Cyprus finally to be united?

[Crown]

The BBC Reports

It seems that after three decades of occupation and separation, the island of Cyprus will be re-united.

Following huge pressures from the Turkish government Denktash has been brought to heal and told to negotiate. The new president of Cyprus Papadopoulos has also been pressured heavily by Britain and the US (he is more of a hardliner than the former President Cleridies, who Denktash walked out on last year).

The stakes are high. For the Cypriot government it could mean finally reuniting their divided island, and removing 30,000 Turkish troops stationed in the North.

For the Turkish Cypriots, they will be able to enter the EU along with their Greek counterparts, without resorting to fleeing to the South in order to apply for a Cypriot passport.

And of course for Turkey this removes the number one biggest obstacle that is stopping its EU negotiations. For if an agreement is not reached by 1st May, then only the South will enter the EU, Turkey will officially be occupying and EU country, and the Cypriot government will get a veto in EU politics, such as who is allowed into the union.

Well, Mr Annan seems to be busting heads nicely on this issue, and I hope he can find a solution for it.

[HemlockGrey]

For if an agreement is not reached by 1st May, then only the South will enter the EU, Turkey will officially be occupying and EU country, and the Cypriot government will get a veto in EU politics, such as who is allowed into the union.

Wow. They pulled out all the stops.

That said, isn't the northern part of Cyprus predominantly Turkish? I was under the impression that the Turkish Cypriots requested the intervention of the Turkish army, although I've not well versed in (modern) Cypriot history.

[Crown]

For if an agreement is not reached by 1st May, then only the South will enter the EU, Turkey will officially be occupying and EU country, and the Cypriot government will get a veto in EU politics, such as who is allowed into the union.

Wow. They pulled out all the stops.

That said, isn't the northern part of Cyprus predominantly Turkish? I was under the impression that the Turkish Cypriots requested the intervention of the Turkish army, although I've not well versed in (modern) Cypriot history.

The Turkish invasion of Cyprus, as far as I have read is a grey area. As one of the guaranteeing powers (Greece and the UK being the other two), they did have a mandate to protect the integraty of Cyprus, which was being threatened by the Greek Junta, which tried to assisnate the Greek Cypriot President, in order to spark a coup.

Having said that however, the junta collapsed 3 days after the Turkish invasion, and Turkey has been lying through its teeth for the last 30 years by continuing to occupy the norther third of the island.

As for 'protecting' Turkish Cypriots, they have been on mass demonstrations throughout Nicosia since the last talks fell apart when Denktash walked out of the negotiations. Since the Cypriot government allowed the occupied north to come into the south, thousands of Greek and Turkish Cypriots have crossed the boarder to visit their original homes.

The idea that the north was predominately Turkish and the South predominately Greek is a myth. Both communities were mixed and lived side by side.

Also many Turkish Cypriots have left, or are trying to leave. And now there is a real possiblity of there being more Turks from the mainland, than there are Turkish Cypriots in the the Northern third of the island. Which also makes the talks interesting ...

[Admiral Valdemar]

Fuckin' A!

Last time I was there Denktash was still talking with Koffi Annan in Nicosia.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Let's see how many months it is until the democide begins.

[Crown]

Let's see how many months it is until the democide begins.

Democide?

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Democide?

A neologism referring to mass murder across a particular demographic segment.

And why, exactly, isn't it going to happen again? It has every single other time a Christian State has gained territory in the Balkans. Territory is gained, the Turkish/Muslim population is slaughtered. Even the Turks managed to win a war--a war started by Greece to grab more territory from Turkey--the only result was mutual forced expulsions. I could every single war started in the Balkans and I could list the number of Turks killed and the number expelled. Every single time.

So why is this time going to be different?

[Crown]

Democide?

A neologism referring to mass murder across a particular demographic segment.

Ethnic clensing would have sufficed.

And why, exactly, isn't it going to happen again? It has every single other time a Christian State has gained territory in the Balkans. Territory is gained, the Turkish/Muslim population is slaughtered. Even the Turks managed to win a war--a war started by Greece to grab more territory from Turkey--the only result was mutual forced expulsions. I could every single war started in the Balkans and I could list the number of Turks killed and the number expelled. Every single time.

I am sure you could list them all, and I am sure you are going to try and paint the 'horrible and barbarous' Christians as being all bad. I am aware of the incidents and I do not condone them, nor do I shy away from them. Yes they happened, but if you are going to try and paint the Turks as the victims in this scenario, cry me a fucking river, and ask the Armenians how they were treated. I could also run through the list of how many Greeks were living in Istanbul in the early 1900's and how many are right now.

In fact I could go the finger pointing with you all day, but I won't. Do you want to know why?

Because none of this IS IMATERIAL to the realities of today.

So why is this time going to be different?

Perhaps because the issue is so close to the majority of Turkish Cypriots that they voted in a reformer who stood on a policy of re-initiating the reunification talks, and openly critisising that fat cat Denktash.

Perhaps because the Greek Cypriots are also so devided on the issue.

A rough statement is 50-50 for both communities want to see their island reunited.

Add to the fact that Mr Denktash's claims (which you just rather eerily quoted) when the border was re-opened have not happened.

Am I stupid enough to assume that Annan will say; 'You are one island' and poof old animosities go away? Of course not, but Cyprus as an EU country could not and would not EVER practise ethnic clensing, and no matter of hand waving from you is going to change this.

And that my dear, just goes to show what a pathetic little liar you are. You try and draw parallels between two different periods of history, and saying well; the region fits, the ethnicities fit so it must be true! While at the same time totally ignoring the geo-political realities which are fundamentally different between now and then.

You ignore;

• The will of the people who want unification.
• The political pressures on both sides to make this work.
• The realities of today's mass media, and the lesser influence of nationalism, ethnicity and religion in the region.
• And you ignore what the people have to loose if they do commit such acts.

In short you are either of Denktash's paylist, or an idiot. Possibly both.

[Sarevok]

The Cyprus issue has been a major problem for a long time. So it would be good to see it finaly resolved.

[StarshipTitanic]

For if an agreement is not reached by 1st May, then only the South will enter the EU, Turkey will officially be occupying and EU country, and the Cypriot government will get a veto in EU politics, such as who is allowed into the union.

Wow. They pulled out all the stops.

That said, isn't the northern part of Cyprus predominantly Turkish? I was under the impression that the Turkish Cypriots requested the intervention of the Turkish army, although I've not well versed in (modern) Cypriot history.

Turkey has been going out of its way to make it that way, actually, but the original Greek and Turkish Cypriots didn't really see a distinction between each other before.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

I am sure you could list them all, and I am sure you are going to try and paint the 'horrible and barbarous' Christians as being all bad. I am aware of the incidents and I do not condone them, nor do I shy away from them. Yes they happened, but if you are going to try and paint the Turks as the victims in this scenario, cry me a fucking river, and ask the Armenians how they were treated. I could also run through the list of how many Greeks were living in Istanbul in the early 1900's and how many are right now.

The Turks are the victims on Cyprus--direct victims of a Greek policy of territorial annexation of traditional lands based purely on the claims of the Byzantine Empire, which has been gone for nearly a millennia and a half. I am not denying that Greeks were oppressed in Asia Minor; nor did Armenians suffer from bloody and brutal suppressions. Just because one side is guilty of crimes, too, doesn't excuse the crimes of the other side and you know that. If you want to start a thread about the Armenian massacres, go ahead and do it, but they're simply not relevant to the situation on Cyprus--which is the result of a consistant Greek policy pursued ever since the inception of the modern Hellenic state to annex territory at the expense of Muslim populations living there and eliminate those populations, by killing them if necessary.

That drive has no interrelation with the Armenian massacres and the suppression and population exchanges (I have never seen reliable evidence for the so-called "Pontic Genocide") of Greeks by the Turks only started well after this policy was in place; and though not morally excusable is an almost expected response of a State to the policies pursued by the Hellenic Kingdom.

In fact I could go the finger pointing with you all day, but I won't. Do you want to know why?

Because none of this IS IMATERIAL to the realities of today.

That is the question, and though you think it is immaterial, I am, essentially, far more pessimistic about the situation in the Balkans.

Perhaps because the issue is so close to the majority of Turkish Cypriots that they voted in a reformer who stood on a policy of re-initiating the reunification talks, and openly critisising that fat cat Denktash.

I'm not quite sure what you're getting at here--the last time I checked, Denktash was running Northern Cyprus. In regard to the desire for reunification, one could certainly note that the brutal economic sanctions the EU placed on Northern Cyprus would have a great deal with forcing the Turkish Cypriots to heel, quite possibly against their will otherwise, which might indeed be suggested as the case since a Denktash-run government is leading the reunification talks now.

Add to the fact that Mr Denktash's claims (which you just rather eerily quoted) when the border was re-opened have not happened.

I have not read any of his claims, and my statements are generally based on the grounds that at some point the Greek Cypriots will have military power over northern Cyprus. Only then should trouble likely emerge since you're removing the ability of the Turks to defend themselves.

Am I stupid enough to assume that Annan will say; 'You are one island' and poof old animosities go away? Of course not, but Cyprus as an EU country could not and would not EVER practise ethnic clensing, and no matter of hand waving from you is going to change this.

And this is where I take particular exception with your argument. You claim that an EU country "could not and would not EVER practise ethnic cleansing", which is an exceptionally bold statement. We know, for example, that one country soon to be an EU member practises racial discrimination, in the form of Slovakia, where four hundred thousand of her citizens are treated as mentally deficient, subhuman, and ghettoized. But nothing is done about it and this is whitewashed over in the rush to get countries into the new European superstate.

We also have Poland, the Czech Republic, Bulgaria, and Hungary. In Poland Roma children are also sent to schools "for the less gifted"; as in the Czech Republic. In Bulgaria, a prospective EU member, only 12% of Roman children attend school. In Romania, another prospective member, forced child marriages among the Roman are routinely permitted/ignored, just to cast an opposite light on the issue.

This, of course, in a region where it has been less than a decade since the guns fell silent in Yugoslavia, very much in an era of modern mass-media, one of your claims that would prevent ethnic cleansing. Altogether the various sides in Yugoslavia managed to do quite well; the Serbs, in fact, only really got so much negative attention because they had a bad press style. We forget the fact that the Croatians (ooh, there's another state that may be in the EU in a few years, if no set timetable one grants) probably killed nearly as many Bosnians. They just had a better flair with the media and so everyone focused on the Serbs. So there were genocides and counter-genocides and more and now the whole region less than a decade later is working toward EU membership, in many cases with the guilty still in positions of power.

That, of course, ignoring even further the violence in Macedonia, Muslims this time fighting for seperation from the christian majority government, requiring a peacekeeping force. And the Greek chauvinists who make everyone refer to it as the "Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" instead of Macedonia, since, of course, the Real Macedonia obviously is Greek. C'est la vie. When has this modern miracle of peace come over the Balkans, Crown? When? Because it certainly hasn't in the last decade? Was it last week that the guns fell silent and the Roma were admitted equally to the other children in the schools, then? But I didn't hear any great and magical declaration of that, either.

So though I obviously hope that I am wrong and that you are right, the simple fact is that the Turks of Cyprus have every reason to be afraid and quite wary of this situation. There has been no great sea-change in the Balkans, and on Cyprus herself the guns have not been silent all that long either. It may not take much to bring about a horrible occurence should events progress as are now being proposed.

I do think, in general, there is hope for the balkans, but it is the hope of many more generations and that the EU is very foolish to press ahead with expansion as it has, especially into that region in particular.

[Crown]

The Turks are the victims on Cyprus--direct victims of a Greek policy of territorial annexation of traditional lands based purely on the claims of the Byzantine Empire, which has been gone for nearly a millennia and a half.

Bullshit. The Turkish Cypriots on Cyprus are direct victims of a Turkish policy of territorial expansion, and geo-political tug of war. They merely provided the casus beli that Ankara had been hoping for since 1920 when Attaturk said; 'Watch Cyprus. Turkey cannot become a Naval power in the Mediterrenian if it falls into Greek hands.'

Fuck Duchess, I am more than willing to admit the Greek Junta's culpability in this fucking scenario, but be damned if I won't point out that that particular policy of 'enosis' has been dead in the water for 30 fucking years and the Turkish Generals have been lying through their teeth the entire fucking time since.

A little history 101, since you seem determined to view one side of the fucking events.

1. 1950 a new political party appears on Cyprus called the TMT, founding member Denktash.
2. It was armed and supported by Turkey and it had an extreme pro-partition agenda.
3. The great difficulty with TMT’s programme was that it required the uprooting of a quarter of a million people - both Greek and Turkish Cypriots - and their removal from their historic and ancestral lands. It is not surprising therefore that it was opposed by the vast majority of the island’s population.
4. It was also to become the organisational tool through which the geo-political partitionist policy of Turkey was to be enforced in Cyprus.
5. It was a policy which aimed at segregating the Turkish and Greek Cypriots from each other as a prelude to the physical division of the island.
6. During the course of 1957, TMT pressured the Turkish Cypriots into withdrawing from any co-operative ties they had with the Greek Cypriots and, on the whole, they were successful; this policy later became known as the `from Turk to Turk policy’.
7. In Cyprus this crude policy of enforced segregation did not go unopposed amongst the Turkish Cypriots. TMT’s answer to criticism was however rapid and brutal.
8. It assassinated prominent Turkish Cypriots who dared to publicly voice opposition or advocated co-operation between Greeks and Turks.
   1. Fazil Ondur, the chief editor of the weekly newspaper Inkilapci, who was killed on 29 May 1959.
   2. Ahmet Yahaya, a committee member of the Turkish Cypriot Athletic and Culture centre, who was killed on 5 June 1958.
   3. An attempt was also made on the life of Arif Barudi on 3 July 1958.
   4. An other attempt on Ahmet Sadi, the director of the Turkish office of the Pancypriot Labour Federation who, soon after the attempt against his life, left Cyprus to settle in England.
9. The same policy continues today with the assassination in July 1996 of Kutlu Adali, the Turkish Cypriot journalist, who had the courage to condemn the partitionist project of the Turkish military establishment which leads the foreign policy of Ankara, and who advocated closer co-operation between Greek and Turkish Cypriots.

It gets even better, the first serious inter-communal fighting began in June 1958;

I was informed that on 7 June 1958 a bomb had been planted in the Turkish press office in Nicosia by persons who, as was later established, had nothing to do with the Greek Cypriots. The Turks of Nicosia were then incited to be overwhelmed by holy indignation and perpetrated acts similar to those committed on 6 and 7 September 1955 in Istanbul.

The situation is made even more clear when you consider that Turkey invaded the week after 10,000 Greek troops which were stationed in Cyprus was removed! They had no interest in 'protecting Turks' they just wanted to fucking extend their geo-political agenda.

I am not denying that Greeks were oppressed in Asia Minor; nor did Armenians suffer from bloody and brutal suppressions. Just because one side is guilty of crimes, too, doesn't excuse the crimes of the other side and you know that.

Then why the fuck did you bring up 'I could every single war started in the Balkans and I could list the number of Turks killed and the number expelled. Every single time'? Fuck it Duchess, don't you realise that 200,000 Greek Cypriots (1/3 of the Greek Cypriot population) were the victims of ethnic clensing in 1974?

If you want to start a thread about the Armenian massacres, go ahead and do it, but they're simply not relevant to the situation on Cyprus--which is the result of a consistant Greek policy pursued ever since the inception of the modern Hellenic state to annex territory at the expense of Muslim populations living there and eliminate those populations, by killing them if necessary.

See above, a claim which more aptly suits the situation in Cyprus is Turkey's military expansion, not Greece's and I will point out -yet again- that Cyprus from a Greek point of view is a nation in-of-itself, and not a Greek territory. Get your head out of 1974.

That drive has no interrelation with the Armenian massacres and the suppression and population exchanges (I have never seen reliable evidence for the so-called "Pontic Genocide") of Greeks by the Turks only started well after this policy was in place; and though not morally excusable is an almost expected response of a State to the policies pursued by the Hellenic Kingdom.

WHICH NO LONGER EXISTS you fucking retard, but the General's in Ankara are a here and now phenomenon.

That is the question, and though you think it is immaterial, I am, essentially, far more pessimistic about the situation in the Balkans.

Bullshit, you my dear, are a generalist and a fucking scare mongeror.

I'm not quite sure what you're getting at here--the last time I checked, Denktash was running Northern Cyprus.

No. Denktash takes his order's from Ankara, for the past 30 years it was the General's and their lap dogs, today it is Erogan (spell?) who is calling the shots, but he is hardly what anybody would call a lap dog of the Generals.

The person I am referring to is, the 'TRNC' PM Mehmet Ali Talat who stood for a policy of re-unification. Denktash had no option but to appoint him if he wanted to save face as 'democratic' leader even though Talat ran on a policy which directly opposed Denktash.

In regard to the desire for reunification, one could certainly note that the brutal economic sanctions the EU placed on Northern Cyprus would have a great deal with forcing the Turkish Cypriots to heel, quite possibly against their will otherwise, which might indeed be suggested as the case since a Denktash-run government is leading the reunification talks now.

Go fuck yourself.
There were mass fucking demonstrations in Nicosia the last time Denktash walked out of the talks. The appeal of the EU is called 'soft power' and be damned if I am going to fucking shy away from admitting that the legal and justified international isloation of a self-declared country continues. You want to talk about Turkish Cypriots forced to do something? Ask me what happened in the population exchange of 1974.

I have not read any of his claims, and my statements are generally based on the grounds that at some point the Greek Cypriots will have military power over northern Cyprus. Only then should trouble likely emerge since you're removing the ability of the Turks to defend themselves.

Fuck You. You are only perpetituating the myth that as a Greek we cannot go two steps without trying to kill a Turk, while at the same time ignoring the fucking realities that the two communities lived peacefully on the island since the 1930's without inter-comunal violence, and it wasn't until the TMT (sponsered and armed by Turkey) appeared on the island that the major tensions appeared.

And this is where I take particular exception with your argument. You claim that an EU country "could not and would not EVER practise ethnic cleansing", which is an exceptionally bold statement. We know, for example, that one country soon to be an EU member practises racial discrimination, in the form of Slovakia, where four hundred thousand of her citizens are treated as mentally deficient, subhuman, and ghettoized. But nothing is done about it and this is whitewashed over in the rush to get countries into the new European superstate.

Thankyou for finding that particular article, because I was looking for it. I will bring to your attention the following;

Brussels has no power to change the deep-rooted prejudices of the Slovak population. But once Slovakia joins the European club, Bratislava will be expected to play by the rules on minorities and equal rights.

Nothing like shooting yourself in the foot is there Duchess?

We also have Poland, the Czech Republic, Bulgaria, and Hungary. In Poland Roma children are also sent to schools "for the less gifted"; as in the Czech Republic. In Bulgaria, a prospective EU member, only 12% of Roman children attend school. In Romania, another prospective member, forced child marriages among the Roman are routinely permitted/ignored, just to cast an opposite light on the issue.

See above and see The Fundamental rights in the European Union;

The Treaty of Amsterdam reinforces these provisions:

1. by establishing a number of principles on which the Union is founded ("liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law");

2. by giving the Court of Justice powers to ensure that these principles are respected by the European institutions;

3. by providing for sanctions in the event of breach of one of these principles by a Member State (suspension of certain rights of the Member State in question).

Quite clearly the Union promotes states to treat their minorities with respect and dignitiy, and insures that if equal rights and opportunities are not recognised, the Union reserves the right to disicpline a member state, and allows an avenue for oppressed minorities to voice their displeasure. Ask the Kurds if they are allowed schools or radio stations with their own language yet.

This, of course, in a region where it has been less than a decade since the guns fell silent in Yugoslavia, very much in an era of modern mass-media, one of your claims that would prevent ethnic cleansing. Altogether the various sides in Yugoslavia managed to do quite well; the Serbs, in fact, only really got so much negative attention because they had a bad press style. We forget the fact that the Croatians (ooh, there's another state that may be in the EU in a few years, if no set timetable one grants) probably killed nearly as many Bosnians. They just had a better flair with the media and so everyone focused on the Serbs. So there were genocides and counter-genocides and more and now the whole region less than a decade later is working toward EU membership, in many cases with the guilty still in positions of power.

Greece and Cyprus != Yugoslavia and see above.

That, of course, ignoring even further the violence in Macedonia, Muslims this time fighting for seperation from the christian majority government, requiring a peacekeeping force. And the Greek chauvinists who make everyone refer to it as the "Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" instead of Macedonia, since, of course, the Real Macedonia obviously is Greek.

Oh fuck you. 'Macedonia' in Yugoslavia did not even exist in the region until after WWII. It was nothing more than a Communist pipe-dream of Stalin and Tito. And it ranks up there in insulting behaivour with the whole 'Black Athena' fucking book. Apologise if we feel that we have a right to defend our heritige bitch (lets not forget the quaint little fact that FYROM borders the Macedonian province).

But why don't we look at The Hellenic Republic Ministry of Foreign Affaris website to see what they have to say about the matter.

Greece is first among foreign investors in FYROM, having invested over €460 million and having created over 8,000 jobs in the sectors of energy, communications, media, banking, cement industry, marble quarries, food and beverage, tobacco etc.

And,

# Greece has contributed to the process of stabilization of the country by taking part, with a contingent of 400 Greek soldiers, in the NATO operation "Essential Harvest".
# Greece participates in and fully supports the current NATO operation, which was endorsed by UN Security Council Resolution 1371, aimed at contributing to the security of the observers in FYROM.
# A continued military presence is essential to achieving stabilization in FYROM. The implementation of the EU's Operation Concordia (31.03.2003) underlined the Union's commitment to a stable and secure FYROM committed to fully implementing the Framework Agreement and determined to make further progress towards EU integration in the context of the SAP. CONCORDIA is the first operation of this kind ever assumed by the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP).

Wow. Look at us bad Hellenite's looking to expand our 'chauvinist' policy of subjugating our neighbours ...

C'est la vie. When has this modern miracle of peace come over the Balkans, Crown? When? Because it certainly hasn't in the last decade? Was it last week that the guns fell silent and the Roma were admitted equally to the other children in the schools, then? But I didn't hear any great and magical declaration of that, either.

THE MUSLIM MINORITY OF GREEK THRACE

Read and educate yourself Duchess.

So though I obviously hope that I am wrong and that you are right, the simple fact is that the Turks of Cyprus have every reason to be afraid and quite wary of this situation. There has been no great sea-change in the Balkans, and on Cyprus herself the guns have not been silent all that long either. It may not take much to bring about a horrible occurence should events progress as are now being proposed.

Bullshit. See above, and stop perpetuating the myth that as Greeks we somehow lack the intrinsic cognetive function to seperate a Turk from a Turkish General bent on expanding their territorial borders. What you just did Duchess was take such a fucking huge dump on me, and on every Greek equalled only to me suggesting that you as a lesbian 'cannot appreciate herorsim, which is why you are a lesbian'.

I do think, in general, there is hope for the balkans, but it is the hope of many more generations and that the EU is very foolish to press ahead with expansion as it has, especially into that region in particular.

The expanision in the 'region' does not acurately reflect the realites of Greece and Cyprus of today, especially with their attitude of their neighbours. Do you understand that?

[The Duchess of Zeon]

The situation is made even more clear when you consider that Turkey invaded the week after 10,000 Greek troops which were stationed in Cyprus was removed! They had no interest in 'protecting Turks' they just wanted to fucking extend their geo-political agenda.

I'll remind you that Cyprus was originally supposed to be returned to the Ottoman Empire after the restoration of Ottoman territories in the Caucasus, which occured after WWI to the Turkish Republic; the legal heir to the Ottoman Empire. The only reason this did not occur, of course, was the direct annexation of Cyprus because of the opposition of the Ottoman Empire and the British Empire to each other in the Great War. Now that annexation was quite legitimate in the context of the war, but that "geo-political agenda" must be held in the context of insuring territory to which the Turkish Republic had at least a partial claim (one in fact stronger today than in that period--the world of the 21st century is rather less inclined to recognize wartime annexations).

See above, a claim which more aptly suits the situation in Cyprus is Turkey's military expansion, not Greece's and I will point out -yet again- that Cyprus from a Greek point of view is a nation in-of-itself, and not a Greek territory. Get your head out of 1974.

Those two segments were really interlinked in the sense that I was arguing that the Greek advance was part of a precise series of events which were interrelated; the Armenian massacres, et al, however, are not part of this series. Now, you say that enosis is thirty years dead and perhaps this is so. But Cyprus and Greece shall be unified in the grander sense of unity in the European Union, shall they not? Cypriots and Greeks will have free passage between each others' territory; commercial barriers between the island and the Hellenic State will be broken down, and in general it will be no different than traveling between Hawaii and California. That is a relatively clean way to achieve a quasi-sort of union.

WHICH NO LONGER EXISTS you fucking retard, but the General's in Ankara are a here and now phenomenon.

Legally the modern Republic is its heir and in many cases the cultural aspects still remain. As for the Generals in Ankara, their influence has, likewise, been reduced massively in the past thirty years; yet you seem to think they are a dominating force. Why has there not been a coup against the current conservative government, then?

No. Denktash takes his order's from Ankara, for the past 30 years it was the General's and their lap dogs, today it is Erogan (spell?) who is calling the shots, but he is hardly what anybody would call a lap dog of the Generals.

Thank you for proving my point above. And I do not think you have any real evidence that Denktash is an effective government bureaucrat of the Turkish Republic; just that the fact that only Turkish maintains relations with the TRNC requires Denktash to be very heavy reliant on Turkey and very obedient to Turkish policy interests.

The person I am referring to is, the 'TRNC' PM Mehmet Ali Talat who stood for a policy of re-unification. Denktash had no option but to appoint him if he wanted to save face as 'democratic' leader even though Talat ran on a policy which directly opposed Denktash.

Which occured only under duress.

Go fuck yourself.
There were mass fucking demonstrations in Nicosia the last time Denktash walked out of the talks. The appeal of the EU is called 'soft power' and be damned if I am going to fucking shy away from admitting that the legal and justified international isloation of a self-declared country continues.

Yes, sanctions, economic hardship--in fact, a form of warfare. Economic warfare is very much a kind of war in which you inflict pain and suffering upon the enemy to bring them about to your interests. The EU's "soft power" is simply military action without bullets, forcing the people of Northern Cyprus to heel. That is what sanctions have always been. That's what the sanctions against Iraq were, that's what the sanctions against Cuba are, that's what the sanctions agains the DPRK are, and that's what the sanctions against the TRNC are. They may be far less severe, but contextually they are the same. Simply a lesser scale. And under such economic hardship--it is natural that the people hope for prosperity in the only way that it is offered to them.

Fuck You. You are only perpetituating the myth that as a Greek we cannot go two steps without trying to kill a Turk, while at the same time ignoring the fucking realities that the two communities lived peacefully on the island since the 1930's without inter-comunal violence, and it wasn't until the TMT (sponsered and armed by Turkey) appeared on the island that the major tensions appeared.

I am not talking about the period on Cyprus before the partition; I am speaking mainly about the Greek interests, which even you admit were partially responsible; that helped bring it about. Of course Greeks can live peacefully with Turks. Istanbul was even in the era of the Hellenic Kingdom, the largest Greek city in the world, and there were no problems. It does not change that a situation was allowed and encouraged to develop in which Cyprus was brutally seperated, and now the unification is being pursued against the real interests of the Turkish northern third. A truly fair plebiscite on reunification would take place after the sanctions had been lifted for long enough for the TRNC's economy to recover, and the people to vote without that imposition over their heads.

Thankyou for finding that particular article, because I was looking for it. I will bring to your attention the following;

Brussels has no power to change the deep-rooted prejudices of the Slovak population. But once Slovakia joins the European club, Bratislava will be expected to play by the rules on minorities and equal rights.

Nothing like shooting yourself in the foot is there Duchess?

I do not believe I did. Considering the EU regularly makes demands of other prospective members to improve their human rights--Turkey banning the death penalty and so on, with concrete results--and yet there has been nothing more than cosmetic, at the very best, improvements for the Roma in these countries, why should I believe that membership shall start a dramatic process of improvement? Especially when the EU shall be burdened simply to deal with the economic conditions of those countries? I suspect the issue shall fall through the cracks, that laws shall be passed and not enforced. It is a rather common failing of governments and the already lopsided handling of the issue points to it again in the future.

Ask the Kurds if they are allowed schools or radio stations with their own language yet.

Kurdish rights have been improved by the demand of the EU in genuine ways; but nothing of note has been for the Roma.

Oh fuck you. 'Macedonia' in Yugoslavia did not even exist in the region until after WWII. It was nothing more than a Communist pipe-dream of Stalin and Tito. And it ranks up there in insulting behaivour with the whole 'Black Athena' fucking book. Apologise if we feel that we have a right to defend our heritige bitch (lets not forget the quaint little fact that FYROM borders the Macedonian province).

Macedonia is a legitimate country regardless of what it wants to call itself--and has the right to call itself whatever it desires--and the fact that you feel the need to "protect your heritage" with silly chauvinistic games over the name of another country does not speak well for the Greeks.

Wow. Look at us bad Hellenite's looking to expand our 'chauvinist' policy of subjugating our neighbours ...

Admirable, but there is evidence of a genuine Macedonian minority in parts of Greece; which is suppressed; and that the influence in Macedonia may be more out of fear of Macedonians going into Greece than anything else. I can find little unbiased on the topic, but this website seems to be decent The Balkan Human Rights Web Pages So we shall go with this report on the crime of the Macedonians of using their own language in Greece.

Read and educate yourself Duchess.

On the Thracian Muslims I never said that Greeks couldn't keep a treaty, because they can and because I am not trying to defame your people:

Greece formally recognizes only one "religious" minority, the "Muslims" of Thrace whose fundamental rights are formally guaranteed by the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne.

But the fact remains there are other minorities in Greece, not protected by treaties, and as referenced above, they suffer.

Bullshit. See above, and stop perpetuating the myth that as Greeks we somehow lack the intrinsic cognetive function to seperate a Turk from a Turkish General bent on expanding their territorial borders. What you just did Duchess was take such a fucking huge dump on me, and on every Greek equalled only to me suggesting that you as a lesbian 'cannot appreciate herorsim, which is why you are a lesbian'.

I did no such thing. I simply reviewed the situation from a rather more pessimistic standpoint, which I can continue to support for as long as you wish to argue your own.

The expanision in the 'region' does not acurately reflect the realites of Greece and Cyprus of today, especially with their attitude of their neighbours. Do you understand that?

I indeed hope it is so, but there is quite a lot of evidence to suggest the old attitudes have never really left in many areas, including Greece proper. Perhaps it is different on Cyprus; let us hope it is.

[Crown]

I'll remind you that Cyprus was originally supposed to be returned to the Ottoman Empire after the restoration of Ottoman territories in the Caucasus, which occured after WWI to the Turkish Republic; the legal heir to the Ottoman Empire. The only reason this did not occur, of course, was the direct annexation of Cyprus because of the opposition of the Ottoman Empire and the British Empire to each other in the Great War. Now that annexation was quite legitimate in the context of the war, but that "geo-political agenda" must be held in the context of insuring territory to which the Turkish Republic had at least a partial claim (one in fact stronger today than in that period--the world of the 21st century is rather less inclined to recognize wartime annexations).

And I will remind you that Cyprus was invaded by Turkish forces in 1974 and is being occupied in viloation of UN Security Council resolutions 367(1975), 541(1983) and 550(1984).

EDIT1 :: I would also like to point out that Turkey renounced all rights to claim Cyprus, when it signed "The Treaty of Lausanne" of which Articles 16, 20 and 21 say;

Article 16 of the treaty states:

"Turkey hereby renounces all rights and title whatsoever over or respecting the territories situated outside the frontiers laid down in the present Treaty and the islands other than those over which her sovereignty is recognised by the said Treaty, the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned."

Article 20 goes on to say:

"Turkey hereby recognises the annexation of Cyprus proclaimed by the British Government on the 5th November, 1914."

Article 21 continues:

"Turkish nationals ordinarily resident in Cyprus on the 5th November, 1914, will acquire British nationality subject to the conditions laid down in the local law, and will thereupon lose their Turkish nationality. They will, however, have the right to opt for Turkish nationality within two years from the coming into force of the present Treaty, provided that they leave Cyprus within twelve months after having so opted.

Turkish nationals ordinarily resident in Cyprus on the coming into force of the present Treaty who, at that date, have acquired or are in process of acquiring British nationality in consequence of a request made in accordance with the local law, will also thereupon lose their Turkish nationality.

It is understood that the Government of Cyprus will be entitled to refuse British nationality to inhabitants of the island who, being Turkish nationals, had formerly acquired another nationality without the consent of the Turkish Government."

Those two segments were really interlinked in the sense that I was arguing that the Greek advance was part of a precise series of events which were interrelated; the Armenian massacres, et al, however, are not part of this series. Now, you say that enosis is thirty years dead and perhaps this is so. But Cyprus and Greece shall be unified in the grander sense of unity in the European Union, shall they not? Cypriots and Greeks will have free passage between each others' territory; commercial barriers between the island and the Hellenic State will be broken down, and in general it will be no different than traveling between Hawaii and California. That is a relatively clean way to achieve a quasi-sort of union.

Yes Duchess, it is clearly a plot by the evil Hellenic conspiracy to create and further its own Mέγα Ιδέα and not an attempt to finally bring peace and prosperity to a continent that started the two most devestating wars in human history, by intergretting the community closer together.

Legally the modern Republic is its heir and in many cases the cultural aspects still remain. As for the Generals in Ankara, their influence has, likewise, been reduced massively in the past thirty years; yet you seem to think they are a dominating force. Why has there not been a coup against the current conservative government, then?

And legally the 'modern' Turkish state is the heir and successor to the Ottoman Empire. The General's are a real and present danger, the only reason that Erogan has survived as long as he has is because of the overwhelming public support and mandate his party won during the last elections, nothing else.

The General's, who still control the 'Turkish Security Council' are waiting for him to slip up, and the last toppeling of the Turkish government was what, in the late 80's early 90's? Regardless they still play an influential voice in the political workings of Turkey, unlike the Greek military which is brought directly under the heal of the Parliament, and not the other way around.

Thank you for proving my point above. And I do not think you have any real evidence that Denktash is an effective government bureaucrat of the Turkish Republic; just that the fact that only Turkish maintains relations with the TRNC requires Denktash to be very heavy reliant on Turkey and very obedient to Turkish policy interests.

Actually Duchess ... I kinda do; Army and Denktash interfere in Norther Cypriot Elections

Taken from the webpage YOU linked me to 'The Balkan Human Rights Web Pages' and I quote;

However, as was pointed out in an earlier report by Cyprus Action Network [1], there were serious irregularities during the elections, especially the presence of thousands of \citizens" of Turkish origin, who were brought to the island as part of a governmental policy to change the country's demographics. Some Turkish Cypriot organizations, particularly Patriotic Unity Movement (PUM), viewed these irregularities as reasons to boycott the elections, claiming that both the elections themselves and the formation of the government afterwards would be dictated by Ankara and not by the free-will of Turkish Cypriots.

You can read the entire report for itself, it only gets better and better.

EDIT2 : And lets not forget the infamous 'Deniz' incident;

In this connection an incident occurred in October 1959, which strained to the limits the efforts of Makarios and Kutchuk to retain intercommunal goodwill—the interception by a British naval patrol of a Turkish motorboat, the Deniz, off the Karpass peninsular carrying large quantities of arms and ammunition. The Deniz incident and the dramatic failure of Kutchuk’s appeal for the Turkish Cypriots to cooperate in a subsequent arms collection, confirmed that TMT were in control in the Turkish community and that the Turks intended to arm, rather than disarm, for security.

Headed straight for the TMT ... which was run by Denktash, despite a Greek Cypriot disarmament, Denktash was arming. Interesting no?

Which occured only under duress.

The invasion and the occupation are phenomenon which promote any duress.

Yes, sanctions, economic hardship--in fact, a form of warfare. Economic warfare is very much a kind of war in which you inflict pain and suffering upon the enemy to bring them about to your interests. The EU's "soft power" is simply military action without bullets, forcing the people of Northern Cyprus to heel. That is what sanctions have always been. That's what the sanctions against Iraq were, that's what the sanctions against Cuba are, that's what the sanctions agains the DPRK are, and that's what the sanctions against the TRNC are. They may be far less severe, but contextually they are the same. Simply a lesser scale. And under such economic hardship--it is natural that the people hope for prosperity in the only way that it is offered to them.

Your point being? The economic hardships and the sanctions are a legal tool in forcing rogue nations from getting away with expansionistic actions. And I will repeat -once again for the mentally deficient- that this is an International sanction, for the 'TRNC' only exists as an entity to Turkey, the rest of the world rightfully sees it as a country under occupation by a foreign power.

I am not talking about the period on Cyprus before the partition; I am speaking mainly about the Greek interests, which even you admit were partially responsible; that helped bring it about. Of course Greeks can live peacefully with Turks. Istanbul was even in the era of the Hellenic Kingdom, the largest Greek city in the world, and there were no problems. It does not change that a situation was allowed and encouraged to develop in which Cyprus was brutally seperated, and now the unification is being pursued against the real interests of the Turkish northern third. A truly fair plebiscite on reunification would take place after the sanctions had been lifted for long enough for the TRNC's economy to recover, and the people to vote without that imposition over their heads.

*bzzzt* Wrong.

A truely fair plebiscite on reunification would take place after the illegal and occupying Turkish forces are removed from the Island. Or does the ethnic cleansing of 200,000 ethnic Greek Cypriots not rate a mention?

I do not believe I did. Considering the EU regularly makes demands of other prospective members to improve their human rights--Turkey banning the death penalty and so on, with concrete results--and yet there has been nothing more than cosmetic, at the very best, improvements for the Roma in these countries, why should I believe that membership shall start a dramatic process of improvement? Especially when the EU shall be burdened simply to deal with the economic conditions of those countries? I suspect the issue shall fall through the cracks, that laws shall be passed and not enforced. It is a rather common failing of governments and the already lopsided handling of the issue points to it again in the future.

No it will not fall 'through the cracks' the links you have already provided prove the European Court of Human Rights monitors, reports and applies pressure to countries who are members of the EU. Greece being one of them. It has also issued rulings and fines to Greece for not adhering to the treaties it has signed. In every way shape and form this is a good thing. I do not deny that discrimination and ethnic tensions exist in the region, but your claim of 'democide' was so fucking wide off the mark it was ludicrous.

Kurdish rights have been improved by the demand of the EU in genuine ways; but nothing of note has been for the Roma.

Errr, no. The Kurdish plitical parties are still outlawed, they are not allowed to broadcast in their own language, and they are still not allowed to print books in Kurdish. Which is why the EU is still hounding on Turkey for its lack of implementing the laws it has passed.

Macedonia is a legitimate country regardless of what it wants to call itself--and has the right to call itself whatever it desires--and the fact that you feel the need to "protect your heritage" with silly chauvinistic games over the name of another country does not speak well for the Greeks.

Oh fuck off. It is an insulting name which implies cultural, and land holdings. And the argument has been put aside for now. We still object to the name, but for fucks sake do you see us invading them or going to war over it? Stop the fucking red herrings.

Admirable, but there is evidence of a genuine Macedonian minority in parts of Greece; which is suppressed; and that the influence in Macedonia may be more out of fear of Macedonians going into Greece than anything else. I can find little unbiased on the topic, but this website seems to be decent The Balkan Human Rights Web Pages So we shall go with this report on the crime of the Macedonians of using their own language in Greece.

Gee Duchess, you just quoted and linked to a Greek organisation which moniters its own country and (rightfully) critisises it when it fucks up ... what ever shall I do? Point out where 'democide' or 'ethnic clensing' is beign commited by a state sponsered action. Fuck the article you linked condemming the persectution of the Rainbow party is undersigned by a Greek member of parliament!

On the Thracian Muslims I never said that Greeks couldn't keep a treaty, because they can and because I am not trying to defame your people:

Greece formally recognizes only one "religious" minority, the "Muslims" of Thrace whose fundamental rights are formally guaranteed by the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne.

But the fact remains there are other minorities in Greece, not protected by treaties, and as referenced above, they suffer.

Article 4
1. All Greeks are equal before the law.
2. Greek men and women have equal rights and equal obligations.
3. All persons possessing the qualifications for citizenship as specified by law are Greek citizens. Withdrawal of Greek citizenship shall be permitted only in case of voluntary acquisition of another citizenship or of undertaking service contrary to national interests in a foreign country, under the conditions and procedures more specifically provided by law.
4. Only Greek citizens shall be eligible for public service, except as otherwise provided by special laws.
5. Greek citizens contribute without distinction to public charges in proportion to their means.
6. Every Greek capable of bearing arms is obliged to contribute to the defence of the Fatherland as provided by law.
7. Titles of nobility or distinction are neither conferred upon nor recognized in Greek citizens.

Article 5
1. All persons shall have the right to develop freely their personality and to participate in the social, economic and political life of the country, insofar as they do not infringe the rights of others or violate the Constitution and the good usages.
2. All persons living within the Greek territory shall enjoy full protection of their life, honour and liberty irrespective of nationality, race or language and of religious or political beliefs. Exceptions shall be permitted only in cases provided by international law.
The extradition of aliens prosecuted for their action as freedom-fighters shall be prohibited. 3. Personal liberty is inviolable. No one shall be prosecuted, arrested, imprisoned or otherwise confined except when and as the law provides.
4. Individual administrative measures restrictive of the free movement or residence in the country, and of the free exit and entrance therein of every Greek shall be prohibited. Such measures may be imposed in exceptional cases of emergency and only in order to prevent the commitment of criminal acts, following a criminal court ruling, as specified by law. In extremely urgent cases the ruling may be issued after the administrative measure has been imposed and within three days at the latest; otherwise it is lifted ipso jure.
Interpretative clause:
Paragraph 4 does not preclude the prohibition of exit from the country for persons being prosecuted on criminal charges by act of the public prosecutor, or the imposition of measures necessary for the protection of public health or the health of sick persons, as specified by law.

Linky

I did no such thing. I simply reviewed the situation from a rather more pessimistic standpoint, which I can continue to support for as long as you wish to argue your own.

Bullshit, you tried -and continue to try- to paint the reunification as a threat to 'Turkish' people, and how it somehow 'violates their rights' by the evil Hellenes who are behind some grand blood letting conspiracy. You have rather neatly side steped the issue of invasion and occupation, and ignored the real ethnic clensing of 200,000 Greek Cypriots in 1974 and some tens of thousands Turkish Cypriots during the Turkish occupation of 30 years by a 'colonising policy' of the Ankara Generals.

You don't have an arguement to stand on, while you continue to make the erroneous assertation that the Turkish invasion was a just cause, and it is justified for the past 30 years.

I indeed hope it is so, but there is quite a lot of evidence to suggest the old attitudes have never really left in many areas, including Greece proper. Perhaps it is different on Cyprus; let us hope it is.

Strawman.

Show me where I said that Greeks were beyond prejudice. I said you have no reasonable justification to assume that there will be a mass 'democide' occuring when reunification occurs. And no matter of hand waving will change that.

EDIT :: 2 Edits made.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

And I will remind you that Cyprus was invaded by Turkish forces in 1974 and is being occupied in viloation of UN Security Council resolutions 367(1975), 541(1983) and 550(1984).

EDIT1 :: I would also like to point out that Turkey renounced all rights to claim Cyprus, when it signed "The Treaty of Lausanne" of which Articles 16, 20 and 21 say;

Article 16 of the treaty states:

"Turkey hereby renounces all rights and title whatsoever over or respecting the territories situated outside the frontiers laid down in the present Treaty and the islands other than those over which her sovereignty is recognised by the said Treaty, the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned."

Article 20 goes on to say:

"Turkey hereby recognises the annexation of Cyprus proclaimed by the British Government on the 5th November, 1914."

Article 21 continues:

"Turkish nationals ordinarily resident in Cyprus on the 5th November, 1914, will acquire British nationality subject to the conditions laid down in the local law, and will thereupon lose their Turkish nationality. They will, however, have the right to opt for Turkish nationality within two years from the coming into force of the present Treaty, provided that they leave Cyprus within twelve months after having so opted.

Turkish nationals ordinarily resident in Cyprus on the coming into force of the present Treaty who, at that date, have acquired or are in process of acquiring British nationality in consequence of a request made in accordance with the local law, will also thereupon lose their Turkish nationality.

It is understood that the Government of Cyprus will be entitled to refuse British nationality to inhabitants of the island who, being Turkish nationals, had formerly acquired another nationality without the consent of the Turkish Government."

And following the Treaty of Lausanne, Turkey did in fact expand at the expense of the French Syrian mandate in the return of the Iskenderum region. Also I doubt that the average Cypriot Muslim who remained in Cyprus in the 1920s expected the British to ever leave, and expected the security of British governance to remain as a security over any possible ethnic tensions. That is no longer the case.

Yes Duchess, it is clearly a plot by the evil Hellenic conspiracy to create and further its own Mέγα Ιδέα and not an attempt to finally bring peace and prosperity to a continent that started the two most devestating wars in human history, by intergretting the community closer together.

You don't think that national interests influence an EU so heavily dominated by the requirement to reach a national consensus to get anything done? Certainly part of the desire to unify Cyprus and in general settle the Cyprus question by the EU comes from Greece.

And legally the 'modern' Turkish state is the heir and successor to the Ottoman Empire. The General's are a real and present danger, the only reason that Erogan has survived as long as he has is because of the overwhelming public support and mandate his party won during the last elections, nothing else.

Then fair enough. Though I could say that the generals are a vital bulwark to the continuing secularisation of the State, and shall remain that way until the rest of the region is also secularized.

Regardless they still play an influential voice in the political workings of Turkey, unlike the Greek military which is brought directly under the heal of the Parliament, and not the other way around.

Their role is constitutionally mandated to preserve the secular nature of the State, which provides them with some legitimacy when they intervene in the political affairs of the State. The Junta could hardly say that, now, could it?

You can read the entire report for itself, it only gets better and better.

What's wrong with a government allowing immigration? Though I grant that the article shows the Turkish Republic as engaging in intimidation tactics with the TRNC, that does little more than put them on the same level as the EU in this circumstance.

EDIT2 : And lets not forget the infamous 'Deniz' incident;

Headed straight for the TMT ... which was run by Denktash, despite a Greek Cypriot disarmament, Denktash was arming. Interesting no?

It was probably rather wise considering the history of Muslim-Christian relations in the Balkans, and you yourself point out that enosis has only been dead for thirty years. Greek Cypriot disarmament was, in the context of the grander political situation, not much more than breathing room.

The invasion and the occupation are phenomenon which promote any duress.

Sanctions which promote direct individual hardship on persons often cause reactions and responses greater than wars. Since the division has been fixed in place, there has not been major displacement on the island; nor major hardship. The sanctions have however caused that for the TRNC.

Your point being? The economic hardships and the sanctions are a legal tool in forcing rogue nations from getting away with expansionistic actions. And I will repeat -once again for the mentally deficient- that this is an International sanction, for the 'TRNC' only exists as an entity to Turkey, the rest of the world rightfully sees it as a country under occupation by a foreign power.

A legal tool that often kills far more people than modern warfare does? You're resorting to a legalistic argument, ignoring the fact that sanctions are often vastly more immoral than the conflicts they are designed to prevent or rectify. What exactly is wrong with the situation on Cyprus? Each community has its part of the island; and the major violence has mostly settled down--there are a few terrorist incidents every few years and even those do not really happen anymore. And reversing that situation, putting everything back to the way it was in the 50s, is thus worth causing major hardship and poverty upon the Turkish population? This is moral? The world has a fucked up idea of what morality is.

*bzzzt* Wrong.

A truely fair plebiscite on reunification would take place after the illegal and occupying Turkish forces are removed from the Island. Or does the ethnic cleansing of 200,000 ethnic Greek Cypriots not rate a mention?

*snickers* "Truly fair", then, means a single vote across the entire island controlled by the Greek Cypriots?

Besides, your statement contains an intentional distortion. I have never seen a source that claims even as many as ten thousand deaths total during the whole partition of Cyprus, including British soldiers in the 50s! There were on the order of 150,000 refugees from Cyprus, but 'ethnic cleansing' carries clear genocidal connotations. The Turks never attempted to take the entire island and never attempted to cleanse the Greek population, just to secure the Turkish minority, who naturally fled to the regions controlled by Turkish troops, thus creating the partition situation.

Naturally a more fair plebiscite could be held without the presence of the Turkish troops. However, they would have to be replaced with another and neutral force to secure the existence of the TRNC while the plebiscite was held; and naturally the sanctions would also have to be repealed for an appropriate period of time as I have insisted. That, certainly, would be fair.

No it will not fall 'through the cracks' the links you have already provided prove the European Court of Human Rights monitors, reports and applies pressure to countries who are members of the EU. Greece being one of them. It has also issued rulings and fines to Greece for not adhering to the treaties it has signed. In every way shape and form this is a good thing. I do not deny that discrimination and ethnic tensions exist in the region, but your claim of 'democide' was so fucking wide off the mark it was ludicrous.

Democide happened in the Balkans less than a decade ago, and the links I have provided show lots of effort being put into curbing the attitudes that produce democide with few results. We do not know the sorts of conditions that may develop in a unified Cyprus, and this adventure must really be approached carefully.

Errr, no. The Kurdish plitical parties are still outlawed, they are not allowed to broadcast in their own language, and they are still not allowed to print books in Kurdish. Which is why the EU is still hounding on Turkey for its lack of implementing the laws it has passed.

The State of Siege was lifted in 2002 for the last two Kurdish provinces, restoring the normal laws of the land to use for the whole populace, including Kurds. They still have a long way to go, yes, but that does now allow the normal political process to be used in widening their rights, making it just a matter of time.

Oh fuck off. It is an insulting name which implies cultural, and land holdings. And the argument has been put aside for now. We still object to the name, but for fucks sake do you see us invading them or going to war over it? Stop the fucking red herrings.

It's not a red herring, it shows that there is an attitude of chauvinism still remaining in the Balkans despite your claims otherwise. Seriously, calling the name of the Republic of Macedonia "an insulting name which implies cultural, and land holdings." Well, god. Historically part of the Kingdom of Macedonia was in the region of modern Macedonia; and certainly the people of Macedonia thought of themselves as Macedonians, for whatever reason, or else IMRO wouldn't have been operating there a century ago.

And just why should you give a shit about the culture of another country? Do the Greeks have a special right to their culture? Are you going to making us abandon all aspects of Greek culture in every other western country, somehow, because it's Your's And You Have A Right To It? It's not just ridiculous, it's incredibly silly. As for land holdings, do you seriously think you can convince me that Macedonia is going to invade Greece!? The country is a wreck that can barely keep itself in one piece, and even if it gets organized, will still be smaller in every aspect to the Hellenic Republic. So it appears that really you are just voicing silly, groundless, chauvinist fears that show precisely how far the Balkans still have to go.

Gee Duchess, you just quoted and linked to a Greek organisation which moniters its own country and (rightfully) critisises it when it fucks up ... what ever shall I do? Point out where 'democide' or 'ethnic clensing' is beign commited by a state sponsered action. Fuck the article you linked condemming the persectution of the Rainbow party is undersigned by a Greek member of parliament!

And members of the Turkish Parliament have opposed the restrictions on the Kurds, and Turkish organizations exist which support improved rights for the Kurds.

< snip >

And you can quote laws all day long that run quite contrary to events which I have showed are occuring; and all this proves is that the laws are not being followed. Iraq had an excellent constitution. And though the Hellenic Republic is obviously not Iraq it is obviously very Hellenic in outlook, too, and there are elements who do not take well to the idea of it being anything else.

Bullshit, you tried -and continue to try- to paint the reunification as a threat to 'Turkish' people, and how it somehow 'violates their rights' by the evil Hellenes who are behind some grand blood letting conspiracy. You have rather neatly side steped the issue of invasion and occupation, and ignored the real ethnic clensing of 200,000 Greek Cypriots in 1974 and some tens of thousands Turkish Cypriots during the Turkish occupation of 30 years by a 'colonising policy' of the Ankara Generals.

No such ethnic cleansing happened--you're intentionally distorting the understood use of the term again; everyone associates it with mass-murder--and you are trying to use past events as the justification for inflicting hardship on individuals in the present day; and past events as justification for completely ignoring the situation on the ground as it stands today.

You don't have an arguement to stand on, while you continue to make the erroneous assertation that the Turkish invasion was a just cause, and it is justified for the past 30 years.

Ultimately whether or not it was justified is irrelevant, okay, the fact is it happened and maybe we should accept that now Cyprus is divided into two ethnically distinct communities that because of decades of propaganda and remembered incidents are unlikely to get along; and that the current effort is filled with sufficient outside compelling factors as not really at all present the real will of the Turkish Cypriots in the matter of unification.

Show me where I said that Greeks were beyond prejudice. I said you have no reasonable justification to assume that there will be a mass 'democide' occuring when reunification occurs. And no matter of hand waving will change that.

I read it as implied in your statement about the EU; and really I am simply attempting to demonstrate a degree of uncertainty about the situation in the Balkans which should lead to patience and cautiousness in trying to undo what has been done. Many refugees have not returned to their old villages in Bosnia despite the hopes of the UN, and a new demographic reality has been largely established in Kosovo as well. You can't fully project those incidents onto Cyprus but I believe you can use them comparativel for the similarity of culture and circumstance; it's all you really can do since it's hard to judge the behaviour of such an inherently irrational animal as a human being when they're in groups.

[dummnutzer]

Greetings! Being neither Greek nor Turk I have two questions:

Is the level of aggressiveness shown in this thread typical of current real life Turkish/Greek relations?I was under the impression that there had been a recent relaxation in the bilateral relations, e.g. cuts in military spending.

A few years ago, there were still restriction on building non-Orthodox churches in Greeece and Christian churches in Turkey.Have there been any improvements in religious freedom in these countries? This question seems to be too unimportant to hit international news media and I do not speak Turkish or Greek. No insult intended. Thanks for any information on this topic.

And now, but to 19th century nationalism ...

[The Duchess of Zeon]

I'm actually not Turkish. I can, however, basically confirm your comments for the Turks--at least the ones who attend football matches:



As for the Greeks, I heard their behaviour at said match was not entirely polite, either, if I may exercise the understatement. Crown here may make such comments as he wishes on the matter.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

And that is intended to be mildly facetious. Graeco-Turkish relations were actually very good immediately after the founding of the Republic; but deteoriated in the period post-WWII; and have now only really recovered to what they once were. Venizelos and Ataturk were actually friends.

[Crown]

And following the Treaty of Lausanne, Turkey did in fact expand at the expense of the French Syrian mandate in the return of the Iskenderum region. Also I doubt that the average Cypriot Muslim who remained in Cyprus in the 1920s expected the British to ever leave, and expected the security of British governance to remain as a security over any possible ethnic tensions. That is no longer the case.

And I also doubt that you can accurately identify what the 'average TC' thought about their chances of not being a British colony. Cyprus was established in the 60's. A call for enosis was voted down, as was the Turkish call for 'taksim' (TMT's proposal of partition). The illegal actions of the Greek Junta led to the invasion, the subsequent occupation was illegal when the Karalamis government agreed to all of the Turkish proposals which included a 'Federal system of two ethinicities under a weak central government'.

The only request from the Greek government was either the removal of the Turkish military from Cypriot soil, or allow UN peacekeepers to move with the Turks.

You don't think that national interests influence an EU so heavily dominated by the requirement to reach a national consensus to get anything done? Certainly part of the desire to unify Cyprus and in general settle the Cyprus question by the EU comes from Greece.

The powers of veto are limited to a few general cases; enlargement, tax and foreign policy. Greece removed its permanent veto to Turkey's assenstion to the EU 3-4 years ago. The enlargement criteria are set out by the comission who is authorised to investigate and approve candidates, which doesn't require a unanimous vote.

Then fair enough. Though I could say that the generals are a vital bulwark to the continuing secularisation of the State, and shall remain that way until the rest of the region is also secularized.

'Bulwark'? You seriously aren't suggesting that the 'brain trust' that brought us; 'if Turkey is poor, we should just print more money', aren't a bunch of idiots bent on protecting their own status?

Linky

Their role is constitutionally mandated to preserve the secular nature of the State, which provides them with some legitimacy when they intervene in the political affairs of the State. The Junta could hardly say that, now, could it?

Strawman. Show me where I ever said the Greek Junta was a good thing?

What's wrong with a government allowing immigration? Though I grant that the article shows the Turkish Republic as engaging in intimidation tactics with the TRNC, that does little more than put them on the same level as the EU in this circumstance.

Rubbish. 'TRNC' did not even claim to exist until 1983, up until that part it was a province of Turkey, read: imperialist expansionism.

It was probably rather wise considering the history of Muslim-Christian relations in the Balkans, and you yourself point out that enosis has only been dead for thirty years. Greek Cypriot disarmament was, in the context of the grander political situation, not much more than breathing room.

I will grant that with the Greek Junta in power the TC did certainly have a cause to fear, however this action happened a full decade before the Junta tried and toppeled the government, and it happened when the vote for 'enosis' was defeated by the Cypriot public. Which leads to only one conclusion, Denktash was merely pushing his policy to 'taksim' which was also unpopular on the island.

Sanctions which promote direct individual hardship on persons often cause reactions and responses greater than wars. Since the division has been fixed in place, there has not been major displacement on the island; nor major hardship. The sanctions have however caused that for the TRNC.

The sanctions are in response to the illegal annexation of Cypriot territory by Turkey. They are completely justified and essential in stopping rogue nations from getting away with breaking international law. Deal with it.

A legal tool that often kills far more people than modern warfare does? You're resorting to a legalistic argument, ignoring the fact that sanctions are often vastly more immoral than the conflicts they are designed to prevent or rectify. What exactly is wrong with the situation on Cyprus? Each community has its part of the island; and the major violence has mostly settled down--there are a few terrorist incidents every few years and even those do not really happen anymore. And reversing that situation, putting everything back to the way it was in the 50s, is thus worth causing major hardship and poverty upon the Turkish population? This is moral? The world has a fucked up idea of what morality is.

Fallse Dilema Fallacy.

The Annan plan does not go so far as 'putting everything back to the way it was in the 50s'. It suggest two federations of a predominately Greek and Turkish regions bound by a loose and weak central state. The self-declared 'TRNC' will most definetly shrink, loosing it's territorial holdings from about 40% of the island, to 28% to reflect the demographics of the island.

I will also point out that the Cypriot Republic has always maintained that any TC returning to the south can claim their lands back, including houses and furniture under the law.

Denktash's regieme wouldn't even allow the 200,000 displaced Greek Cypriots travel to their home towns till about 1 year ago.

Morallity from you, Marina, is like asking to be taught by Justine Timberlake on how to be a true musician. While it is a good facsimily it is ultimately facile in nature. I will repeat it again; 200,000 Greek Cypriots were ethnically cleansed from their homes in 1974. Where is the morality in not allowing them their justice?

I find it also particularly ironic that you should choose to argue 'morality' over the law anyway. There is an old saying that barristers are taught when they are at law school; 1. When you have the law on your side, argue the law. 2. When you don't have the law on your side, argue morality. 3. When you have neither on yourside, point the finger and scream 'he did it!'.

Upon reflection I am arguing 1 and 3, you are arguing 3 and 2 (I place 2 second, because you continue to ignore the Greek Cypriot's case for morality).

*snickers* "Truly fair", then, means a single vote across the entire island controlled by the Greek Cypriots?

Besides, your statement contains an intentional distortion. I have never seen a source that claims even as many as ten thousand deaths total during the whole partition of Cyprus, including British soldiers in the 50s! There were on the order of 150,000 refugees from Cyprus, but 'ethnic cleansing' carries clear genocidal connotations. The Turks never attempted to take the entire island and never attempted to cleanse the Greek population, just to secure the Turkish minority, who naturally fled to the regions controlled by Turkish troops, thus creating the partition situation.

Oh fuckoff you lying little bitch. I asked you to explain to me what 'democide' meant and you said;

A neologism referring to mass murder across a particular demographic segment.

I asked you to justify why you would think this could happen inside the EU, and you brought up cases of discrimination and prejudice as evidence.

When I use the term 'ethnic cleansing' I use it as follows;

The systematic elimination of an ethnic group or groups from a region or society, as by deportation, forced emigration, or genocide.

From Dictionary.com

Had I wanted to say 'democide' I would have said genocide. The term 'ethnic cleansing' refers to other methods of removing a specific ethnicity from a region such as deportation. The unmitigated arrogance that you display is remarkable when you blame me for what people may infer from a term which has multiple meanings (a side note 'neologism' and the use of it, is a feature of pathalogical disorders, alarm bells are ringing Marina).

Also how can you possibly be ignorant enough to claim that Turkey never meant for partition, despite the fact that was 1 of their major claims in the Geneva talks during the crisis to which Greece agreed to?

Naturally a more fair plebiscite could be held without the presence of the Turkish troops. However, they would have to be replaced with another and neutral force to secure the existence of the TRNC while the plebiscite was held; and naturally the sanctions would also have to be repealed for an appropriate period of time as I have insisted. That, certainly, would be fair.

Turkey flat out said no to removing Turkish troops in the Geneva talks of 1974 or allowing UN troops to move with them, despite the fact that Greece agreed to Turkey's proposal of 'two federate states under a weak central government' which echoes exactly what the Annan plan is.

Democide happened in the Balkans less than a decade ago, and the links I have provided show lots of effort being put into curbing the attitudes that produce democide with few results. We do not know the sorts of conditions that may develop in a unified Cyprus, and this adventure must really be approached carefully.

Bullshit. The links you showed did not show evidence of 'democide' happening in the EU, they showed that prejudice and old anymocities are still prelevant, but that is all! Either keep changing your definition, or deposit your concession here; -V-

The State of Siege was lifted in 2002 for the last two Kurdish provinces, restoring the normal laws of the land to use for the whole populace, including Kurds. They still have a long way to go, yes, but that does now allow the normal political process to be used in widening their rights, making it just a matter of time.

I love the fact that Turkey lagging behind Greece a full decade is just brushed away as 'a matter of time' and yet the examples you show of Greek citizens misbehaiving is the 'single largest threat to Turks' Double standard much?

It's not a red herring, it shows that there is an attitude of chauvinism still remaining in the Balkans despite your claims otherwise. Seriously, calling the name of the Republic of Macedonia "an insulting name which implies cultural, and land holdings." Well, god. Historically part of the Kingdom of Macedonia was in the region of modern Macedonia; and certainly the people of Macedonia thought of themselves as Macedonians, for whatever reason, or else IMRO wouldn't have been operating there a century ago.

It is a red herring. You are saying that we as Greeks object to a country being identified with a part of our history that they have no claim to as 'chauvinism', and yet you ignore the very real fact that we are actually the single largest foreign investors in the country, creating jobs and even have peacekeepers in the country to protect its integrity.

They have about as much right as calling themselves Macedonians as you have of calling yourself Soux, Cherokee or Navaho.

And just why should you give a shit about the culture of another country? Do the Greeks have a special right to their culture? Are you going to making us abandon all aspects of Greek culture in every other western country, somehow, because it's Your's And You Have A Right To It? It's not just ridiculous, it's incredibly silly. As for land holdings, do you seriously think you can convince me that Macedonia is going to invade Greece!? The country is a wreck that can barely keep itself in one piece, and even if it gets organized, will still be smaller in every aspect to the Hellenic Republic. So it appears that really you are just voicing silly, groundless, chauvinist fears that show precisely how far the Balkans still have to go.

Hellas does not mind that other cultures acknowledge the contributions of its historical past. It does take offence to others claiming rights to that history that are logically invalid. See 'Black Athena'.

And members of the Turkish Parliament have opposed the restrictions on the Kurds, and Turkish organizations exist which support improved rights for the Kurds.

Well good for them, too bad that it took enormous pressure for the EU (or shall I now refer to it is the vast Hellenic conspiracy?), in order for them to enact humanitarian principle to their own citizens.

And you can quote laws all day long that run quite contrary to events which I have showed are occuring; and all this proves is that the laws are not being followed. Iraq had an excellent constitution. And though the Hellenic Republic is obviously not Iraq it is obviously very Hellenic in outlook, too, and there are elements who do not take well to the idea of it being anything else.

So would me showing links of Anti-Semitism in the US, be a fair representation as America as an anti-semetic racist, chauvinist country? Becuase that is what you are doing. You have yet to show me that 'democide' is occuring inside the EU.

No such ethnic cleansing happened--you're intentionally distorting the understood use of the term again; everyone associates it with mass-murder--and you are trying to use past events as the justification for inflicting hardship on individuals in the present day; and past events as justification for completely ignoring the situation on the ground as it stands today.

Ethnic cleansing does not refer to genocide exclusively. There was no 'majority' Turkish North, and majority Greek South prior to invasion, it was an established fact brought upon by the invasion.

And no, the Annan plan offers a solution to both, by allowing the status-quo to remain, but also satisfying the truth that Cyprus is one island.

Ultimately whether or not it was justified is irrelevant, okay, the fact is it happened and maybe we should accept that now Cyprus is divided into two ethnically distinct communities that because of decades of propaganda and remembered incidents are unlikely to get along; and that the current effort is filled with sufficient outside compelling factors as not really at all present the real will of the Turkish Cypriots in the matter of unification.

The TC have voted for a reformer who stood on a policy of reunification within the context of the Annan plan. Their will is being followed.

I read it as implied in your statement about the EU; and really I am simply attempting to demonstrate a degree of uncertainty about the situation in the Balkans which should lead to patience and cautiousness in trying to undo what has been done. Many refugees have not returned to their old villages in Bosnia despite the hopes of the UN, and a new demographic reality has been largely established in Kosovo as well. You can't fully project those incidents onto Cyprus but I believe you can use them comparativel for the similarity of culture and circumstance; it's all you really can do since it's hard to judge the behaviour of such an inherently irrational animal as a human being when they're in groups.

Bullshit. This debate stems from your definition of 'democide'. You have repeatedly failed to justify why this would occur under the Annan plan. You have continued to ignore the illegal occupation of Cyprus by Turkey, and try to refute that ethinc cleansing occured in 1974.

[Crown]

And that is intended to be mildly facetious.

I should hope so, unless you believe that hooligans in a soccer match are the statistical stimulus of a countrie's psyche.

Graeco-Turkish relations were actually very good immediately after the founding of the Republic; but deteoriated in the period post-WWII; and have now only really recovered to what they once were. Venizelos and Ataturk were actually friends.

I would support that, the major areas of contention are; Agean, the legal territorial waters and air space and Cyprus.

[Crown]

Consequently Duchess, I would like to apologise for this line;

Oh fuckoff you lying little bitch.

It was nothing more than a stupid rant. While I nearly never agree with you, I hardly think you result to outright lying. So I retract that comment, it does you an injustice.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Consequently Duchess, I would like to apologise for this line;

Oh fuckoff you lying little bitch.

It was nothing more than a stupid rant. While I nearly never agree with you, I hardly think you result to outright lying. So I retract that comment, it does you an injustice.

I would like to apologize for pushing this entire thing. I think we have entered it, both, in a mindset that allowed us to take the other's statements generally out of context and press ahead from there.

I will say, quite frankly, that the original comment was flippant, and should not have been posted in this forum in the first place, certainly not to those grandiose and exagerrated terms. I, ah, have a weak spot with Turkey; likely aggravated because I have Turkish friends, besides my historical knowledge and my admiration for the achievements of Ataturk in Islam.

There is, perhaps, a particular subject for each person on which all of us cannot debate purely within reason, nor learn when to let up? I would dare to submit that we have found it for the both of us, hardly the best combination, but now the past.

[Crown]

Indeed.

Anyway lets just give peace a chance, and wish the Cypriots the best of luck (both of them).

Who knows if they can make it work, than perhaps there is still hope for Greeks and Turks in the broader sense.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Indeed.

Anyway lets just give peace a chance, and wish the Cypriots the best of luck (both of them).

Who knows if they can make it work, than perhaps there is still hope for Greeks and Turks in the broader sense.

I would very much hope it successful, in the honest truth. I suppose that I am just exceptionally cynical by nature.