Erdogan warns oil companies against drilling in... Cyprus

[alhoon]

Turkey has no claim over Cyprus. Northern Cyprus does. An administration was set up in 1974, named Autonomous Turkish Cypriot Administration, to administer the region under Turkish control while peace negotiations continued as the purpose at this point was to bring the island back to the situation in 1960.

Right. Meanwhile Turks launched Attila 2 during those "peace negotiations".

Northern Cyprus simply relies on Turkey militarily just like Southern Cyprus relies on Greece.

The Republic of Cyprus, the only recognized and legal authority in the island of Cyprus can invite whomever they want to help them, it's their country. Since they didn't ask for the Turkish troops, those troops are there illegally. They also have the right to invite people and theoretically, they can settle them in the occupied part. I remind you that Cyprus entered the EU as a single whole country. Turkey is occupying part of EU.

The comparison with ISIS is not completely accurate since ISIS is a gathering of extremists and zealots that grabbed some land. Cyprus situation is closer to the one with Crimea - although there I support the Russian annexation since Crimea was theirs till Stalin decided to hand it to Ukraine in the 50s and also Russians didn't expel 1/4th of Ukranians out of Crimea nor they killed tens of thousands of civilians to cause them to flee so they could help a population exchange to be accepted after it has been done de-facto.

[PointOfViewGun]

Right. Meanwhile Turks launched Attila 2 during those "peace negotiations".

That is false. You make it appear as if Turkey launched a second operation during those 9 years of negotiations. That did not happen. The first operation started on July 20 and took about 3 days. The fighting did not stop on July 24. Clashes in various locations continued. Attila 2 operation was launched on August 14 and it too took about 3 days. The fighting on Cyprus happened between July 20 and August 18. Even then, a Greek sniper killed the ambassador from USA, Rodger Davies, during an anti-USA demonstration by the Greek Cypriots.

The Republic of Cyprus, the only recognized and legal authority in the island of Cyprus can invite whomever they want to help them, it's their country. Since they didn't ask for the Turkish troops, those troops are there illegally. They also have the right to invite people and theoretically, they can settle them in the occupied part. I remind you that Cyprus entered the EU as a single whole country. Turkey is occupying part of EU.

The comparison with ISIS is not completely accurate since ISIS is a gathering of extremists and zealots that grabbed some land. Cyprus situation is closer to the one with Crimea - although there I support the Russian annexation since Crimea was theirs till Stalin decided to hand it to Ukraine in the 50s and also Russians didn't expel 1/4th of Ukranians out of Crimea nor they killed tens of thousands of civilians to cause them to flee so they could help a population exchange to be accepted after it has been done de-facto.

Except, Makarios, the president of Cyprus at the time, did request the Greek contingent from Greece to leave the island. The Greek response was to go forward with the coup. Greeks were the first invasion force on the island. In such a case, under the guarantee agreement that Turkey is a party to, Turkey does not require a request from Cyprus to intervene.

Southern Cyprus entering EU without reaching a solution is a complete travesty. It was nothing more than an idiotic and biased move on EU's part which defies EU principles all together. Southern Cyprus entered EU having a claim over the whole island without people in the north having any say in it.

Expelling 1/4th of Greeks from the north of Cyprus sounds much better than what Greeks tried to do, to expel all Turks from entirety of the island. Trying to argue that somehow Turkey caused this debacle is to ignore historical context. Turkey didn't kill tens of thousands of civilians either. The total casualties of the conflict summed up from both sides barely pass 10 thousand. The population exchange did not just happen on paper because Turkey tried to somehow document a reality it caused. Population from both sides were living on the other side. About 50 thousand Turks from the south moved to north while certain Greek villages, with total population over 10 thousand, chose to remain on the north. The population exchange was done under the Third Vienna Agreement between Clerides and Denktaş.

[nhytgbvfeco2]

In such a case, under the guarantee agreement that Turkey is a party to, Turkey does not require a request from Cyprus to intervene.

Yep, under the guarantee agreement Turkey is allowed to intervene to restore the status quo on the island. Attempting to force the state to become a federation is not however restoring status quo, but rather a breach of the treaty. So is establishing a puppet state on the island. Turkey's response to Cyprus breaching the treaty was.. breaching the treaty.

Article IVIn the event of a breach of the provisions of the present Treaty, Greece, Turkey and the United Kingdom undertake to consult together with respect to the representations or measures necessary to ensure observance of those provisions.

In so far as common or concerted action may not prove possible, each of the three guaranteeing Powers reserves the right to take action with the sole aim of re-establishing the state of affairs created by the present Treaty.

[PointOfViewGun]

Yep, under the guarantee agreement Turkey is allowed to intervene to restore the status quo on the island. Attempting to force the state to become a federation is not however restoring status quo, but rather a breach of the treaty. So is establishing a puppet state on the island. Turkey's response to Cyprus breaching the treaty was.. breaching the treaty.

What do you do if the South refuses to restore the status quo on the island?

[nhytgbvfeco2]

What do you do if the South refuses to restore the status quo on the island?

Already during the second round of peace talks Turkey began demanding the establishment of a federal state and a population transfer (aka ethnic cleansing in the civilised world), a clear breach of the status quo. This was before the 2nd Turkish operation. Do not pretend that Turkey was forced to do so because of a failure of peace talks when Turkey doing so was a main reason that the peace talks failed.

[PointOfViewGun]

Already during the second round of peace talks Turkey began demanding the establishment of a federal state and a population transfer (aka ethnic cleansing in the civilised world), a clear breach of the status quo. This was before the 2nd Turkish operation. Do not pretend that Turkey was forced to do so because of a failure of peace talks when Turkey doing so was a main reason that the peace talks failed.

If Northern Cypriot demand for a federal state was the problem Makarios would not agree to it in 1977. In 1978, the federal state idea was reaffirmed in the American-British-Canadian initiative. Again, this idea was reaffirmed in 1979 with Kyprianou as Makarios died. The second round of talks in the Geneva conference was done because the Greek soldiers refused to comply with the results of the first round. At this time, Northern Cyprus proposed federation while Turkey proposed Turkish cantons in 6 regions. Both were rejected. At this time fighting was still continuing and a large portion of Turks were still in the southern part. The population transfer happened after the second operation. It was not really forced as it was voluntary, and at least a small portions from each community chose to stay on the other side.

[nhytgbvfeco2]

If Northern Cypriot demand for a federal state was the problem Makarios would not agree to it in 1977. In 1978, the federal state idea was reaffirmed in the American-British-Canadian initiative. Again, this idea was reaffirmed in 1979 with Kyprianou as Makarios died. The second round of talks in the Geneva conference was done because the Greek soldiers refused to comply with the results of the first round. At this time, Northern Cyprus proposed federation while Turkey proposed Turkish cantons in 6 regions. Both were rejected. At this time fighting was still continuing and a large portion of Turks were still in the southern part. The population transfer happened after the second operation. It was not really forced as it was voluntary, and at least a small portions from each community chose to stay on the other side.

That's all very good, but doesn't change the fact that Turkey breached the very treaty that they used to legitimise their invasion. They acted on the part allowing them to invade, but ignored the part saying that the invasion can only have one purpose: restoration of status quo, something that Turkey never intended to do.
If a treaty says you can invade but only to do x, and you invade to do y, you are not following the treaty. Thus the invasion is illegitimate.

[PointOfViewGun]

That's all very good, but doesn't change the fact that Turkey breached the very treaty that they used to legitimise their invasion. They acted on the part allowing them to invade, but ignored the part saying that the invasion can only have one purpose: restoration of status quo, something that Turkey never intended to do.
If a treaty says you can invade but only to do x, and you invade to do y, you are not following the treaty. Thus the invasion is illegitimate.

Except they didn't invade to do y. They intervened to do x and saw no effort from the other side to do x. If the status quo is unattainable you need to reach a new status quo. However, what you're suggesting that the Turkish position prior to the intervention was to make the island a federal state which is purely your invention.

[nhytgbvfeco2]

Except they didn't invade to do y. They intervened to do x and saw no effort from the other side to do x.

Obviously. If the other side was willing to do x from the get go you wouldn't have needed an invasion.

If the status quo is unattainable you need to reach a new status quo.

Where does the treaty say that?

However, what you're suggesting that the Turkish position prior to the intervention was to make the island a federal state which is purely your invention.

It is speculation when it comes to the first operation, and fact when it comes to the 2nd, which happened after the Cypriot president didn't agree to the creation of a federal state.

[alhoon]

That is false. You make it appear as if Turkey launched a second operation during those 9 years of negotiations. That did not happen.

No, I make it appear as if Turkey launched Attila 2 during the peace negotiations in Geneva in August.

[PointOfViewGun]

Obviously. If the other side was willing to do x from the get go you wouldn't have needed an invasion.
Where does the treaty say that?
It is speculation when it comes to the first operation, and fact when it comes to the 2nd, which happened after the Cypriot president didn't agree to the creation of a federal state.

Nope. Both operations served the purpose of putting an end to the fight. That is exactly what it accomplished. What followed was purely the respective leader's own accomplishments or lack of.

No, I make it appear as if Turkey launched Attila 2 during the peace negotiations in Geneva in August.

Even if you had Geneva conference in mind, fighting was continuing while that conference was in session. Greeks were trying to take back their positions. Inter-communal violence continued. The second Turkish operation started when the conference ended with no result with continuing fighting.

[Odenat]

There would be no such problem at Cyprus if Greek Cypriots accepted the UN brokered peace deal at 2004 but Greeks refused the peace deal and voted against it. Today Cyprus would be a single state and a member of the EU. After the referandum, UN asked for the lifting of the embargo to the Northern Cyprus, saying "if the Greek Cypriots are ready to share power and prosperity with the Turkish Cypriots in a federal structure based on political equality, this needs to be demonstrated, not just by word, but by action”.

And now the same GREEKS who refused the peace deal accuse Turkey of defending Northern Cyprus economic rights. Please tell me, are Greek Cypriots ready to share power and prosperity with the Turkish Cypriots in a federal structure based on political equality?

[alhoon]

The Turkish Cypriots, yes. The thousands of muslim settlers? No and they shouldn't.

[Aexodus]

Didn’t the 2004 deal give Turks and Greeks 50/50 representatives in parliament? Sounds unfair.

[PointOfViewGun]

Didn’t the 2004 deal give Turks and Greeks 50/50 representatives in parliament? Sounds unfair.

Not exactly. The new state would have a senate and a chamber. The senate, the upper house, would have 24/24 representation. The chamber's 48 members would be based on population percentages with no fewer than 12 Turkish Cypriots. A simple majority would be required to pass any legislation in both houses. Executive power was to be exercised by a presidential council that neither side could have less than 1/3 representation. What the plan did was to put safeguards in place to make sure legislations are not passed at the expense of the Turkish Cypriots, though it still allows the Greeks to do whatever they want if they can win over a single Turkish Cypriot in the chamber.

[alhoon]

And the president would be rotating between Greek and Turkish Cypriots.
In a Greek island that was 80% Greek before the invasion, it is unfathomable to give half a chamber to a minority that was supported by a hostile and illegal regime just to appease that regime. There are other ways to make sure that there's no oppressive legislation. Namely... the EU. Do you think the EU would allow Greek Cypriots to pass oppressive measures? No, they wouldn't.

though it still allows the Greeks to do whatever they want if they can win over a single Turkish Cypriot in the chamber.

You mean, it allows the Turkish Cypriots to do most of what they want in the chamber, since Greek Cypriots are very unlikely to be united while the muslim members would be. All it would take is one SYRIZA-like senator to flip and there goes one of the oldest Christian States.

[PointOfViewGun]

And the president would be rotating between Greek and Turkish Cypriots.
In a Greek island that was 80% Greek before the invasion, it is unfathomable to give half a chamber to a minority that was supported by a hostile and illegal regime just to appease that regime. There are other ways to make sure that there's no oppressive legislation. Namely... the EU. Do you think the EU would allow Greek Cypriots to pass oppressive measures? No, they wouldn't.

You mean, it allows the Turkish Cypriots to do most of what they want in the chamber, since Greek Cypriots are very unlikely to be united while the muslim members would be. All it would take is one SYRIZA-like senator to flip and there goes one of the oldest Christian States.

In a Greek island that was 80% Greek whom aspired to be 100% through ethnic cleansing, it is quite expected to have safeguards. The EU allowed Cyprus to enter the union without any say to the people living in the northern part. I don't know what they'd do in such a case.

No, it doesn't allow Turkish Cypriots to do whatever they want in the chamber. The Greeks would have 3/4th of the chamber members. There is no way that Turks would gain half the seats to rely on one Greek member to pass a legislation. That could happen in the senate which would still require the legislation to clear the chamber where Greeks would always have 3/4th of the seats.

Cyprus have not been a Christian state for a long time. The fact that you assume it to be and present the fear of it not being one is quite a troubling position to have.

[AnthoniusII]

No, it doesn't allow Turkish Cypriots to do whatever they want in the chamber. The Greeks would have 3/4th of the chamber members. There is no way that Turks would gain half the seats to rely on one Greek member to pass a legislation. That could happen in the senate which would still require the legislation to clear the chamber where Greeks would always have 3/4th of the seats.

Cyprus have not been a Christian state for a long time. The fact that you assume it to be and present the fear of it not being one is quite a troubling position to have.

In fact Turkcypriots are refugees in their own lands since 1980 when over than 300000 Turkish fammilies migraded from Anatolia to Cyprus. By the info Turkcypriot community gave to UN , 70% of Turkcypriots migraded to EU, Canada and Australia from 1980 to 1999 and those that remained half of them cross the line of fire everyday to work in the Greekcypriot section. So what etnic cleansing are you talking about when the main reason that Turkcypriots are in worst condition today is because they are MINORITY in areas that they were suposed to be majority because "Mother Turkey " suposed that invaded Cyprus to defend them. Instead of defending them actually forced them to migrade!
If you seak for an enemy to turkcypriots simply take a look to Turkey. When Annan Plan was announced Turkey refused only one POINT of that plan...To re-establish the Turks that migraded to Cyprus back to Turkey and allow turkishcypriots return to their STOLEN BY TURKS properties!

[PointOfViewGun]

In fact Turkcypriots are refugees in their own lands since 1980 when over than 300000 Turkish fammilies migraded from Anatolia to Cyprus. By the info Turkcypriot community gave to UN , 70% of Turkcypriots migraded to EU, Canada and Australia from 1980 to 1999 and those that remained half of them cross the line of fire everyday to work in the Greekcypriot section. So what etnic cleansing are you talking about when the main reason that Turkcypriots are in worst condition today is because they are MINORITY in areas that they were suposed to be majority because "Mother Turkey " suposed that invaded Cyprus to defend them. Instead of defending them actually forced them to migrade!
If you seak for an enemy to turkcypriots simply take a look to Turkey. When Annan Plan was announced Turkey refused only one POINT of that plan...To re-establish the Turks that migraded to Cyprus back to Turkey and allow turkishcypriots return to their STOLEN BY TURKS properties!

The ethnic cleansing I'm talking about is the one that happened in partial in 1963, and in 1974 at the hands of the Greek Cypriots as well as Greeks from Greece which resulted in Turkey intervening.

If Turkey settled 300 thousands of Turks from Anatalia to an island that had roughly 1 million strong, wouldn't the ethnic make up of the island change?

[Aexodus]

I’ll say this for forced power sharing between ethnic groups: in NI it has institutionalised sectarianism, making Stormont the opposite of a solution to it.

Now of course, it was a successful solution to the violence, but still, I don’t think power sharing or allocating power by an arbitrary characteristic is an effective way to govern.