William Ralph Inge famously said “A nation is a society that nourishes a common delusion about its ancestry and shares a common hatred for its neighbors.”
There’s no need even to argue that nationalism is the root of Cyprus’division. What was for some people the ideals of freedom and self-determination in a post-colonial wolrd became the bitter disputes that still torture Cyprus and many other societies today.
I’ve had many discussions with friends,mainly of the Left,about nationalism and national identity and have come to accept that what we understand today to be a nation is basicaly an invented tradition. I am still a product of this society though and find it extremely difficult to come to terms with this fact. After all there are plenty of things that make one “nation”different from another that are not made up. To end this confusion I decided to use the term “cultural identity”to pronounce the cultural differences between greek and turkish speaking Cypriots. I am sure many will disagree with my differentiating between Cypriots but I insist on counting two (main) cultural identities on the island simply because the vast majority of Cypriots,including myself,will define themselves in such a way.
So what does reunification mean for the Cypriot identity? Are we going to forge a new nation,creating new delusions and starting to hate our neighbours,or are we going to build a truly multicultural Cyprus? Will Cypriots accept a future in which their country’s administration is not always “one of their own”? Will a federalization of Cyprus take us in the right direction?
Loading ...
A Fairy Story
Would Inge’s definition apply to dogs,pigs,sheep,cynical donkeys and horses?
Quite possibly so.
But the animals also engage in other behaviours &activities. Harvest or leisure,are they less important in determining what one’s collar states?
Is it not the duty of every Benjamin to remind every animal of melodies other than patriotic tunes?
Seek the cultivate greener pastures for all through true common needs,including that of self determination,do not merely replace man-made rags with piggish ones or sheepish ones or…
“to cultivate”,sowwyyy.
The simple answer to your last question is yes. There are political reasons,but also common sense reasons for this:what is the alternative?
On another issue though,identity is not constant. Even if you belong to one of the two major groups in Cyprus,the characteristics of each groups are constantly changing.
The “average”greek cypriot of 2010 is not the same as the one back in 1980. I guess the same goes for the turkish cypriots.
In this sense the federalization of the island will obviously inject new elements,hopefully a lot of tolerance but I do not think the two major groups will have to change fundamentally.
I agree with Strovoliotis. Identity just as culture is dynamic and not at all static. The wrong use of the word culture feeds the whole confusion around the matter of national identity. Because nations do not HAVE a culture,nations ARE cultures. Individuals and groups that share tradition,language etc. are the elements that form a culture. The culture changes as they do in time.
From this point of view,Pavlos is right when he says that GC and TC have different national identities even if it removes lots of romanticism and optimism from the “noble”idea of us becoming one,because,we cannot be one at least not so fast.
We may share a past and I very,very much hope we will share a future,but there are important aspects such as language,religion and many,many years of propaganda turning both groups towards mother and father states that naturally prevent us from sharing an identity.
Greek Cypriots have been taught their “national identity”in schools,at home and in the media. Most of these “teachings”focus on two aspects of our identity:
1. We ARE Greeks (our motherland)
2. We ARE NOT Turks (our enemy)
We have been defining ourselves more through what we are not (turks) as who we are.
This idea that has been nourished for years cannot be changed over night. It is again a dynamic process that will take years.
Undoubtedly we can reach a point of a common national identity,but that will take years of intercultural communication.
I prefer INTERcultural Cyprus a s opposed to MULTIcultural Cyprus.
Multiculturalism although a very positive sounding term,means no more and less of different ethnic groups coexisting in peace whereas interculturalism suggests a permanent interaction and cooperation of different ethnic groups the openness towards diversity and acceptance to the Other.
We have to learn openness. Surely focusing on what GC and TC have in common (which nevertheless is a lot) will help but we should welcome diversity ans learn from it. It will be our future so we might as well make the best of it.
P.S:Great work with this site,keep it up re kopelia!
well..what does “our own”mean?
we are all cypriots as inhabitants..my father still calls people “xeni”/foreigners even if they are from a different village..
surely there are differences in the way people are socialized in each religious-turned-ethnic/national identity..but again,only “we”[the inhabitants] know only too well the maze of what is called “our”national/cyprus problem..foreiners are often justifiably puzzled…:)..it is part of our modern expereince..
the key thing is to realize that the two communities are also constructed..have been constructed in modernity..and within them there are also deep divisions in relation to what may be called political culture and its related imaginary..but that diffuses also into everydayness..people from both communities experienced the events [and thus their constructed memory] from the 40′s to today differently…
and that shows from village coffeshops,to family voting traditons to soccer..
left- wing and right- wing narratives for example are clearly internal deep cultural divisions in each community…
more generally [and this goes beyond the right-left split as can be seen from the 60s onwards] one may say that there are at this moment historically at least 3 communities..greek-cypriots,turkish-cypriots and cypriots..
the former 2 have a hegemonic position in the institutional framework but surely cypriotness is also diffuse in both communities..
and as research shows the boundaries of cypriotness in each community are fluid…as they are in relation to the other community..
“Undoubtedly we can reach a point of a common national identity,but that will take years of intercultural communication”
I agree with postbabylon’s answer. I also like the idea of interculturalism.
Postbabylon says that this common identity will be reached if we are accepting and open towards diversity. I think this is very important if we want to be reunited. I just wanted to add to this a quote from this post (http://www.mahallas.com/2010/01/xenophobia-nationalism-and-collective.html) I read as one working way in which we can achieve this:
“A measure to fight xenophobia,therefore,is to rid ourselves of these oppositional narratives. One way to achieve this is to change the way history is recounted in them,as a number Cypriot academics who have placed the teaching of history in state schools in both communities under scrutiny suggest. Another way is to allow for a multiplicity of perspectives on the history of Cyprus to be heard. Completely different histories emerge”
@backbeatlili:
I agree with backbeatlili.
A different approach to Cyprus history and above all,to the way it is being teached to the “future Cypriots”is vital!
Alas! The Benjamins will continue to decifer (for the other animlas) the commandments and the inscriptions upon the collars.
Unless we discuss common work,play,etc.,that is,the attributes that are of essence to identities,we shall continue focusing on our tags.
Point One:
William Ralph Inge was a priest,an Anglican priest to be more precise. So I am not quite sure for his intensions while writing (or saying) this definition.
I consider Christianity as an aggressive “spiritual” imperialism systematically cultivating people’s obedience through the elimination of local cultures. We are not enemies because we are Christians therefore we all love each other. From my point of view this is an unacceptable concept,a concept that leads to the gradual elimination of identities.
Point Two:
There in need to argue about this,indeed. (Roots of nationalism in Cyprus)
About the “invented tradition”:
Eric Hobsbawm suggests that you can pick a mass of people,place them “somewhere” and create a national identity in 30 years or less even. I believe that this is somehow realistic,even if some of them carry strong memories from a historical past.
After a couple of generations you do have there an open field,a fertile ground to plant “whatever”.
From my point of view though,the roots of the two main communities in Cyprus enjoy deep roots in history.
And they carry two different identities extremely visible in daily life. It’s not only language or religion but also a matter of temperament which is a product of these two crucial elements.
Yes,we ARE different from our Turkish Cypriot compatriots.
As French and English speaking Canadians are.
As citizens of Belgium are.
As,as,as…
But these existing differences are our Common Treasures.
That’s why,many times while writing for the Cyprus Issue I always (and I still do) insisted that the one and only tool for a successful reunification of the Island is a massive investment into the fields of Education and Culture for both communities.
I don’t want to see us becoming Turks as I don’t want to see them becoming Greeks.
And I also don’t want to see a hybrid coming out created in a “laboratory”.
If a clear Cyprus Nation with a clear Cyprus Identity is ever to be born,let us time and history create it.
Otherwise it’s going to be a dysmorphic monster.
I believe that ALL Cypriots will accept a future in which their country’s administration is not always “one of their own” if there is a solid and mutual respect of the differences.
I don’t believe that the problem is with accepting to live in a multicultural society.
That’s a different story!
Multicultural society mean that you have from the one hand a “clear” majority (same language etc) and a variety of minorities coming from different ethic origins.
England is a real multicultural society.
U.S.A is also one.
Canada ,is not. Canada has two different communities,an English one and one French speaking and each community is totally respected for its differences.
The Greek Cyprus State (in a Federation) can be a multicultural State,with citizens from China,Africa,Asia,Europe etc.
In the very same way that will work for the Turkish Cypriot State.
And the only way for a “common culture” which will lead to a common identity is through a successful common economy through partnership for common interests.
That may lead one day into a real unification,meaning “Cypriots” and nothing else.
But that will take generations to happen.
And this is the only natural way for me to happen.
Any other way will bring tragedies.
My vision is two communities sharing the same house,with different rooms and a common playground.
With mutual respect for our different historical elements.
And let the children play in the common “playground”.
In my opinion,it is a trap to think a group of a people under of one nation-state a cultural entity.It is to forget the socio-economical relations that exist in that group and to think a homogenous being whcih in fact in the end can be defined as a nation as the circumstances are satisfied.Does a construction worker have the same let’s say a similar culture with a bank manager?Do they eat at the same place,share a similar ethics or morality,or can these two be found in the same goup of friends? I don’t even mention how similar live two bank managers from two different countries. In the case of Cyprus may be you can say that they are no so different.Still,somehow,I claim and many,you will find they belong to other groups (or is it class?) in the society. And what about the immigrants? Where are they in your cultural identity?
@Adespotos:
I think we should all be carefull,we are mixing up terms. We are talking about national identity,very different than cultural identity.
Though I do like your point that different microgrouips within a group may form different cultures.
Culture can be another flag,another tag.
Why not use true needs instead?
“I am hungry,I need food”
“I am unemployed,I need work”
“I am Young,I need to fall in &out of love. I am alive,I need to enjoy”
As a person you belong to a set/group defined by certain characteristics. While I am Cypriot,I also speak Greek,I have black hair,was baptised Christian,I play basketball or whatever…so I belong to many groups and within each one of these the people that do not belong to the group are outsiders. The same goes for national or cultural identities. If you ask me every single identity we have is artificial –how do I belong to a nation if I can live in another place of earth for x number of years,get another passport and change nationality. I can change religions just as easily,I can dye my hair…. and what if it happened that I was born of another race –would anything be different?
So reading too much into this “identity”only causes problems. All groups are artificial,based more on survival needs than anything else.
If there is a cultural identity that says everyone that eats shieftalia is Cypriot,then I assume everyone eating pasta is kinda of Italian…
The problem in Cyprus is that we take a very narrow view of the term identity,celebrate the accomplishments of people that lived here thousands of years ago and ignore the similarities we have with others.
@Adespotos
I insist on Inge’s definition and stress the word “delusion”not only regarding ancestry but the rest that consists a “nation”. The same goes for any kind of identity. We argue that we are all the same with the same ease we can argue that we are each a unique individual. What matters is that people feel that they have to define themselves in one way or another. Whether that is a nation or a political party or ideology or the brand of car they drive,we all do it! What any country needs to impart to its citizens through practice and education is tolerance and even more:we should learn to appreciate and enjoy all cultures that are present.
@politispittas
I think you must also learn to tolerate and even appreciate thoughts even if they are coming from the clergy
First of all,i do not agree with Inge…
We all belong somewhere by the time we are born or maybe later when we grow up (or live and participate) in a society. I use also the term Cultural Identity although there is no doubt that by that we are refering again to the national identity in a modern way of thinking…
Pavlos wrote:“There’s no need even to argue that nationalism is the root of Cyprus’ division.”
That is true. But how did it come to nationalism and division?
Before the appearance of nationalism,there was the struggle for defending the right of selfdetermination,meaning to protect the IDENTITY. So,if there is no respect to the existing identities,we may have new troubles again in the future…
P. S. It is very funny to watch people who think nations are “delutions”,trying to create a new nation and in this case a…cypriot one…
@milaz
I think it was this stupid idea of cultural/ethnic identity that created the whole problem –and the first unforgivable mistake was the struggle against the British –for what reason? I wonder:Was it really all happened because of our strong will to have the right to be identified as the dark haired,Greek speaking,shieftalia eaters those crazy people fought for?
@Demon:
I hope I am right when I detect some irony in there…
@postbabylon
some?
@Lemesia
I did not argue for a new nation because like you say that would be ludicrous.
The struggle was not to protect the identity but for self-determination which translates as the right to self-government or at least the right to choose your government. Identity was safe with and without the Brits.
@Demon
Come on! Cultural/ethnic identity is not a stupid idea but a product of human society like so many other things. Please try to think of history in context. WWII was over,people believed a new age had dawned,countries were being de-colonised and Cypriot society worked the way it did. Do you really think that the typical EOKA member was the same as these neo-nazi types we see today?
@Demon
Damn! Missed that!
The comment still stands though…
@Demon:
@Pavlos:Pavlo,my P. S. was not refering to your text.
“Identity was safe with and without the Brits.”you wrote…
I do not believe that people were sharing this opinion at that time. Actually,there was a great pressure against everything greek on behalf of the British. On the other hand,while the wish of the Greek Cypriots for enosis/unification with Greece was becoming louder and louder,the fear of the Turkish Cypriots about their IDENTITY was increasing as well. So,if we look at it closer,the lack of respect for each others difference and national identity was the real reason for all the violent fights that followed…(There is no argue that not only the British,but also the Greeks and the Turks played a fatal role towards division,mainly for keeping their influence on the island…)
The ability of the 2 communities to blend and the likelihood of a gradual cultural convergence will depend PRIMARILY on the nature of the federal solution.
If Turkish-Cypriots are treated as “winners”who are enjoying the spoils of war at the expense of Greek-Cypriots,then cultural convergence will be hard to achieve.
For example,if GCs lose their property rights against their will (i.e. they are not offered the choice between restitution,exchange and compensation,hence ensuring fair reward),or if the 18% TCs,who own an even lower land %,end up getting 29% of land and 55% of coastline,or if GCs are grossly underrepresented in the federal bodies in relation to the population,then it is highly likely that serious problems will arise.
@the Idiot Mouflon:Worthless is the nation that does not gladly stake its all on its honor.
For most Greeks,nation,and more especially the Greek nation,has a metaphysical,transcendentalist meaning. Sadly,behind this lies a latent,anti-westernism which has become a tradition not only for the left but also for the right. Any attempt to describe in a scientific way the meaning of “Nation”is considered to be a sacrilege. This was made very evident in the Greek world and in Cyprus quite recently,when some enlightened scientists tried to introduce new history books to schools that would be free of exactly those elements that create such stupid illusions about nations. Normally anyone that is caught going against the grain is labeled an agent of foreign powers. This is very sad indeed,mainly because it hinders progress.
The aim of every political association is the preservation of the natural and imprescriptible rights of man. These rights are liberty,property,security and resistance to oppression.
If a nation values anything more than freedom,it will lose its freedom:and the irony of it is that if it is comfort or money that it values more,it will lose that,too.
@Χριστόφορος:What is a political association?
there is a very serius post in the coments signed by p.pittas but nbody comments on it.is hard?
Demon what u mean?
@jean
p.pittas’post is ideed serious and interesting. Personally I don’t have anything to add apart from disagreeng with his judgement of Inge solely by virtue of his being a priest.
@χριστόφορος
Can you tell us wahat you mean exactly? It reads like an excerpt from some kind of manifesto…
@ Raftis
It is interesting to see what is happening elsewere in relation to identity and education. Here is an extract from the UK Department of Education &Skills:
“A recuring danger in teaching and learning about cultures is that pupils will get the idea that each culture is distinct from all others. The reality is that boundaries between cultures are porous and frequently unclear.
Identity and Belonging:Every individual belongs to a range of different groups,and therefore has arange of different royalties and affiliations. Also and partly in consequence,all individuals change and develop. Pupils need to know and feel confident in their own identity but also be open to change and development and to engage positively with other identities”.
This is clear evidence that you are a British Agent,says the “Organisation of GREEK Educationist of Cyprus Secondary Education”
@politispittas:
“But these existing differences are our Common Treasures.”
clap clap clap.
could’nt have put it better myself.
I disagree on the way you see Canada. Beyond the two majorities,English and French,Canada is one of the classic migration states. The different origins of it’s people reflect the melting pot that it is. The same goes for the US. I believe someone here used the word hybrid. Which is,according to my opinion,what happened in these two cases.
We therefore,should not strive assimilation. We should not work towards becoming a melting pot,besouse diversity is our “common treasure”as you said. Diversity should run the engine.
I would like to imagine future Cyprus more as a mosaic,one that has it’s pieces stuck very close to one another.
P.S:
I would really like to see what TCs have to say about all this.
@Christoforos
Oh,My Darling Clementine
In a cavern,in a canyon,
Excavating for a mine
Dwelt a miner forty niner,
And his daughter Clementine
Oh my darling,oh my darling,
Oh my darling,Clementine!
Thou art lost and gone forever
Dreadful sorry,Clementine
Light she was and like a fairy,
And her shoes were number nine,
Wearing boxes,without topses,
Sandals were for Clementine.
Oh my darling,oh my darling,
Oh my darling,Clementine!
Thou art lost and gone forever
Dreadful sorry,Clementine
Drove the ducklings to the water
Ev’ry morning just at nine,
Hit her foot against a splinter,
Fell into the foaming brine.
Oh my darling,oh my darling,
Oh my darling,Clementine!
Thou art lost and gone forever
Dreadful sorry,Clementine
Ruby lips above the water,
Blowing bubbles,soft and fine,
But,alas,I was no swimmer,
So I lost my Clementine.
Oh my darling,oh my darling,
Oh my darling,Clementine!
Thou art lost and gone forever
Dreadful sorry,Clementine
How I missed her! How I missed her,
How I missed my Clementine,
But I kissed her little sister,
I forgot my Clementine.
Oh,My Darling Clementine,youtube
Ό,τι είναι ο νους και η καρδιά για τον άνθρωπο,είναι και η Ελλάδα για την οικουμένη.
Βόλφγκανγκ Γκαίτε
@Χριστόφορος
Please avoid using languages other than english. It really spoils it for the rest and is disrespectful to those that don’t speak it.
Also throwing in quotes without explaining their relation to what we are talking about only kills the conversation.
@Postbabylon
I think some of the comments have come for turkish speaking cypriots.
@Sceptic
A misbalanced solution can indeed make the situation worse. I think the conversation on the governmental aspects of the solution will be dealt with in a different post so I won’t continue it now.
It seems to me you are falling into a classic trap when you talk about victors and losers. It is typical that both sides of the cyprus problem think of themselves as the losers. The communities’inerests are not mutually exclusive and looking at it in that way leads to more problems.
@Χριστόφορος:Μόνο που η σημερινή Ελλάδα δεν κατοικείται από Έλληνες,αλλά από βάρβαρους που έμαθαν Ελληνικά.
PLEASE MAKE YOUR GREEK COMMENTS IN THE GREEK SECTION!!
@Pavlos:So sorry,couldn’t resit the temptation …
@Pavlos
I am glad you recognise that a misbalanced solution will make matters worse.
Given that the objective of this forum is to assist,in practical terms,in the reaching of a solution that will reunify the island,I am surprised at the volume of theoretical,academic,and “arty-farty”(pardon the term),discussion of this topic –as opposed to what is,in my view,by far the most critical factor at play,i.e the nature of the solution.
Choosing to not discuss the “fairness”or “balance”of a solution,the definition of these terms and the impact it will have on each community is akin to ignoring the elephant in the room.
@Sceptic
We are not choosing to not discuss these things. It is just not in the scope of this particular post.
“fairness”and “balance”are very much subjective terms,especially in politics and their definition has a lot to do with the subject we are discussing. That’s why this conversation is not at all “artsy-fartsy”but at the very essence of what we call reunification. If a solution of any kind fails to address the issues of nationalism/identity/tolerance it will be disatrous.
As for winners and losers I am not too worried because a solution will have to pass through a referendum. The result of a democratic process does not include winners or losers.
@Χριστόφορος,
Goethe meant classical Greece,Goethe was an active participant of the Weimar Classicism Movement,Goethe saw Classical Greece as the main inspiration of the European Enlightenment.
The Enlightenment that Greece never experienced unfortunately mainly because of the clergy.
*sorry Pavlos
))
@Pavlos
“If a solution of any kind fails to address the issues of nationalism/identity/tolerance it will be disatrous.”
Indeed –however,the ONLY way of effectively addressing these issues is to ensure that the solution does not violate the fundamental human rights of all Cypriots. Do both communities share this view? If not,then the whole thing is doomed from the start and all of the above discussions are irrelevant.
“As for winners and losers I am not too worried because a solution will have to pass through a referendum. The result of a democratic process does not include winners or losers.”
Not necessarily –if for example GCs are blackmailed into saying Yes on the basis of the “it’s either this or partition”dilemma(which Christofias has already tried).. i.e. be presented with 2 options both of which abolish their fundamental human rigths.. then they will indeed feel like losers at whose expense TCs have made unfair gains (e.g. land,property etc).
It’s kinda weird that although there is not one T/c participating in this dialogue we have to keep it going on in English –and it’s kinda funny when it turns out to be the usual nonsense talking about classical Greece vs modern Greece,the enlightened vs the barbarians and the clergy etc etc …blah blah blah (what all these have to do with epanenosis and the solution of the Cyprus problem?
And where are those T/c participants?
Come on guys talk and don’t worry Greeks always have to end the dialogue with nonsense talking about classical Greece when it comes to the identity topic. It’s a kind of tradition you have to get used to it…
@Demon
I think two t/c have commented. I hope many more are following. Don’t forget that this is only the first discussion topic in english,it’s not that simple…
I think the commentary has been very interesting and the subjects you mention have only been in the last few comments.
Maybe you could offer us an interesting viewpoint on the subject instead of sarcasm?
@Sceptic
The issue here was Identity and I opted to redirect it from race/culture to fundamental common needs (food,work,happiness) via questions. You prefer to totally divert the discussion towards the general tag of “human rights”.
I bet you one dish of shish-kebab that any subject –even the color of a Federal Flag –can be redirected there. I bet you a coca-cola to go with it that if we raise the issue of “Flag”… someone will do exactly as described above.
Nevertheless…
Right after independence,the fundamental human rights of Cypriots were violated by Cypriots themselves. Guess who had the upper hand then. It starts with Greek and ends with Cypriots.
What about the right to protect one’s self or community from such a situation?
Given the historical background of the whole mess,I expect from you a detailed description of how that can be achieved outside a Bi-zonal,Bi-communal Federation. I also expect –since you accepted consent as a pivotal factor –an analysis on how the “other side” will be encouraged into consenting for anything less than BBF with special provisions that offer them exactly this type of protection.
An explanation
Under the lyrics of “Oh,My Darling Clementine” there is a link to Youtube. There you can listen to the melody of the song. Try to figure out what it reminds you of. In case you ask yourself ”how did this become the tune for ‘It was the 1st of April’…”,consider the fact that this melody was also used by boy-scouts,an organization that was present in Cyprus since 1913.
@Raftis:
Political parties and others (like this blog) that have or try to have political influence.
@Idiot Mouflon
1. I will not subscribe to the “we did a lot of bad things to TCs,so we need to be punished”mantra that our president is advocating. Neither I,nor 99.99% of GCs,violated anyone’s human rigths in the 60s.. so it is unacceptable that my or your human rights should be abolished because of this 50 years later.. not to mention that we all know who started the trouble back then (first intercommunal killings were done by TMT,NOT GCs!!),and why (Turkey’s plan for Cyprus). Those few GC and TC criminals who acted illegally in those days should be prosecuted.
2. I did not suggest that I am against the BBF basis. I fully support this,provided it respects human rights and is fair and balanced. Human rights are expressly mentioned in the relevant UN resolutions –this is even more important now that all of Cyprus is EU land. Also,for the record,nowhere in the definition of a BBF does it include that:
- for X years in every term the 82% GCs must have a Turkish/TC president with winning vote,purely on the basis of ethnic/racial criteria;or that
- GCs will lose the right to their properties,and/or that
- the 18% TCs (with an even lower land ownership %) should have 29% of land and 55% of coastline
(you can have a fine BBF with a TC component state of around 18% of land &coastline and with a permanent GC president and TC vice-president).
@Demon
You are asking for ΙD tags(dabella/ ταμπέλες) such as T/C or G/C,which personally are insufficient to define me(actually many) but for your sake I publicly announce I am T/C.
@ postpbabylon
I think I am not mixing up terms. Nationalism is a made up thing,there is no doubt,it is a product like your laptop on your desk and servers for many things. I won’t discuss them since;I hope and guess,everyone here is aware of it. It is a global trend in many studies to analyse things with culture. Since class analyse is dangerous to our precious system it has gone to garbage (not totally and some are still using it) and nationalism reminds us not good memories or we don’t buy it anymore or it is also somehow outdated (ok not totally I am not a blind optimist) etc. Now they found the culture,and it sounds very nice and harmless. But let’s speak for the Cyprus case;it is still a way to separate both societies. As I said it before,with the given circumstances the cultural identity replaces the national identity. They are replaceable,the term culture is not global,it still divides the world map into countries. Nationalism,I continue with the example of laptop,is not a static tool and meaning (technology bears meanings as well),also it does not always provoke same reactions and actions. It is subject to change as everyone and everything. If you listen many ordinary T/C / (included syndicalists,leftists,so-called progressive people etc) you will hear racism to settlers which is based on cultural difference.
I would like to say few words about class and authority but time does not allow me. I post it anyway,it is more interesting since it gets more critics
Fortunately or unfortunately Greek Cypriots carry their Greek (I d rather say Hellenic) identity. Schools may cultivate nationalism but the notion of belonging to a wider group sharing a common language and a common cultural background is not does not make you a nationalist,no way!
Our literature,our poetry is part of the Hellenic Literature not matter if we mean Philosophy (Zenon for example) or “belle lettres” etc. The very same with music either art songs (entehno) or traditional / folk which is obviously a part of the wider Hellenic folk corpus.
I will agree 100% with Postbabylon for the Inter Cultural rather the Multi cultural society. The “Inter” defines a better world,a fair in pluralism world than the chaotic “multi”. (Διαπολιτισμική ή Πολυπολιτισμική κοινωνία)
And I will also agree 100% for our need to learn Openness.
But to be Open in a constructive and honest way,first we need to love ourselves. Do we?
Adespote,T/c and G/c are not just ταμπέλες. Are people with certain identities –both national and cultural. If not anything else signs don’t kill each other,they don’t occupy and separate lands.
I asked for the T/cs to speak up because that’s the only reason we all try to make comments in a third language –something not so easy for some of us. So I’m glad to know that at least one actually is here and makes interesting comments
Pavlo,if nothing else my “sarcasm”made adespotos to come up and make clear that all this english commenting an posting is not made for nothing.:)
On the topic,my opinions are pretty much in harmony with Politis Pittas first comment,so I didn’t find it necessary to double on that…
@Sceptic
“…we did a lot of bad things to TCs,so we need to be punished…”
I did not say that. Those are your words and your understanding of things.
I clearly said that “TC have the right to be protected from such things”.
***
“…Neither I,nor 99.99% of GCs,violated anyone’s human rigths in the 60s…”
Not exactly true.
Find a copy of Cyprus’s Constitution. Turn to Article 2) 7.
It states that married women must take either the TC or the GC identity,according to that of their husbands’. This clearly violates ALL women’s rights.
Add to that the fact that GC were the majority and try to figure out how that would benefit them in terns of population. See,ones does not even need to refer to the killings.
***
The UN also offered us this: Resolution 649
Now consider the following:
1) Individual Rights vs. Individual Rights
2) Rights of one Community vs. Rights of Other Community.
3) Rights of both Communities as a whole.
In the first and second case,when we have a clash of Right(s) A with Right(s) B,one should aim to find –through consent –ways to maintain the rights of both.
Remember that clashes do not appear only in relation to identical rights,it is quite possible that … for example… Right A (to settle freely within one country) clashes with Right B (to be free of human rights’ violations as they occurred in the 60’s).
One must be very cautious when making claims that right A is “heavier” than right B or vice-versa. Remember,there could be countless other examples and if you try to hierarchically tramp the other side’s rights,the very principles you might use to support this may later be used in order to tramp some of your rights.
Therefore one must try to seek consent and a balance between the various rights.
However,if that proves impossible,one naturally turns to the bigger picture.
For example,in the case of one individual right vs. the other … and with all other parameters being equal … one must turn to “the good of the whole”,be it a community or a country as a whole.
(It is in this manner that,for example,the right for free expression can be tramped by the rights of the whole in cases of “fighting words”).
In that case,with the greatest possible consent always being in our minds and also keeping in mind the historical background of the problem,does not the right of the “whole” to live in a united country and in peace … allow for some restriction of some rights involving …say … free settling or amount of land per canton?
Do we not ourselves seek refuge to such a syllogism when we argue in favour of restrictions to the number of mainland Turks that can be inserted into a Federal Cyprus as citizens,even if Turkey enters the EU?
***
If the BBF that you suggest does not take into consideration the worries of both sides and the syllogism displayed above… then … “hasta la vista baby”…
@Idiot Mouflon
It is one thing for the TC to enjoy a certain level of protection and a completely different thing to make substantial gains at the expense of GCs (in a zero sum as opposed to a win-win context) –on the basis of the “realities”imposed by brutal force,ethnic cleansing and colonisation of stolen areas.
By DEFINITION,a BBF means that the TC community will have all the protection it needs –even though I consider this is hardly needed on EU land –not to mention the Turkish guarantees it is bound to have (hopefully just on the TC component state).
Your above analysis does not provide ANY justification for a solution that includes the 3 elements I set out above. TCs can be perfectly safe and enjoy their full individual and community rights in a TC component state covering 18% of land and coastline,without restrictions on the human rights of GCs and with a permanent TC vice-president at the federal level.
Anything over and above this would in my view represent “loot”that TCs are demanding at the expense of their compatriots through Turkey’s military force. If GCs are blackmailed into accepting such terms (effectively of “surrender”),then the future of the new federal state will be uncertain as there will be a constant source of friction,likely to fuel new trouble for Cyprus –which would land us in a worse position than the (bad) position we are in today.
I see a lot of people here that want to be punished for the “dreadful”things done against the Turkish- Cypriots. They might enjoy punishment,after all masochism might be a deviation but it is there choice,but nobody give’s them the right to call for the punishment of the rest of us…the normal people.
By the way in Cyprus live Greeks or to be accurate Hellenes and not just Greek speaking people.
@Sceptic
“Bound to have”(with relation to turkish guarantees) ?
Not.
It is still under negotiation and if I am not mistaken …Christofias (along with the entire Natioal Council) declared this as a “red line”.
***
“…(in a zero sum as opposed to a win-win context)…”
Not.
The return of land to GCs is still under negotiation and this will be achieved without a single shot being fired.
Also,I had already mentioned our demand for a limit to Turkish citizens transferring to cypriot citizenship even if Turkey joins EU.
More importantly,by DEFINITION …(see resolution 649)…a BBF excludes the possibility of union of part or the whole of the country with a “motherland”,something which became our demand after 1974,1977 and 1979.
Furthermore,the return of some refugees and the option to claim compensations is still on the table.
Etc,etc.,etc.
***
The basis for ethnic/racial criteria preexisted due to the 1960 constitution.
It was then strengthened by our foolishness.
***
“…TCs can be perfectly safe and enjoy their full individual and community rights in a TC component state covering 18% of land and coastline,without restrictions on the human rights of GCs and with a permanent TC vice-president at the federal level.
Did you ask them?
If the BBF you suggest implies thatm WE will determine how THEY will feel safe…forget about it. Did you not stress yourself the need for consent amongst the cypriots themselves? Does that mean only GC.?
Nice try though.
@Χριστόφορος
Thanks for the wonderful illustration of the subject!
Read the post and all the comments and try again…
Hmmm.. Interesting how a discussion on identity turned into statements about “where are T/Cs”before deciding on what to do with those labels/terms etc. Sorry,I could not read through the whole thing carefully. But let me chime in as a ‘T/C’about the original post,more or less ignoring the lengthy (but important) comments.
“So what does reunification mean for the Cypriot identity? Are we going to forge a new nation,creating new delusions and starting to hate our neighbours,or are we going to build a truly multicultural Cyprus? Will Cypriots accept a future in which their country’s administration is not always “one of their own”? Will a federalization of Cyprus take us in the right direction?”
There is always a bit of “fetish”about having an “identity”or a “nation”. Looking back to years of writing here and there,arguing about these topics,I realize that I do the same often too. It is a good defense against those with nationalist,xenophobic,racist etc tendencies. Invent something other than the “friend”or the “foe”and we will do fine for a while,until they figure out how to attack that one too.
But if the question is what I *want* for the future,then the answers is a society where these are less relevant than they are now. When I look around,I want to see humans who are living in a prosperous,happy society without any real effect of the distinguishing features like nationality,religion,language,ethnicity etc . As long as this does not happen,I won’t be satisfied with the labels and how they evolve.
Inevitably,we will have political structures (at least in the short run) that will depend on ethnicity etc in Cyprus but we do not have to let them control our lives beyond their political roles. We do not have to be satisfied with their presence either.
Whether we will speak out more often as “Cypriots”or continue to use additional definitions like Greek -Cypriot,Turkish-Cypriot etc,I do not know. The important thing is their effect on our lives.
Ok,getting late.
@politispittas:
We cannot deny the sense of belonging,it is naturally and socially impossible,and as you say,it does not make us nationalists. But then again,the way we express our “belonging”to others could be nationalist,or not.
Your comment ends with a very interesting and well put question:I dont know if we do love ourselves(i.e. our identity –oh-oh tricky word again:-)),but I believe that in order to do so,we need to get to know “us”very,very well. We need get to get to know “us”from scratch,in a neutral context,in order to evaluate us.
A child that does not know what a zebra is,will describe it as horse…or a donkey with stripes,untill the day it finds out that it is indeed,a different animal,with –admittedly- many genetic similarities to a horse and to a donkey,but yet different enough to be entitled to an own name.
I was told to be a horse for many many years,until I noticed my stripes:-)
Just a simple example for the sake of visualisation. Dont take it to seriously.:-)
123 testing,i ve just written a 1000 word post and it disappeared…
Now it worked,in summary …i believe language will always be the barrier that will separate the two identities and the anchor for the other diferences
and that both communities have people that will never stop reminding and exagerating those differences
and the fact that the solution will be unfair for some people in both communities and the people mentioned above will never stop reminding and exagerating them,
and the fact that those people are among our leaders in both communities
and the fact that in general the leaders in both communities are,to say it politely,not of good quality
make me very pessimistic about this solution
Language…Certainly an issue if we can not communicate. One of the deliberate consequences of the “hard barrier”that was sustained for decades.
Keep in mind we have somehow managed to live for centuries without becoming fully bi-lingual. We have many more resources now and many of us speak English. We will have to see how it evolves but I do not think it would hinder the chances of a “reunification”.
Everywhere,there will be people who will exaggerate some differences like ethnicity,language,economic class,geographic origin etc. We either have to live in “purified”places and under “iron fist”rule or grow up and learn to look beyond those. I hope we will do the latter and as I said earlier,I won’t be satisfied until we do.
Now I see all the comments I really doubt if there is one woman member in this blog.If there is not,it is another clue that the Cyprus problem was also a product of patriarchial,gerontocratic and traditional Cyprus society(not societies.these features unite all of you/most of you whether or not you realize it) and for the probable divided Cyprus in recent future.I hope I am humiliated when you tell me nearly 50% of the blog is made up of woman presence.
@Bananistanos
“…to say it politely,not of good quality…”
Understatement of the year !
@Adespotos
There must be 10 to 12 women amongst the contributors.
@Adespotos
Are you looking for dabelle re?
@Adespotos:
there is at least one,here!
Ah now I liked more this blog.I think My only prejudice is against the man who is speaking Cyprus problem.That’s my flaw no one is perfect.
@ Idiot Mouflon
I tried hard to find arguments in your response that cover the points I raised.. and couldn’t really find any..
Turkish guarantees –are you seriously doubting that any solution will have these,at least in relation to the TC component state?? I am happy to bet on this if you are..
Re BBF and union with other countries etc:What are you on about? Of course BBF excludes this,but why is it relevant to the above debate?
Re “return of some refugees”and “option to claim compensation”etc.. feel free to talk like this in relation to your own properties.. but not about other people’s properties.. this is an individual right that cannot be negotiated on a collective basis without the owner’s explicit authorisation.
Finally,as this topic is about cultural &identity convergence post-solution,I agree that consent needs to be sought. That is why I am trying to look at things from the TC perspective too.
The vast majority of GCs would prefer a unitary state,with the 18% TCs having just minority rights and nothing else. The TCs want two largely separate states. IF GCs ever actually accepted a BBF,it would be a major concession –don’t forget that this was Turkey’s initial demand post-74 that our leadership (not the people) eventually accepted.
This BBF,however,to have a chance of passing referenda on both sides,in my view needs to be as painless as possible for GS,while maintaining the key protection features for TCs. Having a land split on a fairer,proportional basis (82:18) and permanent TC VP would address most of the difficult issues and have a decent chance of success. If,on the other a plan similar to Annan is put together,then it is certain it will be rejected.
Hey! Boobs alert.
Ulugeyik I think I’m in love with you. No really. Your kind of positive ambition can make a woman very happy. And if I could only pronounce your name,I might actually not copy paste it
@Sceptic
On Turkish guarantees. If you find me “not serious:then I guess you feel the same about the unanimous decisions of the National Council as well. Try fooling them into a bet.
BBF and union with other countries is relevant to what we gain from a BBF solution.
On refugees and properties. If this is so… then the same goes for every Turkish citizen who –in the case of Turkey joining the EU –will want to move to Cyprus. We ask for a deviation and a restriction of fundamental (and European) rights but deny others the right to do so…
You are the one who deviated from the topic and I only accommodated your needs.
“…The vast majority of GCs would prefer a unitary state,with the 18% TCs having just minority rights and nothing else….”
How is that different from the Constitution of 60? Is that what you mean by BBF?
“…IF GCs ever actually accepted a BBF,it would be a major concession…”
Which our leaders –Big Mac included –accepted as the only viable solution a long time ago.
You insist on interpreting how others would “feel safe”. If this is a characteristic of the BBF you want then… you are right. We might as well abandon the whole idea.
Any possible referenda will fail because of the lack of willingness to prepare the people and tell them the truth instead of feeding their fears. Like throwing the “XXXXX XXXX” scare-word.
Sceptic,you are writing solely for the ears of fellow Greek-Cypriots. Being one myself,I’ve heard all this before and it bores me to tears.
@Idiot Mouflon
Thanks for your comments.
Re Guarantees:Time will show who’s right..
Re union with other countries:This is in no way a gain,because as things stand today this restriction already exists!
Re property rights v “right”of Turks to freely settle in Cyprus –you are purposely misleading readers by comparing the two. One has nothing to do with the other. One is the absolute individual right to EXISTING property one owns,which is protected by courts everywhere(as most recently shown by the Orams case). The second relates to the conditions that may be imposed on migration flows from one COUNTRY to another in the context of the EU in order to protect small COUNTRIES from losing their character and has ALREADY been legally used within the EU. Cyprus has every right to impose a ceiling on migration (from ANY country joining the EU,not just Turkey). This is in no way the same as depriving an owner from his existing property in his own COUNTRY.
Re BBF v 60 constitution:of course the 2 are not the same and by BBF I mean exactly what the relevant UN resolutions say –that Big Mac signed.
My note made it clear that I personally accept a BBF as opposed to a unitary state,as do most of our leaders,however the GC people have never approved this. At risk of repeating myself,I believe that the only way GCs will approve a BBF at referendum is for this to be made as painless for them as possible,while still being a BBF,hence satisfying both communities –which may result in a solution and epanenosi (the forum title).
Surely,you are not advocating that TCs should be able to choose whatever type of BBF they want without any compromise.. because this would never be pass on our side –hence ensuring epanenosi NEVER happens.
@Sceptic
The whole rhetoric of what “T/Cs get”and “what G/Cs get”is a trap. We should learn to think also in terms of what do we,the Cypriots get. I am not saying to compromise G/C rights in favour of T/C right or vice-versa but that we should throw the common good on the balance as well. That’s what nationalism has taken away from us.
As for properties I am inclined to believe that property rights have been given up in the past as part of political settlements. The historians with us could enlighten us.
The 18% sounds fair but you have to admit that on an island our size it would have severe problems functioning. It also points to the T/Cs being grouped together in some sense. To me it makes sense that in cases like ours it is the majority that gives up part of their power in favour of the minority. That’s the whole point:absolute numbers simply make minorities irrelevant. Look at Cyprus’representation within the EU for example:in absolute numbers we would be irrelevant and and ineffectual.
@Sceptic
“…Re union with other countries:This is in no way a gain,because as things stand today this restriction already exists!”
Tomorrow?
(A reminder:when Cyprus joined EU some funny people with beards and dark gowns delcared that the Union with Greece had been accomplished. No,I am not implying that anyone should take them seriously. Lord forbid.)
***
Cyprus is of small size. Will we ask for a limit in immigrants from other countries as well? If we do not,will not that imply that our demand is based solely on the origin of those immigrants. e.g.,Turkey?
In the same way that we fear a situation like that,the TC are justified when they present their fear of being suffocated by the majority.
We tried exactly that with the Constitution of 60. We were hoping to strangle them,we were hoping that they would wither away so that we would be free to move on with “Enosis”.
As for individual rights,I already explained how those may sometimes be tramped by the rights of the whole,if it is impossible to avoid a clash between those rights and the rights of the whole. A few comments back,I told you:
“…Now consider the following:
1) Individual Rights vs. Individual Rights
2) Rights of one Community vs. Rights of Other Community.
3) Rights of both Communities as a whole.
In the first and second case,when we have a clash of Right(s) A with Right(s) B,one should aim to find –through consent –ways to maintain the rights of both.
Remember that clashes do not appear only in relation to identical rights,it is quite possible that … for example… Right A (to settle freely within one country) clashes with Right B (to be free of human rights’ violations as they occurred in the 60’s).
One must be very cautious when making claims that right A is “heavier” than right B or vice-versa. Remember,there could be countless other examples and if you try to hierarchically tramp the other side’s rights,the very principles you might use to support this may later be used in order to tramp some of your rights.
Therefore one must try to seek consent and a balance between the various rights.
However,if that proves impossible,one naturally turns to the bigger picture.
For example,in the case of one individual right vs. the other … and with all other parameters being equal … one must turn to “the good of the whole”,be it a community or a country as a whole.
(It is in this manner that,for example,the right for free expression can be tramped by the rights of the whole in cases of “fighting words”).
In that case,with the greatest possible consent always being in our minds and also keeping in mind the historical background of the problem,does not the right of the “whole” to live in a united country and in peace … allow for some restriction of some rights involving …say … free settling or amount of land per canton? …”
***
Don’t we already impose restrictions on TC with regards to their land and their properties?
What is this then?
And this?
I am referring to the authorities of the “Custodian” (I could not find the official translation for “Kidemonas”) of properties belonging to TC who do not reside in the non-occupied area.
Do we not impose restrictions upon that same “right to property” ourselves?
Do we not seek refuge to the “Rule of Necessity” / “Emergency Law” (“Dikaio tis Anagkis”) in order to justify those restrictions?
What is this then?
***
The reason people might object is mainly because…our leaders accepted BBF but never really felt the need to properly inform the people about what this meant. We had a Denktash always on the negative side and this suited the purposes of our leaders:to appear as willing to negotiate before foreigners …and to appear as super-patriots before their own crowd.
***
No,I did not suggest that the BBF should be in the form that only TC want. You are the one that tries to interpet how they should “feel safe”. I merely suggested that negotiations and consent ought to take us to a meeting point.
@Psychia:
Ahhh. I am not so sure about that
Today one of my favorite writers/activists has passed away,Howard Zinn. He has backed up these type of,what you call “positive ambitions”with examples from primarily USA history but world history too. When he said:
“Voting is easy and marginally useful,but it is a poor substitute for democracy,which requires direct action by concerned citizens”,he was not just being a utopic thinker.
@Adespotos,look what you did
@Idiot Mouflon
I think we have exausted this topic and we have different views.. I think you are suggesting that the “protection”of the TC community can be used as a reason to do all sorts of illegal things.. My view is that by definition,a BBF guarantees that the TC state will always have its own TC zone and it will always be ruled by TCs. Accordingly,no “suffocation”can take place. This,however,does not mean that it has to be two and half times in size than properties TCs collectively own (because someone has to lose their own property for this to happen). It also does not mean that there has to be rotational Turkish presidency with a winning vote at the federal level.
Re custodian:The RoC is being far more generous than it could have been.. effectively every TC is able to re-claim their property,in some cases immediately and in others with minimal hassle. Even if they have a complaint they can take it to ECHR and,unlike Turkey,the RoC always adheres. So,sorry,but I will not feel bad about this..
In fact,some say that TCs are receiving hugely preferential treatment in the RoC.. no tax on salaries,free health care (which I do NOT enjoy),no car fees etc.. not to mention that if the LAW was applied to the letter,as you suggest,then TCs crossing the line would probably need to go to court,face criminal charges for supporting (through taxes,military service etc) an illegal entity that has stolen and still occupies part of the RoC,often illegally using stolen GC properties etc etc then serve any prison term and only after that be able to re-claim their properties. [I do not support this - just an extreme view to respond to the extreme view you have put forward]
Finally,to say that GCs reject a certain type of BBF because they have not been properly informed or do not understand it,is to seriously underestimate the intellect of GCs.. many of whom are far more accomplished than the average politician.. The Annan plan was discussed in an extreme level of detail and people formed their own views on it (that’s why very few were influenced by party decisions).
@Pavlo
I am all for the common good.. but not for a zero sum game where TC make unfair gains at our expense..
I agree that the smaller side should have a disproportionally large say in decision making at the federal level in the context of a BBF.. but land &property is a very different issue.. Yes,Cyprus has more “say”than its relative size in the EU.. but try to ask another EU state to cut a piece of its territory and hand it over to you and see what happens.. (or citizens of a state at that)..
“The 18% sounds fair but you have to admit that on an island our size it would have severe problems functioning.”I disagree.. there are states much smaller than this that work fine..
“It also points to the T/Cs being grouped together in some sense.”That is exactly what they say they want.. pure TC state with clear majorities.. only difference is that they want to also have an area two and a half times bigger than what they own,and ethnically cleanse the real owners to achieve this.. can’t have it both ways..
@Sceptic
Of course we have reached the end.
When WE restrict rights it’s ok,WE do if for the good of the whole…
Please,do not bother to comment upon TC social benefits,etc. before you explain how restrictions upon property rights are justified in one case but not in the other.
@Idiot Mouflon
Opinions are like backsides.. everybody has one. The concepts of “rights”,“compliance with law”etc are,on the other hand,objective and factual.
I am able to say that Turkey (through its army and controlled entity,the “TRNC”) violate fundamental rights because of the numerous court decisions and rulings that confirm this.
If you feel “we”(by that I guess you mean the UN and EU member state of the RoC) “restrict rights”please go to the european courts and then come back to say it again. Until then,this is just slander and libel.
Sue me.
By the way
1) Compliance to Law exists even in countries that later deem laws as unjust. It also exists in various countries with significantly contradictory laws.
2) You are deliberately misleading. I did not refer to the Custodian in order to justify Turkey breaking International Laws but in order to explain how an agreed BBF solution would justify some restrictions to some rights.
3) If reference to “they have too many rights”and “the XXXXX XXXX”fails to scare enough people…may I suggest Nessie (the Loch Ness Monster),the abominable Snowman…and if all else fails…Darth Vader.
Επειδή δεν βρήκα αυτούσια την απόφαση,δες τούτη την αναφορά σε συνεδρίαση της βουλής:
“…Σε πρόσφατη απόφασή του,ημερομηνίας 21ης Μαΐου 2007,το Ανώτατο Δικαστήριο της χώρας μας,απορρίπτοντας την προσφυγή αρ. 99/2005 Τουρκοκυπρίων αιτητών,αποφάνθηκε τα ακόλουθα:«Ο Τουρκοκύπριος ιδιοκτήτης δεν αποστερείται της περιουσίας του,της οποίας εξακολουθεί να είναι κύριος. Η διαχείριση όμως της περιουσίας αυτής ανατίθεται,κατά τη διάρκεια της έκρυθμης κατάστασης και για τους σκοπούς που προαναφέρθηκαν,στον Κηδεμόνα. Απλώς,το δικαίωμα κατοχής,διαχείρισης και ελέγχου της περιουσίας υπόκειται σε απόλυτα αναγκαίους περιορισμούς,που συνάδουν με το άρθρο 23.3. του συντάγματος»…”
Το δικαστήριο δεν αποδέχτηκε ότι του στερεί το δικαίωμα της περιουσίας αλλά λέει σαφώς “το δικαίωμα κατοχής,διαχείρισης και ελέγχου της περιουσίας υπόκειται σε απόλυτα αναγκαίους περιορισμούς”.
Τα πρακτικά της βουλής εδώ.
Above are the records of a parliamentary session (31st May,2007)…referring to a court decision about the Custodian.
Although it states that the right to property is not violated,it also clearly states that “…the right to possession,management and control of property undergoes absolutely necessary restrictions”.
Had enough?
Now go tell the judge he is slanderous.
Sometimes it feels like Cyprus is one huge courtroom.
Cool,let’s play “Legal Eagles”…
I’ll be Robert Redford,who want to be Daryll Hannah?
@Idiot Mouflon
Hopefully you are calmer now.. in all the 7 replies you posted,there is not a single fact showing that the RoC fails to comply with the law. Even if that were the case,whoever has a complaint is able to take it to European courts –the RoC,unlike Turkey adheres to ALL court decisions.
@Sceptic:
Slow down. The first thing to do is to exploit all local remedies. RoC is very clever in its handling of the situation by actions like lengthy delays of the “local remedies”.
ulugeyik is right. there are many cases of t/c living in the territory under the control of RoC,who have claimed their land back and did not get it. they tell them to wait for the solution of the Cyprus problem.
@Sceptic
The “calm down”phrase is something you can use in your own house Sceptic,not with me.
It is not an issue of complying to the law.
The very decision of the court admits that there are restrictions to the TC rights to properties. That was the issue we were discussing,in relation to possible restrictions of GC rights in case of a BBF solution.
In the same way that the court justifies (via “Rule of Necessity”) the first restrictions and accepts them as legal…the agreement of GC and TC,the constitution of the BBF and …with the blessing of the EU…the latter restrictions will also be legitimized.
When you recover from the fact that your ignorance or deliberate lies have been exposed…come around for some “Kourtounia”tea.
Now it’s more like a football ground…full of lawyers!
@Idiot Mouflon
Readers can have a look at your 7 consecutive snappy responses and make up their own minds as to whether I was justified to say “hopefully you are calmer now..”.. Your latest reply shows that’s probably not yet the case..
My point was crystal clear:the RoC is not breaking any law and if anyone feels otherwise,he/she have proper recourse (this can in no way be compared to Turkish crimes and contempt of law).
If there is a certain process a TC has to go through to reclaim property,then this can also be challenged and it sometimes is. Similarly,GCs have the right to sue the RoC for the preferential treatment it affords to TCs in many ways.
The “rule of necessity”which you say restricts the rights of the “poor Turks”can be lifted TOMORROW if Turkey takes its troops,settlers and criminal gang (“TRNC”) back to Anatolia and hands back the stolen lands to the owners. TCs have every right to demand the return to the 1960 constitution if they want,and all their rights will now be guaranteed by the EU.
About your wish to deprive GC of their properties and rigths to perpetuity and even try to legitimise this through changing the EU acquis.. go ahead and try it.. you are talking about the properties and the rights of the GC people,not your grandfather’s farm –so the people will give you the answer,as they did in 2004.
Your aggressive writing style shows that it is you that has not yet recovered from your failure to blackmail GCs into surrendering the RoC in 2004..
Sad,really,because I have come on this forum with a view to be constructive and discuss with people what is realistically the best way forward in order to achieve a solution and “epanenosi”,yet some people constantly seek confrontation.
The XXXXX XXXX
The XXXXX Plan
The Annan XXXX
Nessie (the Loch Ness Monster)
The abominable Snowman…
Darth Vader
…
…
…
Nellie the Elephant?