Phil view, etc.
In Yesterday’s Άποψη: Δημοσκοπήσεις και Ευθύνες Ταλάτ, Fhileleptheros (Phil) accuses essentially Talat for the shift towards the two-state solution on the Other Side. According to Phil, this shift is worrying, and for sure must not be coming from the behavior of the Cypriot government that has offered so many conveniences for the T/C brothers (like free medicare and the like). If the T/C have indeed shifted to the 2 state solution, then analysts should look for responsibilities in the Talat regime for all the attacks it unleashes on the Cypriot government.
Of course, cause and effect in these situations are hard to untangle. Nevertheless, if you had to bet, would you bet that Talat is leading his people (equivalently for TeePee) or are his people leading Talat (equivalently for G/C and their politicians)?
Levent in Politis had a more balanced view arguing that it is not Talat’s fault really but this change of attitude since 2004 has come naturally due to the economic upturn on the Other Side since 2004. If the economy can do well without the G/C, then why complicate matters? As the practical Yanks say, “If it aint broke, don’t fix it”. Which is not too different from the attitude among the G/C about the dangers of a federation, a key fear driving many NO votes in the Patriotic Referendum.
Now, I realize we want to have a propaganda machine, but how many of us actually believe Phil? Levent in this case is more reasonable and has part of the answer, but not exactly.
The plain truth is that the T/C are for 2 states because they predominantly view us, the G/C, as wanting two states! Honestly now. How many of us (the G/C) think that there can be one unitary state (along the lines of bizonal, bicommunal) from now on? How many of us want such a state, really? Moreover, how many of us believe that such a state can arise from the policies of TeePee? How many of the younger people would like to have anything to do with the T/C? 10%? 15%? I think even that is optimistic. The T/C view this, and given that this also suits them in terms of keeping the disproportionate share of land they got in 1974, they think, “why not?” They think, “Wait a minute, we started the quest for taksim, for partition, now the G/C are for partition, but if we can get partition and what we got in 74 with a good economy, why not go for it?”
Simple as that. And with the machissimo politicians we have among the G/C, especially with Presidential elections coming up, will there be any doubt that however much Talat tries to also "look tough" so that he can stay in power, the pendulum is fast swinging towards the Denktash tradition coming back to power in the Other Side? Will that also be Talat's fault?
Of course, cause and effect in these situations are hard to untangle. Nevertheless, if you had to bet, would you bet that Talat is leading his people (equivalently for TeePee) or are his people leading Talat (equivalently for G/C and their politicians)?
Levent in Politis had a more balanced view arguing that it is not Talat’s fault really but this change of attitude since 2004 has come naturally due to the economic upturn on the Other Side since 2004. If the economy can do well without the G/C, then why complicate matters? As the practical Yanks say, “If it aint broke, don’t fix it”. Which is not too different from the attitude among the G/C about the dangers of a federation, a key fear driving many NO votes in the Patriotic Referendum.
Now, I realize we want to have a propaganda machine, but how many of us actually believe Phil? Levent in this case is more reasonable and has part of the answer, but not exactly.
The plain truth is that the T/C are for 2 states because they predominantly view us, the G/C, as wanting two states! Honestly now. How many of us (the G/C) think that there can be one unitary state (along the lines of bizonal, bicommunal) from now on? How many of us want such a state, really? Moreover, how many of us believe that such a state can arise from the policies of TeePee? How many of the younger people would like to have anything to do with the T/C? 10%? 15%? I think even that is optimistic. The T/C view this, and given that this also suits them in terms of keeping the disproportionate share of land they got in 1974, they think, “why not?” They think, “Wait a minute, we started the quest for taksim, for partition, now the G/C are for partition, but if we can get partition and what we got in 74 with a good economy, why not go for it?”
Simple as that. And with the machissimo politicians we have among the G/C, especially with Presidential elections coming up, will there be any doubt that however much Talat tries to also "look tough" so that he can stay in power, the pendulum is fast swinging towards the Denktash tradition coming back to power in the Other Side? Will that also be Talat's fault?
posted by apodimos Kypreos at 11:35
1 Comments:
Well, it most certainly won't be the fault of anyone on the G/C side. And that's what matters. As always.
Post a Comment
<< Home