This is related to events from about a year ago, where the UN tried to broker a deal between the Turkish and Greek Cypriots. This is very relevant to the whole disengagement debate.
The UN and EU decided that there is no right of return for refugees and that the "new situation that has been created" must be considered. Why is what's good for Cyprus not good for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?
A little background: Since Cyprus became independent in 1960, there has been tension between the Greek majority (80%) who are Orthodox Christians and the Muslim, Turkish minority that lives in the northern part of the island. In 1974, the Turkish army invaded the island to aid its Turkish "brothers". In 1983, the Turkish-Cypriots declared an independent state in the northern part of the island.
During negotiations for reunification, the Greeks demanded that all of the refugees and their descendents return to the Turkish section. Obviously, the Turks were opposed. When preparing their plan, the United Nations and European Union did not accept the Greeks’ demand to allow the refugees to return!
The second provision related to Turkish “settlers” and “settlements”. After the invasion, the Turks brought farmers from Turkey and settled them in northern Cyprus. They settled there, built settlements, increased the number of Turks on the island and contributed to the agricultural economy of Turkish Cyprus. During the negotiations, the Greeks demanded that the Turkish “settlers” return to Turkey. The Turks were opposed. The United Nations and European Union supported the Turkish position and left the “settlers” and “settlements” in place, despite the Greek demand.
The result is quite embarrassing. As of this week, the Turkish army occupies a significant portion of an EU’s member state’s territory. In recent years, it seems that European leaders cannot sleep well at night because of the "Israeli occupation". Does the "Turkish occupation" of one of their member countries also disturb their slumber?"
4 comments:
Of course Israel is different. We have a leader ( Sharon) who went from being a Hawk to being the most cowardly of the Doves. He will be the downfall of Israel. What Israel was when it started to what it has become is like to completely different countries. The best thing that can happen to Israel, is that Sharon dies before he can put his plans into action.
Avi,
May Hashem forgive you for that comment.
For Israel to be a player in the World Arena, it has to abide by their rules. Now, it is important to call a hazir fees out, when it really is so, like you are here; but it is still important for Israel to play in the game.
ABDULLAH...For Israel to be a player in the World Arena, it has to abide by their rules.
Abdullayh, which world arena do you want Israel to be a player in? The Hague which said that Israel must knock down its security wall and pay the Palistinians reparations for the inconvience, so that the Palestinians can kill more Jews? If we were to listen to the European countries, we probably would not exist. By the way, the decision to disengage was Sharons own idea. Nobody else influenced him.
Interesting analogy, however consider if you will a sociey and a people whose origins date back most likely before religion who have lived in subserviance for these millenia attached to their land. It is like saying Isreal should be torn between those Arabs who hate it and the Americans who feed it because the Jews are few and the UN says so.
Basic Human Rights leave no room for compromise; Germans learned this from the Holocaust, we can never forget, our diligence whoever we are, to respect reason, in service give love, and to suffer peace. Cypriots do not deserve our contempt. Rather, their survival depends on our remembering, and our acts for, the dignity all Humans are due.
Post a Comment