 |
| Author |
Message |
Kifeas
Warnings : 6
Ministerial
Joined: 26 Aug 2005
Posts: 2733
Location: Location: Pafos-Cyprus, since 1974 ethnic cleansing. Originally, Lapithos, northern occupied Cyprus.
|
|
| Alexandros Lordos wrote: |
| I assume you know that in the Annan Plan, after 18 years have elapsed, a general safeguard clause would apply whereby Greek Cypriots could not be more than 33% of the Turkish Cypriot component state population. Ofcourse, the Annan Plan constitution leaves it up to the constituent state to define the particular details of the law that will have to be passed, so it is very likely that in the end we would end up with a "maximum 33% in each town or village (as opposed to the constituent state as a whole)" - which again is unbearably constricting, because it doesn't allow for the natural development of Greek Cypriot communities. |
Actually the 33% is wrong. The correct percentage of Greek Cypriots that were ever to be allowed to return within Turkish Cypriot component state is only up to 18% of the total population of the Turkish Cypriot state and this was for the entire state and on a village or town basis. The 33% that Alexandros is saying refers to the total percentage of non-Turkish Cypriots and non-mainland settlers (includes all foreign residents) that could ever be allowed to have a secondary residence within the Turkish Cypriot component state. This means that any Greek Cypriot beyond the 18% of those that could obtain permanent residency rights should only live in the north as a secondary resident. If we take into consideration that if up to 10,000 foreigners live or will potentially live within the Turkish Cypriot component state, this number already makes up a 5% of the Turkish Cypriot component state population. Furthermore, the status of a secondary resident is essentially no different than that of a tourist. This person will just buy or rent a house somewhere and naturally will not be entitled to any political rights at any level, not even for the municipality elections. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Kifeas
Warnings : 6
Ministerial
Joined: 26 Aug 2005
Posts: 2733
Location: Location: Pafos-Cyprus, since 1974 ethnic cleansing. Originally, Lapithos, northern occupied Cyprus.
|
|
Erol, you seem to be making a big fuzz about and against the repatriation of mainland settlers, who after all came here from another country and as a consequence of the Turkish occupation, but at the same time you want to seek ways and /or suggest reasons in order to permanently restrict the right of return of the Greek Cypriots, who after all rightfully belong to this country and to those villages and towns from which they were once illegally displaced by the Turkish Army.
I ask you again, would you have maintained the same opinion if they were not in the range of one hundred thousand but instead 3 or 4 hundred thousands? Please do not say that this is a hypothetical question because it could have as well been the case if one considers the policies of Denktash and Turkey regarding this issue.
Is the 18% of Greek Cypriots that were supposed to have eventually been allowed to permanently settle within the Turkish Cypriot component state a reasonable amount, too little or too high, assuming that this ratio translates into some 35 thousands of Greek Cypriots? |
|
| Back to top |
|
erolz
Site Admin
Joined: 11 Aug 2005
Posts: 4195
Location: Kyrenia / Girne
|
|
| Kifeas wrote: |
| Erol, you seem to be making a big fuzz about and against the repatriation of mainland settlers, who after all came here from another country and as a consequence of the Turkish occupation, but at the same time you want to seek ways and /or suggest reasons in order to permanently restrict the right of return of the Greek Cypriots, who after all rightfully belong to this country and to those villages and towns from which they were once illegally displaced by the Turkish Army. |
Actually my _personal_ requirement in a solutio does not require bizonality at all just bi-communiality. I do accept however this is not the case for many of my Turkish Cypriot compatriots. So assuming bizonlaity is required then for me the only need to restrict Greek Cypriot rights to live anywhere in a bi-zonal system is to protect bi-communiality. If a way can be found for bi-zonality to exist that does not require any limits on Greek Cypriot freedom to live anywhere in Cyprus and does not have potential to undermine bi-comuuniality, then I am happy.
| Kifeas wrote: |
I ask you again, would you have maintained the same opinion if they were not in the range of one hundred thousand but instead 3 or 4 hundred thousands? Please do not say that this is a hypothetical question because it could have as well been the case if one considers the policies of Denktash and Turkey regarding this issue. |
My 'sympathy' for the settlers is based on the fact that they are a relatively unempowerd (economicaly and polticaly) group that like immigrant populations the world over are subject to unfair (imo) prejudice. To me if we are to build a better unified Cyprus it should not be at the expense of this group, who in themselves did not create the Cyprus problem. If you imagine a settler population of 3 or 400 thousand then certainly my view would change as they are unlikely to be the 'weaker' group in danger of being 'sacraficed' on the alter of convieience (most expecially by Turkish Cypriot and Turkey who are responsible for encouraging them to come to Cyprus in the first place)
| Kifeas wrote: |
Is the 18% of Greek Cypriots that were supposed to have eventually been allowed to permanently settle within the Turkish Cypriot component state a reasonable amount, too little or too high, assuming that this ratio translates into some 35 thousands of Greek Cypriots? |
My personal view is that the figure is too low. I would hope that in a unifed Cyprus where good will and compromise is exercised by both sides from day one such restrcitions could be removed by mutual consent in a short period of time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Alexandros Lordos
Site Admin
Joined: 19 Aug 2005
Posts: 324
Location: Cyprus/Greece
|
|
| Dhavlos wrote: |
Alex, i read your survey results on the web(the one that was published in the newspapers), and one thing cropped up when i was reading it.
When your survey comparing Turkish Cypriots and settlers talkied about certain issues, i couldnt help notice the settlers were quite split on a number of issues. Is this an age difference, the fact that some have lived with Turkish Cypriots longer than the origional immigrants(their parents) or have the 'children' of settlers become more 'radicalised' in their thought?
it would be interesting to find out.
From your survey, it seems the Settlers are quite reluctant to find the same kind of soltuion that the Turkish Cypriots want!
Thanks in advance |
Dhavlos, I haven't had time yet to do analysis among the settlers only, to see whether age, gender or other factors are influencing the results. I will do so as soon as I can and let you know of the results. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Alexandros Lordos
Site Admin
Joined: 19 Aug 2005
Posts: 324
Location: Cyprus/Greece
|
|
| Kifeas wrote: |
Actually the 33% is wrong. |
Well, yes and no. 
You are right when you say that in the 33% all other non-Turkish speakers will also be included (armenians, maronites, british ex-pats, israelis etc.), so the true percent of Greek Cypriots will be closer to 25%.
Having said that, the 18% that you mention is not permanent. That will only apply up to the 18th year, and then it will be abolished.
As for having a second home without any other residence rights, there is no limit in the Annan Plan to how many Greek Cypriots can do that - it has nothing to do with the 33%. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Kifeas
Warnings : 6
Ministerial
Joined: 26 Aug 2005
Posts: 2733
Location: Location: Pafos-Cyprus, since 1974 ethnic cleansing. Originally, Lapithos, northern occupied Cyprus.
|
|
| Alexandros Lordos wrote: |
| Kifeas wrote: |
Actually the 33% is wrong. |
Well, yes and no.
You are right when you say that in the 33% all other non-Turkish speakers will also be included (armenians, maronites, british ex-pats, israelis etc.), so the true percent of Greek Cypriots will be closer to 25%.
Having said that, the 18% that you mention is not permanent. That will only apply up to the 18th year, and then it will be abolished.
As for having a second home without any other residence rights, there is no limit in the Annan Plan to how many Greek Cypriots can do that - it has nothing to do with the 33%. |
Alexandros, I have a very strong impression that in the last version of the A-plan (AP5) the 18% was meant to be permanent and that is also why the Turkish Cypriot side wanted this to become a primary law of the EU aqui, or in other words to constitute an amendment to the treaty of accession of Cyprus with the EU. The only way that this 18% would ever (or after the 18th year) cease to be permanent was if the provisions of the A-plan had failed to be accepted by the EU member state’s parliaments and governments to constitute a primary law. In addition, the secondary home residents wouldn’t enjoy political rights, by definition. All their political rights would be exercised at their primary residence place, including the municipal ones. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Xenos 2Fan
Warnings : 5
Ministerial
Joined: 16 Aug 2005
Posts: 3499
Location: Dallas,Texas/Mersin, Turkey
|
|
Hello Alexandros and congrats on your new position as co-modorator. Well done.
| Alexandros Lordos wrote: |
Cannedmoose,
I don't think that adopting a "Settlers should stay" approach is the way to solve it ...
Leaving aside for a moment what is popular and what is not, the departure of settlers would make sense on pragmatic grounds.
Firstly, it is impossible to grant Greek Cypriots the right of return so long as the settlers remain. Almost all settlers live on Greek Cypriot properties. Where will we get the settlers to live, if not on Greek Cypriot properties? In the forests and mountains?
This should be up to the newly formed united Republic. They are all living on the island presently and should remain there even if it means to build new towns and cities in the so called "unlivable" areas of Cyprus. With time these towns will spring up.
Secondly, if settlers remain there will inevitably be social friction and probably also violence, between the Greek Cypriots and the Settlers. Such is human nature ...
It is also human nature to have sex with as many beautiful girls as we can but most of us control ourselves. ( sorry for the bad example).
This too should be the concern of the new State that is committed to re-unifying the population. Any friction should be dealt with swiftly and the idea of zero tolerance against violence must be introduced to all inhabitants of the island. I mean that any perpetrator should be arrested and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law with full compliance to all international human rights standards.
Thirdly, if the settlers stay, and Greek Cypriots also relocate to their allotted percent in the Turkish Cypriot component state, then the true Turkish Cypriots would be a minority within the Turkish Cypriot component state: Settlers 30%, Greek Cypriots 30%, Turkish Cypriots 40%.
Please stop labeling. You see how far it has gotten the island. All inhabitants must be viewed as Cypriots, FULL STOP!
Fourthly, if the settlers stay there would also be excessive competition in the job market, leaving many people without a job - again, probably the Turkish Cypriots, since the settlers will have the competitive edge in agricultural labour and the construction industry, while the Greek Cypriots will have the competitive edge in white collar jobs - once they become bilingual.
I believe that when the Moose promulgated this plan he meant to apply it to a post re-unified scenario. After re-unification all embargoes should be lifted and there should be an economic explosion in the north creating enough jobs for most Cypriots. I give credit to the Turkish Cypriots that they are smart enough to figure out that they will need to learn Greek to compete and I am sure they will on a united island. Nothing like competition for a economy.
Allowing the settlers to stay would only "work" in a plan where the Turkish Cypriot component state remains purely Turkish in terms of ethnic origin - like the Annan Plan. If you also want to allow for the return of Greek Cypriots and a mixing of populations, then I don't see there being room for the settlers as well ... |
You will have to make room for the settlers if you want this thing to fly. What some of our friends on forum are suggesting is a modern population displacement that smacks of the population exchanges if the early 20th century (greek/turkish) even if it is financed at market rates. Man, those exchanges of yore really helped turco/greco relations.
I have no problem with providing the incentives but a person should not be forced to uproot and leave. If they chose on their own free will - no problem. But if you insist on displacing these innocent people you are sowing more seeds of hatred. I think the real estate issue should follow the humanitarian issue. This policy will also obtain credibility with the rest of the world and bona fide assistance in solving these issues. In my imho, you guys need to stop looking at numbers and percentages or you will be at it for another 50 years.
Last edited by Xenos 2Fan on Sat Sep 17, 2005 7:25 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
Bullika
Warnings : 1
Ministerial
Joined: 29 Sep 2005
Posts: 3025
Location: World
|
|
| i think theres enough room in cyprus for everyone, nobody needs to be or should be uprooted anymore. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
All times are GMT + 3 Hours
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3
|
| Page 3 of 3 |
| |
 
 
Link Partners
3400 Attacks blocked
|
Register 
Log in 
Album 
Home