 |
|
VetLegion
|
|
Turkey will have to make concessions about that, also about the sea border with Greece, because having military aircraft dogfights between two EU members is unacceptable.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Ancyrean
|
|
Back to Ankara, Turkey
Feb 2003
time: 12:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by axi
Of course all this means nothing since Cyprus (and Greece, by solidarity) will veto the Turkish bid because Turkey still does not recognise the Republic of Cyprus.
|
If we are talking about vetoing the start of membership negotiations with Turkey, then where do you get this idea? Greece repeatedly supported Turkey's membership and carefully avoided any indication of any veto in the offing.
As for Southern Cyprus, they have been toying with the idea but even they avoided putting the issue in a recognise-me-or-veto setting.
If you meant vetoing an eventual membership after the negotiations are completed, then it will be a whole new ball game some years from now, where Greek Cypriots in the south may have to face their loss of face in Europe by their intransigence about the UN Plan, let alone feeling free about a veto.
Southern Cyprus was assumed by Europe to be "European enough" to accept a deal hailed as fair, balanced and comprehensive by Europe and the UN. Now, no European authority or government is able to put the slightest pressure on Turkey, since it's a deep embarrasment for the EU that a plan they wholeheartedly supported was rejected by the side that was becoming part of their union.
quote:
For obvious reasons anyway, even if Croatia gets into negotiations with the EU, I am certain that it will somehow be stripped of the capability of vetoing out a future candidacy of Serbia, since at least Greece, but also Bulgaria and Rumania who will be in first, will have reasons to want the Serbs in as well. |
I would be surprised if there was such a conditional restriction imposed on Croatia for its future vetos. It wasn't applied to Southern Cyprus even after they rejected the universally-supported UN Plan for the unification of the island.
quote:
Also note that Greece is prepared to block EU talks with FYROM until the name dispute is solved. |
Nevertheless, the situation is not the same as before after the US recognition of Macedonia.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Wernazuma III
|
 |
Decolonize!
Aug 2000
time: 06:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Heresson
The ex-leader of Carinthia...
And He used to play on anti-Slovenian feeling ammongst Carinthians...
Ammongst EU members, Austrians were the least pleased with Polish membership. Or the French were worse.
And I remember some affair between Austria and Czech Republic some time ago due to Czech nuclear plant |
1. Carinthia=!Austria and lamentably Haider is still Carinthian leader. 
Carinthia is a stinking biotope of the most reactionary, most German-nationalist elements in Austria. It's where they all go. Compared to other Austrian regions, Carinthia felt most German and had most Nazi members (and activists). One of the worst was Odilo Globotschnigg, figure the tragic irony and stupidity of the name.
Carinthian-Slovenian relationship is problematic since 1919, when Yugoslavian troops and Austrian partisans fought a dirty Guerilla war there (I can't go into detail here). Anyway, the rest of Austria is very favorable towards Slovenia, especially Styria, the other bordering province, where I live.
I was not pleased with Polish membership either, but not out of general xenophoby but because of that backwards medieval kind of Catholicism that rules the country.
Czech Republic - well, you say it yourself, it was over a nuclear power plant. Austria has an extremely strong anti-nuclear movement ranging from the political left to the right. Austria itself decided not to have them and is especially concerned about the security of bordering plants and felt the Czech officials didn't cooperate. The other issue with the Czechs are the Benes-decrees, and actually I believe the Austrian side was not really too picky on this issue, it had to be addressed.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ancyrean
|
|
Back to Ankara, Turkey
Feb 2003
time: 12:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by axi
Oh come on, the UN proposal was totally skewed in favor of Turkey and all the United States and EU pressure fell on the Greek Cypriot side to accept it nevertheless. Annan did not serve his purpose correctly because he failed to bring the two sides into an agreement and then he arbitrarily made a draft that was predestined to fail. Had he balanced the plan more, there would be good chances for it to pass both referendums with a 55-45 majority.
The main problem of the plan was not the give or take of land or money or population, but the fact that it was unworkable and led to the eventual division into two separate states and also to the perpetuation of Cyprus's dependence on outside forces, not just Greece and Turkey, but chiefly the US and UK. |
On the contrary, the Annan Plan was not a dramatic departure from the previous plans in the 1980s and 1990s that the Greek Cypriot side endorsed and Turkey rejected.
Moreover, the Greek Cypriot government actively worked to prevent any torough explanation of the plan to the Greek Cypriot people. They even prevented the EU Commissioner for Enlargement to come on screen and commend the plan.
If you think the Plan was biased in favour of Turks, I can assure you that there was a very strong objection in Turkey to the plan too, on the basis that it was not fair enough, which the government worked a lot to overcome.
The primary reason the plan was deemed "unworkable" by Greek Cypriots was the Greek Cypriot inability to comprehend any arrangement based on equal partnership. Instead of the nice all-Greek, universally recognised (albeit divided) structure they now have, suddenly they had to catch up with the reality of a Cyprus united but one in which they will be only one of the partners in an equality based arrangement.
Besides, once in the EU, the chances of division and seperation are not realistic, at least given the regard of Turkish Cypriots' for Turkey 
Or else the UN with its 40 years of experience in Cyprus affairs, as well as the EU and the US, who had all staked their prestige in their support for the plan, had some strange interest in preparing so terribly biased and "unworkable" plan and take pride in supporting it actively and loudly. The balanced nature of the plan was the most advertised and hailed quality of it. But to the Greek Cypriot mind, it would be balanced only if it gave the overall control to them.
quote:
These 2 want to secure Cyprus as a base of operations in the Middle East and they want Cyprus to be as dependent as possible. |
I'd agree that our two countries have seen Cyprus as a staging ground in the dynamics of conflict between them, but I'd also say by the time of the Annan Plan Greece and Turkey agreed largely that a solution is better for the future improvement of their relationship. 
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:18.
Apolyton Time is 00:18. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
30-11-2004 00:23
However, those numbers are not accurate, since they do not include the money that was practitcally transfered back to the West. Oh and compare East Germany now with the GDR 15 years ago, und you will see, what the money was spent on. 
|