PtePike on 
I Veli on 
Hector on 
Thomas on 
miltiades on 
Thunderbox on 
Pauline Read on Erdogan’s interview with Greek Cypriot journalists
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan spoke to a group of Cypriot journalists in Istanbul, explaining that Turkey had no hidden agenda as far as Cyprus was concerned. He asked Greek Cypriots to overcome their mistrust of Turkey and accept that whatever decision over Cyprus’ future Cypriots came to, Turkey would accept them.
This interview was the first time since 1974 that Greek Cypriots had a chance to directly ask questions of a Turkish Prime Minister. Referring to the Turkish side’s package of proposals on governance and power, submitted in January, he was critical of the Greek Cypriot side’s suspicions:
“I see on the Greek Cypriot side some question marks or doubts about what is behind this package. Whereas what we have to be doing is thinking not just about one part of the island, not only about the north of the island but the north and south of the island.”
PM Erdogan also repeated that Turkish troops would be withdrawn from the island but not until there was a solution. He criticised the Greek Cypriot side’s insistence that Turkey’s rights as a guarantor should be removed. He accused the Greek Cypriots of “in a manner of speaking acting as if they are the spoilt child of the EU and they feel like they can afford to do that.” This was in reference to their decision to block chapters in Turkey’s EU accession bid, particularly the ‘education’ and ‘energy’ chapters.
number of views: 568
good words by erdogan.
2 things on my mind….
if the above is to be relied upon and assuming he expressed his true views.
a. why the propositions that were recently placed on the negotiating table, which where, a clear attempt to make the negotioation fail.
b. T. is internally a v troubled place. Assuming GC can trust the wester-facing ertogan, there is no guarantee he will remain in power. And that the army wont attempt something like what it failed to do in 2003 to the government of Ertogan.
other than that, statement of this sort is what we need to move ahead with things.
Good Contribution. Constructive or Abusive:
4 
0
ME, and I suppose after a settlement a Makarios-like figure could be elected….
Good Contribution. Constructive or Abusive:
3 
0
The GC journalists should have asked him to demonstrate Turkish goodwill by returning Varosha. They could have also asked where else in the world does one State have a legal(?) right to interfere in the affairs of another with military force.
Good Contribution. Constructive or Abusive:
3 
0
Jerry, that’d work – don’t you think? Have you ever had to negotiate in a difficult situation? Perhaps there’s a seminar called, “the role of aggressive confrontation during delicate negotiations.”
Good Contribution. Constructive or Abusive:
2 
0
Jerry, I was thinking about your legal right to militarily intervene. For example, the US built A bombs and used them on Japan in WW2. Iran wants to build a nuclear bomb and this somehow becomes illegal so that the US can militarily intervene. Why do you think the US having nuclear weapons is not illegal?
Good Contribution. Constructive or Abusive:
2 
0
Malcolm, you are stretching things a bit aren’t you. The journalists were not negotiating, Christofias does that, they could have done a Jeremy Paxman and asked a few more searching questions. As to your second post I’m not aware that the parties involved ever signed agreements that legally allowed them to use military force against each other. Perhaps you can say which countries have the right of intervention enshrined/attached to their constitution.
Good Contribution. Constructive or Abusive:
4 
0
Jerry, the journalists represented GC media and as such reflect/create GC public opinion. The way they respond sends a signal and the way you were asking them to respond sends a non-conciliatory signal. I’d accept that it is stretching things a bit and perhaps the mainstream Greek language press in south Cyprus would have taken your stance. If this is true then I can see why the talks will fail.
You talk of “rights” and “constitutions” as if they were real things. When Russia invaded Georgia they stated that they had the “right” to do so and that their “constitution” allowed them to participate in armed struggle. I’m not sure where you are going with that question?
Good Contribution. Constructive or Abusive:
3 
0
mc said “and I suppose after a settlement a Makarios-like figure could be elected….”
Mc,
a couple of things:
a. your view of what makarios was is not correct. If anything M. was a moderate in views and had to keep hard core GC at bay. Testiment to this is the fact that they tried to kill him and overthrow him. He did, however, 9unofficially) participated in the Akritas plan and that is a blemish to his name. The Akritas plan has to be viewed in the context of its time. It is in todays standatds, however, a clearly racist and divisive plan.
b. We do not have, anywhere in our political system, any hard core views that might surface at any one time. The same is, I feel, true of the GC ppl. We do not pose, politically, a security threat to TCs. The few morons we had that thought in that fashion are either dead or in a wheelchair.
c. The risk of radical changes in T. is not an unlikely scenario, to the contrary, if erdogan does not manage to keep the army at bay, they will overthrow him. It’s a true gamble.
Your comparison is unfair and unjustified because it is extremely unlikely.
I do think Erdogan would like to solve the Cyprus issue, maybe the first president after Ozal that thinks this way.
Poor Ozal did not make it. Will he ?
Good Contribution. Constructive or Abusive:
4 
0
ME, sorry that’s not what I meant about Makarios. I meant someone who would change the rules as he did in 1963. Although change is more likely in Turkey it is not unlikely in Cyprus. The whole point of Erdogan’s words was about ignoring Turkey and focusing on Cyprus and Cypriots. In 30 years time who knows which energy rich Middle Eastern country might have their eyes on Cyprus. Whether they are successful depends on the strength of Cyprus’ alliances. Currently the EU is a good bet but who knows in 30 years time, it might even separate into individual countries and where would that leave Cyprus?
Good Contribution. Constructive or Abusive:
3 
0
The reason that Turkey had the right to take military action is because there was a treaty authorising them to do so if requested by the rightful government. The treaty authorised each of the guarantor powers the right to intervene together or separately to ensure the constitution of Cyprus. The request for intervention was duly made by the rightful vice-president and other recognised representatives of the TCs because the Greek inspired coup made Enosis imminent.
The treaty was agreed by the Cypriot, Greek, British and Turkish Governments so it is a bit much for GCs to now complain because the terms of the treaty were triggered by their actions against TCs. Further, it is part of the constitution of Cyprus – as is the guarantee that Cyprus will remain independent of both Greece and Turkey. The constitution cannot be altered without the agreement of both sides – and if the agreement of TCs is required then it should be earned not demanded.
Also you deny that the events of the 60s could happen again yet refuse to believe that Turkey would not intervene again unless they do. Surely if you are still fearful of Turkey, you can understand why the TCs are still fearful of you. I think the guarantee should remain in place until a solution has been in place long enough (therefore more than 3 years) to reassure Turkey and the TCs that this time you will honour whatever constitution results from a solution.
Good Contribution. Constructive or Abusive:
9 
2
look JJ
no one can deny that T. intervention had some legitimate pretext to it. It “intervined” because forces outside the control of what was then part of the RoC (i.e. GC controled) took over and clearly were clearly posing a (potential) threat to TCs.
The junta, however, was not our choice, it was brought in upon us and it then FASCILITATED the turkish invasion. The fascilitation happened in real terms on the ground when the invasion was happening. We have hundreds of dead soldiers and thousands alive ones that will testify on how the Greek army command DELIVERED nc to Turkey. These people should have been executed for high treason. They are rotting in a jail right now.
So if the “intervention” was to restore legitimacy, it did none of that. And the intention to move towards a solution was NEVER there with exception of Ozal and Ertogan (for different reasons).
the Turkish intention in cyprus, was to divide the island, it was such back then and it would still be the case had the political scenery hadnt changed so much. T. had considered the Cyprus issue “solved” for the better part of the last 35 years. There are numerous such statements made by T. presidents.
This kind of new “diplomatic” face of T. in news to all of us (including TCs).
The changes M. attempted to make in 1963 were in my view reasonable changes. It would allow the RoC to survive an unworkable constitution. The TCs chose to walk out in protest.
I also think M. was wrong to make this proposition at the time because the result of this was predictable. He was not v. smart in that way as he was not smart in 74 in ignoring the threat from Junta. he is partly to blame for the situation we are in right now.
We dont like priests in Cyprus ever since (nevermind having them involved in politics). This is contrary to what TCs believe about GCs (regarding priests).
The guarantee issue is one that is clearly a divisive element in any new constitution. It is unheard of in any state to have their existance dependand on another. The A5 plan had no such provision.
GCs were morons to vote regarding this issue in parliament, the GC parliament tried to pre-empt any such concesion from the GC government. These are done for internal consumption and in a showdown between MPs and governent. They did us no favours.
JJ, i dont think anyone would object to an interim guarantee. One that has a beggining and an end time.
Good Contribution. Constructive or Abusive:
8 
0
Excellent comment, ME, I would have happily published that as an article.
Good Contribution. Constructive or Abusive:
3 
0
Masta, that’s beautiful! There are a number of points in it with which I would take issue, but it’s a reasonable, rational, well-constructed argument with not a hint of insult, abuse or derogation.
Congratulations.
Good Contribution. Constructive or Abusive:
4 
0
Thank you for those comments ME.
On a scale of 1 to 10 how would you rank the strength of the ROC government now? And in 74 how would you have ranked it?
Reading into your comments, much depends on negotiations with governments that are legitimate in the peoples eyes and third countries eyes as well.
Malcolm, go ahead an publish it. Take it from a footnote to the standing it deserves.
Good Contribution. Constructive or Abusive:
3 
0
.. another pair of beautiful words by yet another politician…
just what we need to solve the problem..
.. same old same old..
words words words..
…i am too tired to care what they say anymore.
Just wake me up to vote when it all ends..
Good Contribution. Constructive or Abusive:
2 
0
kyriakos,
I agree.
however, what we are witnessing here is important.
not because there is a change in T. policy in the Cyprus issue. This is important because T. now, unlike what has done so far, has entered a game whereby it is dancing the politics of civilised countries.
This means there is now a way to influence (pressure) turkish governments through the work of diplomacy, this trend will continue and will be come more evident as time goes by.
Its also important because it shows that erdogan is willing come to some kind of conflict with the hawks in T. which have first say in issues like cyprus.
the beast called turkey MAY have slowly started to turn.
Good Contribution. Constructive or Abusive:
3 
0
ME, by popular demand I’ve published your article. Tell me if you want any changes.
Good Contribution. Constructive or Abusive:
3 
0
MC,
I dont mind the publishing of the article, although I think some of the views are expressed a bit “free-handed”. I wish you had asked first, so I could make it a bit more “presentable”
also, you may have not noticed but the pseudonym I use actually has a meaning. its mostly funny, but COULD be seen as oftensive to some…
Constructive or Abusive:
0 
0
ME, you rewrite it and I’ll put the updated version online in place of this one. You can change your pseudonym too, it can’t be any worse than Dixie Normous can it? I don’t think that you realise that everything you write as a comment is automatically placed on the internet. Takes a few hours though. I’m offline until tomorrow.
Good Contribution. Constructive or Abusive:
1 
0
Μ.Ε.
However I don’t think the leaders in both sides are capable to seize the opportunity (?) and find a solution just by themselves..
Good Contribution. Constructive or Abusive:
1 
0