Thursday, June 22, 2017
...I do not agree. If anything a Cyprus re-united, is a beginning for Turkey, not an end.
Mr. Erdogan has only to make a small change in intention to recognise Cypriots exist.
What is "Turkishness" may end. That is to say it may change itself, and its intentions. A Cyprus divided, is a Turkey divided. Witness what has been done to Cyprus, having its "Turks", and those, not "Turk". Witness what is happening today, in Turkey, where it is more divided than ever for the same political dogma. There is a big difference between Turks, and "Turks"; this is clear. The Turks are a diverse People. Turkey, as in Cyprus, is not "Turkish", (nor "Greek",) it is and has always been more than that.
And what of the "Greeks" and "Turks" in Cyprus? Think about it, were they ever busy at killing each other? The answer is no. Although at their hands many Cypriots died for not "being" them. "Greeks" and "Turks" are the same, "Greeks" and "Turks" are not Cypriots. It is the Cypriot people who need protection against "them"; this is worth thinking about, in Cyprus, and for Turkey and its Citizens, to be Free, to have Liberty.
...as I have said before, i will say it again, it is not the Turkish Cypriots that should be looking to Turkey for help. It is the other way around. In Cyprus, Turks, as Cypriots have the opportunity to represent themselves as Persons, as a Constituency, and as Individuals to represent themselves as Cypriots. This is the same hope Turks who are not "Turkish" in Turkey have: that they may have in Turkey's own Constitutional reform a form of self-representation as Persons, as Constituencies, as well.
Mr. Akinci is well placed to serve Cypriots, and those who are Turkish; he needs to express his disdain for, "Greeks" and "Turks", being Cypriot, being not "Greek" nor "Turkish". It is time for him to say it well, one Turkey, one Cyprus, so that Turks and "Turks" may find their Peace as Human beings, those who believe in God, and even those who do not, to serve lovingly each other.
Sunday, June 18, 2017
...three votes. When voting the elector chooses from three slates, electing a Turkish Cypriot Representative, a Greek Cypriot Representative, and for a Lower House, an Independent Representative (without Party affiliation).
If a leader could win a majority in a Legislature evenly split as seats Turkish and Greek, Parties, to win the leadership would necessarily fill all the slates toward that end. It would be in effect impossible to win such a House, without a majority of Cypriots in any case. Parties would necessarily have to present Platforms that their voters would consider as Individuals, not just as Persons. A Turkish Cypriot, as President, or a Greek Cypriot as President would be just as likely, and based on merit.
...and what of the demographics of the island? Is it believable that any 'number' chosen to represent some 'fair' split now will be as valid in the future? Why should it matter? Who is represented and how will minorities be given their recognition and respect in such as State if "Greekness" and "Turkishness" are fixed to some bloodline? Indeed it is far more complex, (or far simpler, either way) the issue is not one of "Greekness" or "Turkishness" but the Universal Principals we demonstrate, as Cypriots that we are willing to defend. (and allow me to add, there is no shame in "being" Cypriot)
Cypriot Constituencies may exist. They have the potential of being several as a sum. It is clear that a Turkish Constituency is prepared to demonstrate the value of such political representation, as Persons, specifically to nurture this Identity. Embracing this change, for Cyprus, the existence of distinct identities, within a Cyprus where Cypriots express no discrimination or distinction between themselves as Cypriots, is the BBF which offers to Individuals and Persons, their Freedom and Liberty respectively.
Cyprus has a Republic, a State. If it is to have a Turkish Constituency, i ask where are its equals? I ask, Cypriots, as Persons, would they, as Cypriot Constituencies, not have the same needs in sustaining their own diversity, that which makes them vital? Wouldn't they be more effective in sustaining their distinct identities through self-representation if in representing themselves there was a similar debate, as a 'majority' which may have different interests competing for attention, but always aware and mindful that there exists a 'minority' with its own special needs they must nurture as well? Wouldn't a Federal Government in this scheme of things be seen to be free of its present bias in securing a Cypriot their Freedom, and this Liberty, in setting a standard and goals?
...I ask, why not within this Republic, at another level of Government, as well, a Greek Constituency (and others)?
Could Mr. Akinci recognise the existence of the Republic (and work toward its reform), if the representative of a Greek Constituency was duly elected, and not the President of the Republic? Is it possible for the President to remove himself from the discussions, so that when the Constituencies are in unanimity they may discuss the State's Constitutional reform with him? Mr. Akinci must demonstrate in Switzerland in a few days something more than a "Turkish" view to claim he is a Cypriot, imho.
Some may recall the Communal Chamber and why it failed, while the intention remains. One may also recall that while "Greeks" and "Turks" were busy doing their killings, it was not other "Greeks" and "Turks", it was Cypriots for not being "Them", who were murdered and made to disappear. That while the coup succeeded, removing Makarios from office it failed because there were so few "Greeks" on the island supporting it. And, I remind the readership that Cypriots have existed for millennia as Cypriots. In any case, Cypriots cannot be denied the same basic principals any Human being has to being Cypriots. It would be a despicable thing if Cypriots cannot call themselves Cypriots to satisfy these same people who deny the existence of their Flag, the Flag of Cyprus, under which so many have died for at their hands already.
...a Cyprus divided, is a Turkey divided; it is something to think about. A "new" Cyprus, is not the answer, like a "new" Turkey i believe, they are likely to divide these populations further. The Problem is not exclusively a Cyprus Problem; witness how the same "Turkishness" has divided Turkey. Yet Cyprus is small in population; one hopes that this is an advantage in its own Constitutional reform. That while Turkish Cypriots look to Turkey for guidance, I suggest it should be the other way around; that while Turkey is in this state of reform it is all the more valid to think differently. That if, Cyprus is not "Greek", Turkey is not "Turkish" for the same reasons. That as a Constituency what can be gained being Cypriot, offers the same hope to the Kurds, and the Alevi, (not "Turks", but Turks) for example in Turkey. That this same hope, in a Cypriot way, makes it clearer, what is an Individual, what is a Person, what is a Nation, what is a State, what is Freedom, what is Liberty; and from a Unitary State exclusively, to a BBF, Cypriots, by changing themselves in this way may possibly change the political landscape throughout the region, being the "perfect" solution sought after for so long, because it is practical, it promotes respect among all Peoples, it is held in so much high esteem, (it is the solution to Turkey's Problem), and it is something which can be emulated.
It is wrong for Turkish Cypriots to think that they are weak and impotent; but as "Turks" they are.
...cheers, Mr. Alper.
Tuesday, June 13, 2017
..what is the importance of these Tripartite meetings?
...the tables themselves can be joined to make for larger meetings. It is the recognition that no country can do it alone, stabilise the region, exploit safely what is under the sea, and as a first step, small as it has been, it is a big first step.
Turkey does not dare join any one of these tables. The meddling failed, that while Egypt, (Lebanon,) and Israel may have their own agendas, it does not include the exclusion of Cyprus, as was the possibility before these Agreements, and is as it remains, Turkey's intention today.
It is "her" Continental shelf, according to Turkey, her's to share; a hard sell if no one is listening, it is harder still if she must go it alone. News that Turkey will start drilling is old news to me; no one can stop Turkey from building her own drill ships and rigs. But, like the rest of the world i am waiting because they do not exist (as far as i know) in Turkey, and no oil major will contract for this work.
No one excludes Turkey, her chair, like Syria's and Palestine, are yet to be filled. One hopes that there is no disaster from such work in any case, and she may with a small change in intention, by recognising Cyprus, join at these tables, a partner, instead of the "but one". It is a hard choice for Turkey embracing such a change; in my mind it is a good one.
Cyprus continues to demonstrate itself to be a formidable adversary for decades, against Turkey.
Cyprus may make as good an ally, with the capacity she demonstrates as a facilitator of exchange.
Dialog is all we have to make clear what is reasoned; there is a great potential here.
Monday, June 12, 2017
...we, the rest of the world, can see the result of dividing for "Turkishness", people "Turkish" and not "Turkish".
...Turkey, for "Turkishness" is more torn now than ever before in its History. As it is in Cyprus, there is a difference between a "Turk", and a Turk. This is the Problem; it is not exclusive to Cyprus.
...one small change of intention, Erdogan can build his Legacy for Turkey united as Turks, if in Cyprus, Cypriots unite as Cypriots, a State based on Universal Principals; in effect, a Cyprus not "Greek", a Turkey not "Turkish".
Saturday, June 10, 2017
…what is becoming clear is that “Greeks”, and “Turks”, make up the same side of the debate; Cypriots on the other. What is the fundamental flaw in this debate is being revealed. While Cypriots are intentionally ignored by the Problem, without this recognition, that they exist, there is little choice but to represent themselves.
If the leaders they elected as Cypriots cannot do more for Cypriots, rather than their “Turkishness” or not, they betray those who voted for them; this is clearer, now. Mr. Akinci must recognise that Cypriots need him to demonstrate that courage. Cypriots are Cypriots. Mr. Anastasiades, in Geneva, should not stand alone, not for “Greeks” or against them, not for “Turks” or against them, but for Cyprus, without “them”.
Thursday, June 08, 2017
...let's remember that it was Cyprus that endorsed Turkey's bid for membership into the EU.
Turkey may have much more prosperity with a small change in intention. Cyprus exists, except for this "but one".
You are very confused about your History it seems. Since then, Turkey is even more divided by its "Turks", Cyprus has recovered despite "them" (read: "Turks" (and "Greeks")).
...Turkey may betray its "Turks" in Cyprus. It is clear they don't have the capacity to support themselves', as Erdogan has said: no more than servant-slaves, parasites.
Turkey my take "Turkishness" in Turkey somewhere different because it is clear that there is more to Turks, and Turkey, than that. He has a Legacy to build.
...and in an instant everything can change, for him; recognising the Republic because, in its reform, one Cyprus, like one Turkey, is easy to imagine.