Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Actually in Cyprus the British ARE the UN in terms of patrollingthe Green Line. It would in fact be entiely possible for them to withdraw to the bases and let the two sides get on with it. The bases there have very little stategic importance but do make considerable contributions to the Cypriot economy both directly and by  increasing tourism.

The problem with the aquis compliance is the question of the rights of the northern Cypriots who do not have right of abode in the south. As you rightly state, in international law northern Cyprus has no legal status and therefore the citixens are EU citixens (although arguably the Turkish immigrants since the invasion and their children do not have this status). As full compliance with the aquis is required before admission, the Cypriot government have breached those terms and therefore they have breached treaty requirements.

The Greek Cypriot government most certainly were obstructive in the negotiations which is why the final compromise was not to their liking. As you seem to have bought in entirely to their propoganda on this, it is probably unproductive to argue the toss on this point much further.  

YOu make the point that the referendum result in the south should be respected. The same could well be said of the north which voted for the agreement. There are huge outstanding problems of residence and property rights than need to be resolved. The northern population had reservations about the the final outcome and  how it would work in practice. They were willing to put aside their worries and take what was a real risk. The south, as you indicate, quibbled and wanted  every i dotted and t crossed in the agreement when these could have been resolved after a yes vote.    

by Londonbear on Wed Jun 15th, 2005 at 08:58:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:

Display:

Occasional Series