrizatz wrote:
The break up of states along ethnic lines is a regression to the malady of nationalism and separatism, instead of a forward movement in the spirit of the multicultural brotherhood of the peoples of the one humanity of nations.

Comment 1: Good, than you you can start lobbying for uniting Turkey and Greece into one country for your "peoples of the one humanity of nations".

Comment 2: We did not break up from the Republic of Cyprus - we were ejected by force of arms and enclaved and murdered for refusing to have it annexed to Greece. Huge dfference.

stavrizatz wrote: murataga wrote: The greatest lie is denying the realities of Cyprus: two people, two languages, two religions, two cultures

Do you really call that the REALITY of Cyprus!!! As RW sais, to me it truly reveals ignorance about the reality of Cyprus. Because other minority communities did not have the opportunity to break up into their own territory, it means that they don’t exist.

It is a fact that there are two main communal entities in Cyprus: the Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots with two two distinct languages, religions and cultures. The rest are "protected minorities". Read Appendix E of the current Republic of Cyprus constitution if you do not believe me.

stavrizatz wrote: murataga wrote: As a human being I need to have my security and my right to govern

When you had the opportunity to govern yourself in the government of the Republic of Cyprus, why did you choose to be governed by the Turkish Army Officers who are ruling the North of Cyprus?

When we had the opportunity to govern ourselves in the government of the Republic of Cyprus we were doing so until the criminal Greek Cypriot regime orchestrated an offensive against us for refusing to give up our rights which would effectively lead to the Hellenization and ENOSIS of Cyprus. We were ejected by force from the Republic of Cyprus, murdered, enclaved, and embargoed for refusing to give up our rights as the partners of the Republic of Cyprus.

stavrizatz wrote: murataga wrote: The likes of your mindset have brought misery upon the people of Cyprus.

If all people were like RW, the world was going to be paradise.

Marry him if you like him so much.

stavrizatz wrote: murataga wrote: No, we are NOT all the same and there is nothing wrong with being different - it is called diversity, don`t destroy it embrace it. In your logic the whole world should be a single county - no. You forcing everyone to be "one" is the most severe violation of the fundamental human right to self-identify and self-govern in combination with gross intolerence to diversity.

Diversity can exist within states and it can exist in Cyprus just like it exists in other countries in the world.

Not according to the realities of Cyprus, the unquestionable political prioroties of the two communities and the tragic experiences of the past. No two countries are the same. There are undeniable differences of interest and objectives among the two communities, if omitted will lead to lethal consequences for all. Diversity needs to be accomodated in Cyprus and it can be accomodated by extending the two people their inalienable right to govern themselves in security in their own zones.

stavrizatz wrote: A single country with effective local governments and respect for human rights is the vision of global peace philoshophy.

That is a strong generalization. The philosophy for a just and lasting solution that I believe should be as what I have elaborated previously - the rest are just fancy names and technicals.

stavrizatz wrote: murataga wrote: Given that we have been ejected from the state that we have established, that we have been murdered and ambargoed for refusing to have that state annexed to Greece, we can not be denied the right to determine our own fate and live in security, hence two states is the only solution given the circumstances. The criminal actions of the Greek Cypriot regime are making the status quo more permanent every day.

Now we can all learn the true history of Cyprus:
Greek Cypriots murdered Turkish Cypriots to unite with Greece – sorry, to be annexed by Greece. Maybe you prefer colonized by Greece?

Turkish Cypriots were in danger, maybe danger of potential genocide by the Greek Cypriot bustards?

The criminal actions of Greek Cypriot regime. Republic of Cyprus is a spurious entity isn’t it, the only legal state in Cyprus is Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. Or again maybe Cyprus should be handed over to its legal owners the Ottoman Empire , today Turkey.

But clearly Turkish Cypriots cannot live with the evil Greeks therefore either two state solution or one state solution given that the evil Greek are expelled first.

That is the only true history of Cyprus and the current reality. Don’t bother to search for anything new.

By the way if I may add

The Turkish troops came heroically in 1974 to liberate Turkish Cypriots from the true animals “the Greeks”. The heroic troops had to kill and rape women in order to win the horrible enemy of humanity “the Greeks”. A good Greek is only a dead Greek that is why many had to die, so as to become good. But unfortunately not all Greeks died, some are still alive and the make the pure Turkish Cypriots suffer from the embargoes. The pure Turkish Cypriots were forced to get passport and ID cards from the Greek Cypriot regime but that doesn’t mean that the Greek Cypriot regime is legal, it is happening out of necessity.

Last wish 'Death to all Greeks'

Save us the monologue.

[erolz]

repulsewarrior wrote: I suggest that both communities have gloves, so
that they can stick their hands in the fire.

If by gloves you mean 'protections' in an agreed negotiated settlement , then fine.

repulsewarrior wrote:
Erolz, being a realist, look down the road.

I don't dare mention any neighbours in the region, and the conflicts that they are in.

No Army, not even the Turkish Army can stop the will of those who choose to be fanatics.

I am not saying that the presence of the Turkish Army is a solution. What I am saying is the idea that just removing them , without dealing with all the issues involved is not only not a solution it could only result in renewed conflict. For me this idea that 'getting rid of the Turkish army' is a solution to our current problems is a fallacy rooted in classic propaganda that the problem started in 74 and is one merely of Turkish military presence in Cyprus. This is simply not true and thus the 'solutiuon' suggested by this false notion (removing the Turkish army solves the problem) is equally not true. That is what I am saying.

Yes we need to 'demilitarise' Cyprus imo and have no foreign troops here but that can not be achieved without a comprehensive solution that deals with all issues. If it were achieved without such chaos would result. That is to me just plain and obvious evident fact. It is also evident to me that the greatest burden of such chaos that would surely follow would fall on Turkish Cypriot rather than Greek Cypriot, so maybe this is why this seems like a 'solution' to some Greek Cypriot?

[AQMessiah]

erolz, you allow your paranoia to get the best of you. I am not your enemy. One more time just to make sure you understand... I AM NOT YOUR ENEMY!
Is it not the goal of most Cypriots for a united and stable Cyprus? 90% of your rhetoric is how dangerous Southern Cyprus is and the harm that is unlikely to befall you. Don't you think easing the tensions of both sides is a necessity to move forward? Quote: Now we are in the realm of madness and to be frank dangerous madness at that. ... erolz, I applaud you for making a website devoted to building that bridge we were discussing earlier between communities, but it is your ideology that has prevented us from uniting. You speak as if I'm your enemy and for someone who supposedly advocates peace between us you are quite the hypocrite.

Think outside the box, it does wonders.


Mete:
Quote: So that's why we need a citizens movement on both sides of the island to force politicians to do what we want. This is the solution I have in mind and this is what I'm willing to work for given that there are serious and committed citizens on both sides of the island.

Mete, I have never agreed more. If there is an idea behind this please let us know. I've spoken of something like this but it has ended up labeling me as a "radical Cypriot."

Peace

[erolz]

AQMessiah wrote: erolz, you allow your paranoia to get the best of you. I am not your enemy. One more time just to make sure you understand... I AM NOT YOUR ENEMY!

Where have I said you are my enemy or I consider you such ? No where as far as I am concerned so why the need to shout that you are not my enemy. What I have done is disagree with your idea that a means to a solution would be the removal of Turkish / all troops from Cyprus not within the framework of a comprehensive settlement. I have explained why I disagree with your view. That I disagree with you on this issue or others, like all we need to do is forget the past, that does not mean I think of you as my enemy. You talk of my paranoia yet it seems to me pretty paranoid to think that I believe that you are my enemy given what I have actually said.

AQMessiah wrote:
Is it not the goal of most Cypriots for a united and stable Cyprus?

I do not know. Was it the goal of those that historicaly sought enosis and considered it more important than a stable and united Cyprus ?

AQMessiah wrote: 90% of your rhetoric is how dangerous Southern Cyprus is and the harm that is unlikely to befall you.

The 90% figure is simply not true in my opinion. I explained to you why I do not think removing troops outside of a comprehensive settlement is a way forward and why. I have stated in response to Stav that Turkish Cypriot as a community have fears about living as a political minority in a unitary Cypriot state. I have explained we have sucvh fears and why we have them. You can charaterise such as 'rhetoric as to how dangerous Southern Cyprus is and the harm that is unlikely to befall us' but I do not think such a charaterisation is a fair desciption at all.

I will try once more to make my point clear. Turkish Cypriot as a community DO have fears and concerns about how they would fare in a unitary Cypriot state politicaly dominated by Greek Cypriot. They have these concerns because of the way historicaly a numericaly dominant Greek Cypriot community DID try and impose purely Greek desires (not cypriot) on them as a community in their own shared homeland.

I suggest that if you are SERIOUS about finding a way forward you first need to accept that we have such fears and why we have them. Telling me that such fears are 'unfounded' or 'made up' does not help us find a way forward as far as I am concerned. Nor does labeling me as paranoid, or seeking to portray me as someone who seeks to use the past to maintain seperastion, merely because I point out these fears of the Turkish Cypriot community and why we have them.

AQMessiah wrote:
Don't you think easing the tensions of both sides is a necessity to move forward?

Yes easing tensions is one thing that needs to be done but it is not the only one. Another thing that needs to be done is accepting and understanding our respective positions and concerns. Telling me I am paranoid and preventing unifiaction and you enemy if I mention OUR concerns to me is not particularly constructive.

AQMessiah wrote:
Quote: Now we are in the realm of madness and to be frank dangerous madness at that. ... erolz, I applaud you for making a website devoted to building that bridge we were discussing earlier between communities, but it is your ideology that has prevented us from uniting. You speak as if I'm your enemy and for someone who supposedly advocates peace between us you are quite the hypocrite.

Again I have to ask you if you REALLY believe that the removal of Turkish tropps without a general settlement would lead to progress or lead to renewed tension and conflict between Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot in Cyprus. My view is that such a removal without a general settlement could only lead to renewed conflict between the communites. I absolutely beleive this to be true and pretty obviously so. That does not make us enemies. It means we have differing views. I would have more chance of understanding your view that such a removal would help us find a solutiuon, if you actualy explained why you think that and deal with the issues I raised, rather than just tell me I am paranoid and a hypocrite.

I want a unifed Cyprus because I believe unity is better than division in the most generic terms. Today we are not unifed and to me I can not plot a way from divided to unifed that does not look at the causes of our current division and seek ways to remove those causes as part of the process from goihg from division to unity. This process however is next to impossible when the response to looking at those causes is simply 'your concerns are not valid', 'your concerns are made up because you dont want unity', 'you are paranoid', 'you can not forget the past' etc etc.

AQMessiah wrote:
Think outside the box, it does wonders.

I am more than willing and in fact able to think outside of the box (another slogan by the way). However the key part of that slogan is THINK. You suggest that removal of all troops without a general settlement would be a positive thing. I am asking you to THINK what the actual consequences of such a thing would be. To try and think about how it would WORK. In such a senario the Republic of Cyprus would HAVE to try and assert its authority in the north and I can see no way they could do this without it leading to new conflict. If you can see how they could do this without conflict then please do explain how. Or if you think they would not try and exert their authority in the north if there were no troops preventing them from doing so then please explain why you think this. Simply stating that the removal of all troops without a general settlement would be a positive move and then attacking me as paranoid and hypocritical and unable to think outside of the box if I question this assertion is to me not rational discussion.

Again do not get me wrong. I am NOT saying that Turkish troops in Cyprus is a good thing. What I am saying is that if we want to remove them we have to do it in a way that is sensible practical and carries the lowest possible risk for conflict. Simply removing them without an agreement on the underlying issues does not achieve this, which is why I do not think the suggestion that removing all troops from Cyprus without a general settlement is sensible or desirable or a way forward. I am more than happy to consider this view in the light of convincing arguments otherwise, but calling me paranoid or hypocritical are not convincing arguments to me.

[Mete]

AQMessiah wrote:
Mete, I have never agreed more. If there is an idea behind this please let us know. I've spoken of something like this but it has ended up labeling me as a "radical Cypriot."

The idea is as follows...

I believe that current political parties in Cyprus are part of the problem rather than the solution. For years, leftist/socialist political parties blamed the rightists/nationalists for our problems but now we have CTP in power in the north and AKEL in the south and we still have all our problems. They cannot even come together and discuss how to open the Ledra Street crossing and we expect them to agree on a solution. When they don't agree, nobody questions them. They get away with stupidity and nobody holds them accountable. This is absurd.

Political parties on both sides of the island are all waiting for the all mighty comprehensive solution. They expect that one day, the God almighty, will drop a solution for us and we will live happily ever after. That's why they don't want to give anything to the other side now. But we've been waiting for years for a perfect solution. Any sane person knows that there won't be a perfect solution but this doesn't mean that we cannot better the lives of ordinary Cypriots today.

I believe that we have to construct peace ourselves if it is going to last and this is only going to happen if there are committed people on both sides of the island who genuinely care about all Cyprus and its people.

So my vision is to have a citizens movement that will have members on both sides of the island. It should be open to anyone who sincerely cares about Cyprus as a whole and who is willing to make a difference in everyday life in Cyprus. This movement will not belong to any political party or ideology. The only ideology we will follow is to make ordinary people's lives better in any way possible. This will be our focus. We won't get into politics and we won't waste our time with trying to find a perfect solution or what bizonality means or what a future solution should look like.

We'll focus on concrete actions that can make a difference now without getting into politics. For example, why is the Ledra Street still closed? Who's responsible? Why can't we have a bicommunal Cypriot football league today? Why do we have to wait for a solution for that? Why can't we have a bicommunal Cypriot group represent Cyprus in Eurovision today? These are the sort of issues we'll discuss and more importantly work to make a change.

[stavrizatz]

erolz wrote: If Turkey was to tomorrow remove it's troops from Cyprus do you REALLY believe the Republic of Cyprus would not seek to exert it's authority over all of Cyprus, as the recognised sole legitimate government of all of Cyprus ? How could it not use it police force to enforce its laws and court rulings already made ? There can be no (peaceful) solution that involves the removal of Turkish troops without a comprehensive solution and to pretend that there can be , to yourself or others is naive in the extreme imo as well as dangerous .

So you disagree totally with the quote "the pioneers of peace are those who refuse to take on arms"? Of course I really believe that a tiny country like Cyprus wouldn't even dare to have its police force to restore the territorial integrity over the whole of Cyprus with the use of violence having Turkey only miles away. You think Turkish troops will go after years of efforts of a peaceful settlement and we will give them them opportunity to invade again. Anyway in reality the power hungry Turkey will not move an inch from Cyprus unless there is something in return. Human rights are of little interests for them and they will use Cyprus' strategic location as an advanced army based in the crossroads of the three continents.

erolz wrote: If I stick my hand in a fire and I get burnt I fear to do the same again without some form of protection. I could overcome my 'internal' fear and again stick my hand in the fire with no protection but the probable result is that I will get burnt again and it is not something I am likely to do, even if you tell me that actually the previous time I did not get burnt but have just been convinced by others that I did. Now you believe that I (Turkish Cypriot community) did not get burnt in the past and so all fears of it potentially happening again are just 'limiting stories'. I however do NOT believe this version of the past. You can keep trying to convince me that there is nothing to fear or you can accept that fear and the reason why I have it and the validity of those reasons from my perspective and seek to find a way to overcome those fears. I think the second approach is the better one myself.

Your fear of the example with the fire is because the fire will 99% burn you, but your fear from Greek Cypriot is a fear or a scenario that 99% will not happen. If you have one reason to fear, I have 20. I can make you the list if you want but I would rather not because it will be another blame game justifying why I should not trust Turkish Cypriots. To overcome those fears there is a whole project funded by the UN which is designed to unstuck people from the constains of the past. Sorry I am in a hurry to go but I will give you more info later

[erolz]

stavrizatz wrote: So you disagree totally with the quote "the pioneers of peace are those who refuse to take on arms"?

This is just ridiculous. Because I believe that the removals of all troops without a general settlement would be precipitate and dangerous and would most likely cause more harm than benefits you conclude that I totally disagree with the quote you give above ?

Should we now discuss your views on EOKA and if you totally disagree with the quote ?

stavrizatz wrote:
Of course I really believe that a tiny country like Cyprus wouldn't even dare to have its police force to restore the territorial integrity over the whole of Cyprus with the use of violence having Turkey only miles away.

I know that they did in the past do this.

stavrizatz wrote:
You think Turkish troops will go after years of efforts of a peaceful settlement and we will give them them opportunity to invade again.

I do not know what you are talking about (what years of effort for a peaceful settlement?) . The discussion as I understood it was about if removing all troops from Cyprus without a general solution would aid reunification or hinder it. My belief is that such a removal without a settlement of the core issues that brought us into direct conflict as communities in the past would inevitably lead to new conflict between the communities, which in turn would undermine reunification efforts not aid them. That is why I do not support the thesis that removing troops without dealing with the underlying , longer standing core issues would be a good thing.

stavrizatz wrote:
Anyway in reality the power hungry Turkey will not move an inch from Cyprus unless there is something in return. Human rights are of little interests for them and they will use Cyprus' strategic location as an advanced army based in the crossroads of the three continents.

This is not what the discussion was about as far as I am concerned. The discussion is about a theoretical removal of troops from Cyprus and if such a move without a general settlement would be beneficial or not. I do not believe that such removal without dealing with the core issue will be beneficial.

In practical terms the only way removal of Turkish Troops from Cyprus without a general settlement could be feasible would be if the Republic of Cyprus were to recognise the legitimacy of the current border and the legitimacy of the authorities in the north, which clearly it will not do. Whilst it maintains that such a border is illegitimate and the authorities in the north illegitimate, then the removal of troops from Cyprus can only lead to new conflict between the communities, which is the LAST thing we need now.

stavrizatz wrote: Your fear of the example with the fire is because the fire will 99% burn you, but your fear from Greek Cypriot is a fear or a scenario that 99% will not happen.

The risk that a numerically dominant Greek Cypriot community may try and impose purely ethnic Greek desires on the Turkish Cypriot community in a unitary Cypriot state, against the Turkish Cypriot communities desires and with no regard for these desires is 1% according to you. Yet this IS what a numerically dominant Greek Cypriot community tried to do both before a Cypriot state existed and after a unitary power sharing state was created. Not only did this happen , you still argue today that the Greek Cypriot community have every such right to impose a purely Greek desire on the Turkish Cypriot community in Cyprus with no regard for their communal will. So you did this thing in the past and you argue that there was nothing wrong in these historic attempts and then you want me to believe that the chance of 'you' doing it again are next to zero ?

stavrizatz wrote:
If you have one reason to fear, I have 20. I can make you the list if you want but I would rather not because it will be another blame game justifying why I should not trust Turkish Cypriots. To overcome those fears there is a whole project funded by the UN which is designed to unstuck people from the constains of the past. Sorry I am in a hurry to go but I will give you more info later

If you have fears then we need to discuss those fears. Fears can be founded or unfounded or somewhere in between. I am more than willing to try and understand your fears and address them. However it feels to me that the only response you have to mine is that they are 'unfounded' or 'made up as an excuse'. That does not take us very far.

[repulsewarrior]

The whole issue of removing all Turkish troops from Cyprus is imo totally unthinkable. not because of the risks involved to Turkish Cypriots, but because it is not at all in the interest of the Turkish state, for its own security. Cyprus, its Government needs to address this issue, and since it has accomodated the British in this regard, it has the opportunity to consider this as a mandate to provide security to it's global partners, as well as Turkey, in a similar manner.

Recognition will come to the Republic from Turkey when a State exists that can guarantee the self determination of Turkish Cypriots in a manner where they can sustain their society, without the threat of assimilation, and with a sense of security, as a partner, where all citizens are equal. Beyond that, Cyprus needs Turkey as an ally, where they are working toward common interests militarily, and in their external affairs.

[erolz]

repulsewarrior wrote: ...not because of the risks involved to Turkish Cypriots, .....

Let me just take this opportunity to be explicitly clear about what I mean by 'risk' and 'danger' involved in removing Turkish Troops without a general settlement. The risk or danger I am worried about in such a scenario is not the risk of physical violence to the Turkish Cypriot community per se, it is the risk of an increase in communal tension conflict and clashes that may well end in violence and the damage this would do to the chances of reconciliation and reunification - and thus to ALL cypriots not just Turkish Cypriot.

[repulsewarrior]

indeed erolz, i agree.

But for Turkey, it is very clear that their State is at risk without the foothold they have, here.

I think that in this regard, Cypriot interests have always been a secondary consideration, whether it is the rights of Turkish Cypriots, or the desire for self determination by all its citizens.

[stavrizatz]

erolz wrote: This is just ridiculous. Because I believe that the removals of all troops without a general settlement would be precipitate and dangerous and would most likely cause more harm than benefits you conclude that I totally disagree with the quote you give above ?

Why is ridiculous? What are the dangers? The well taugh story that Greek Cypriots will seek to dominate the Turkish Cypriot community!

I'll give you my opinion now, firstly starting from the Greek Cypriot army. For us, it is ridiculous to have national guard because:
a) there is nothing that the army can do, to defend the rest of Cyprus from a potential further penetration of Turkish troops into the island.
b) There is nothing that the army can do to bring peace to the whole of Cyprus. A Greek offensive will bring the opposite results.
c) Anyhow, currently it is not in the interest of Turkey to occupy the rest of Cyprus so.
d) The army is 25months of brainwashing and caltivation of nationalism, hateress against the 'enemy' and not culture of love and multiculturalism which is what will solve the real problems
e) By dimilitirisation of Cyprus and I am mean No National Guard the international community will be sympathetic to Cypriots and foreigners will perceive as a unique move towards peace.
f) The money spend on military can be spend on educating young Cypriots and teaching them the values of peace culture which are much more productive than the action of war.

The existance of Turkish troops in Cyprus, in order to protect the Turkish Cypriot community imo it is also ridiculous:
For the same reasons as I mentioned before for d,e and f and also the biggest quarantee of Turkish Cypriots is not that the Turkish army is in Cyprus but the fact that such a huge military power is only 40km from the coast of Cyprus and they will intervene just like they did in the past in case of violence. In fact it is the obligation of Turkey to intervene in case of domestic violence. However Turkey has no right to abuse the right of guarantee and use it as a pretext to fufil its military and strategic objectives just like they did in 74.

What I am trying to say, Turkish military is not in Cyprus to maintain peace, the Turkish military is in Cyprus to maintain power. The total dimilitarisation of Cyprus before any peace agreements is not a step towards further violence, it is a step towards peace.


erolz wrote: Should we now discuss your views on EOKA and if you totally disagree with the quote ?

If you want yes, why not

[erolz]

stavrizatz wrote: erolz wrote: This is just ridiculous. Because I believe that the removals of all troops without a general settlement would be precipitate and dangerous and would most likely cause more harm than benefits you conclude that I totally disagree with the quote you give above ?

Why is ridiculous?

What is ridiculous is the logic that because I do not think removing all troops without solving the underlying issues is a sensible thing to do it must mean that I totally disagree with the quote on the forums banner.

It is also a false assumption to assume that the quote on the banner is 'mine' any more than 'yours'. It was chosen by the members of the forum not me as an indivdual.

stavrizatz wrote:
What are the dangers? The well taugh story that Greek Cypriots will seek to dominate the Turkish Cypriot community!

You are not hearing what I am saying Stav. Removing troops from Cyprus without settling any of the issues like who has valid authority in the north is asking for trouble. Do you really expect me to believe that if all Turkish troops were to leave tomorrow , you would not encourage the kind of demonstrations that we saw in 96?

stavrizatz wrote:
I'll give you my opinion now,

Look stav I support the idea of a demilitarized Cyprus. I support it as part of a comprehensive settlement. We do not need troops here, but unless we all agree who has valid authority in the north before we remove them, then removing them can only lead to clashes - because you (Republic of Cyprus) says it has valid authority there and we say different. It is just madness to pretend we can totally and absolutely disagree on this fundamental and not have any force keeping us apart without risking clashing.

stavrizatz wrote:
The existance of Turkish troops in Cyprus, in order to protect the Turkish Cypriot community imo it is also ridiculous:

I am not gonna argue this point because it is not the point I am making.

stavrizatz wrote:
What I am trying to say, Turkish military is not in Cyprus to maintain peace, the Turkish military is in Cyprus to maintain power. The total dimilitarisation of Cyprus before any peace agreements is not a step towards further violence, it is a step towards peace.

Whatever their reason for being there their removal without any agreement can only encourage protests like those seen in 96 or even worse encourage a Republic of Cyprus government (or hot headed individual within it) that considers itself the legal and valid sole authority on the island (and is recognised as such externally) to try and exert that authority and test the limits.

Do I think if all Turkish troops left tomorrow Greek Cypriot tanks and militas and riot police would flood into the north and declare a state of emergency there. No I do not. Do I think that a group of hot heads may decide to try storming the 'border' with disastrous consequences for them and the chances of peace in general. Yes I do. Do I think it is conceivable that without Turkish Troops patrolling the border a Greek Cypriot policeman in uniform may 'test out' crossing the border without recognising the right of the Turkish Cypriot police to stop him and that this could lead to the use of deadly force that could then escalate and spiral out of control. Yes I do think these kinds of things are vastly more probable if you remove troops without dealing with the underlying issues. Matsakis stole a flag in the buffer zone. You do not think he would be encouraged to greater bolder stunts if there were no troops and that a hot headed Turkish Cypriot policeman might do something stupid in response to such, like shoot the idiot ? What happens then. The whole thing is just too dangerous imo.

Removing the troops without a basic acceptance of who has authority is creating a vacuum that is massively dangerous. A small incident could easily escalated and spiral us into direct confrontations that would make the chances of agreement and settlement impossible for years to come. You may be willing to risk all this , I would just prefer we get down and settle our differences so we can removal all the troops SAFELY and without taking such risks.

[repulsewarrior]

The Army, or National Guard exists to protect the State from any force that may form against it, in any country, including Cyprus.

What the Government does inside a State is another issue. In Cyprus, it seems that its government uses it to promote the ideals which you describe, stav, and I agree, educaton and dialog can go a long way to end the adversarial politic which is keeping us divided.

It would be better to have this armed force, but to train its members to be a body which can be used for the type of emergancies which require it's men and women to work together as units, and as a team against forces which bring with them harm, natural or external. Furthermore, as a force it should be prepared to allie itself with other armed forces for the benefit of the larger body we call Mankind. In this regard, it matters very little if its personnel are turcophone or grecophone. Rather it will be a uniting force against disaster.