'Do We Know What We Really Want?'

A question posed by the editorial writers in today's Cyprus Mail. Among the observations made are the following striking points:

...Only when the first version of the plan was submitted did people get a genuine idea of what a federal settlement would be like and it was nothing like it had been described by the politicians over the years. Politicians had been misinforming people for decades about the type of settlement they could deliver, creating false expectations by setting unattainable targets. So when the plan was presented people felt cheated and wronged, not by the politicians, who immediately started slamming it, but by the UN and the international community that were seen as favouring the Turkish side. As usual, the foreigners were blamed.

Opposition to the Annan plan was fuelled by another factor – Cyprus’ imminent accession to the EU. Greek Cypriot confidence has grown ever since the signing of the accession treaty last April, people feeling that as part of the EU the free areas’ security has been taken care of. Feeling that their security was guaranteed, the need of a settlement ceased to be an imperative.

And the politicians are back to playing their old games, creating unrealistic expectations about the type of settlement that can be secured after accession. The human rights of everyone would be guaranteed, there would be no exemptions from the acquis communautaire and the Turkish side would have no choice but to accept the type of settlement that Greek Cypriot side wants, politicians have been arguing. All we have to do is avoid signing a peace deal before May 1, when we will become full members of the EU.

Nobody can say whether this line of argument is correct, but it does seem to feature a large element of the wishful thinking that has always characterised our politicians’ Cyprus problem discourse. Could they be painting a rosy picture and raising false expectations again by refusing to look at the possible negative consequences of a rejection of the plan in the referendum? Is it not possible that after a no-vote in April, the exact same plan could be put to a referendum three months later? Are people being misinformed yet again about what our government can achieve?

This is the perennial problem with regard to the issue of a settlement. There has never been an open, honest and constructive public debate about how we want our problem resolved. Do the Greek Cypriots really want the re-unification of the island and to share power with the Turkish Cypriots? And if we do, do we really think re-unification would be on our terms, because we would be an EU member-state? Do we rally want to finance this re-unification and to pay in order to help improve the living standards of the Turkish Cypriots? Do we want to invest time and money in a solution or do we believe it is not worth the risk and the two-state solution is a better option?

These are all very important questions that should have been at the centre of public debate in the past 20 years. Yet 30 years after the invasion, we still have not decided what sort of solution we really want...

Comments

[ahffsunvul]

[url=http://hometown.aol.com/pills597307433/nasonex-meridia-doxycycline-famvir-glucotrol-xl-plendil.htm]nasonex meridia doxycycline famvir glucotrol xl plendil[/url]

[lybrjnurcl]

dads fucking boys