Netanyahu Rejects Peace with the Arabs As Well As Palestinians: New Age Islam's Selection, 24 February 2017
New Age Islam Edit Bureau
24 February 2017
• Netanyahu Rejects Peace with the Arabs As Well As Palestinians
By Chris Doyle
• For Palestinians, Any Solution Is A Solution
By Abdulrahman Al-Rashed
• The UAE and the Formulas of Power and Success
By Abdullah Bin Bijad Al-Otaibi
• Does The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor Worry India?
By Fahad Shah
• Migration Is a Killer of Turkish Cyprus
By Yusuf Kanli
Compiled By New Age Islam Edit Bureau
----
Netanyahu Rejects Peace with the Arabs As Well As Palestinians
By Chris Doyle
23 February 2017
How to react to the revelation from former Obama administration officials that there was a secret summit in Aqaba a year ago on 21 February where Benjamin Netanyahu rejected a regional peace deal?
Firstly, one has to acknowledge one rarity that given how many governments were involved that it took a year to be leaked into the media. That certain parties were at least attempting to muster some form of deal must be to their credit. Yet this is tinged with the inevitable disappointment that once again such a move went nowhere.
There are some serious questions that do need to be answered and not just why it did not work out? A regional approach for an Israel-Palestine peace deal seems even more relevant today given that this seems to be the preferred approach of President Trump. He wants an outside-in deal.
In theory, so says Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu who always pushed for a regional solution but what this deal exposes yet again is that Netanyahu simply is not interested. He has the Palestinians where he wants them, weakened, divided and under his thumb with a near complaint US President.
Any regional deal means conceding on issues such as Jerusalem and settlements where he and his coalition partners see no reason to back down. The suspicion is that Netanyahu simply is not prepared to risk his own job for peace.
Alternative Fact
The standard, tired alternative fact is that it is always the Palestinians who reject peace, who are unprepared to negotiate and who are the obstacle to peace. Nobody has been more fulsome in pushing this “fake” narrative than the current four-time elected Prime Minister, Netanyahu. Yet the Palestinians were not at Aqaba so even Netanyahu has not found a way to blame them - yet.
Bibi routinely laments that he has no partner for peace, that if only President Abbas would just meet with him. If only he would choose him over Hamas, he bleated in 2014. Well Netanyahu preferred the extremist Naftali Bennett over peace. As Ehud Barak, the former Israeli Prime Minister stated on his Facebook page: “The fiasco is exposed.”
he reality is that Netanyahu was the Likud leader who rejected Oslo, opposed the pull-out from Gaza and torpedoed the Kerry process in 2014. The question is will Netanyahu ever be interested in taking the slightest risk for peace? It is remarkable how risk averse Netanyahu has always been, that after so long in office, he has so little appetite to achieve anything meaningful in terms of peace.
The scant detail of the offer in the Aqaba talks that involved then US Secretary of State, John Kerry, King Abdallah II of Jordan and President Sisi of Egypt is still instructive. It was billed as an updated version of the 2003 Arab Peace Initiative, which in truth means savagely diluted.
Gone is the clear requirement of a full Israeli withdrawal from territories occupied in 1967, instead no more than a construction freeze outside settlement blocs. This is even more pathetic since there is no definition of settlement blocs, and for most of the Israeli government the entirety of Area C in the West Bank (60 percent) is one giant single settlement bloc.
It also envisaged not just recognition of Israel, but recognition of Israel as a Jewish state, something the Palestinian leadership baulks at as they see this as betraying Palestinian citizens of Israel and consigning them to a basement status inside Israel. The recognition of Jerusalem as a shared capital for Israelis and Palestinians is perfectly sensible, so perfectly horrendous for Netanyahu. This alone was a deal breaker.
‘Right To Return’
But what does softer language on “right to return” for Palestinian refugees mean? This is far from clear. Even if Netanyahu permitted some refugees to live inside Israel, it is dubious that even a centrist, let alone a far-right Israeli coalition, would accept it was a right.
Sadly for the future, Netanyahu was only mildly attracted to the idea of doing a deal with the leader of the opposition, Isaac Herzog which could have allowed to ditch extremists like Naftali Bennett and Avigdor Lieberman. Herzog was scathing in his condemnation of Netanyahu. “History will definitely judge the magnitude of the opportunity as well as the magnitude of the missed opportunity.”
Peace should not wait for history to pass judgement. It needs leadership from multiple parties and courage, all of which are completely absent or at best very well hidden. A regional deal still has merits but not as a means to deprive Palestinians of their rights but to realize them. The message that the Israeli coalition and the Trump administration should be receiving is that normalization with the Arab world cannot and will not happen unless the occupation ends.
John Kerry clearly made huge efforts to shift Netanyahu. It appears that the adage of former Israel Defence Minister, Moshe Dayan still applies: “Our American friends give us money, arms and advice. We take the money, we take the arms but we decline the advice.” The difference now is that Trump will not even bother with the advice.
Chris Doyle is the director of CAABU (the London-based Council for Arab-British Understanding). He has worked with the Council since 1993 after graduating with a first class honors degree in Arabic and Islamic Studies at Exeter University. As the lead spokesperson for Caabu and as an acknowledged expert on the region, Chris is a frequent commentator on TV and Radio and gives numerous talks around the country on issues such as the Arab Spring, Libya, Syria, Palestine, Iraq, Islamophobia and the Arabs in Britain. He has had numerous articles published in the British and international media. He has travelled to nearly every country in the Middle East. He has organized and accompanied numerous British Parliamentary delegations to Arab countries.
Source: english.alarabiya.net/en/views/news/middle-east/2017/02/23/Netanyahu-rejects-peace-with-the-Arabs-as-well-as-Palestinians.html
----
For Palestinians, Any Solution Is A Solution
By Abdulrahman al-Rashed
23 February 2017
A little hope was reignited lately because US President Donald Trump decided to assign his son-in-law Jared Kushner to manage the Palestinian-Israeli struggle file. However, so far, it resembles a mirage for the thirsty. There will be no solution if there is no change on the ground.
First of all what is needed here is Palestinian unity to prevent detractors from exploiting the peace project and using it as a ball to throw into each other’s courts. Whenever there is consensus among Palestinians, there will be an Arab stance that supports it.
This does not mean that an Arab-Palestinian agreement is enough for mediators to market solutions that have become impossible today. A little realism is necessary for success. Truth be told, any proposed solution will revive the cause, which seems to have lost its brain functions.
Will it be two different states or one hybrid state? A federalism affiliated with Jordan or a confederation made up of three states – Israel, Palestine’s West Bank and Palestine’s Gaza? Will it be a state with one central system or several systems? What matters is any solution that ends the Palestinians’ tragedy which is the longest in modern history.
Buying Time
Israel is very happy with this forgetfulness and delay in addressing the Palestinian cause. It is happy with the dispute between Gaza and the West Bank and with their preoccupation in little details. This way, time passes by and Israeli settlements expand on the occupied territories. At the same time, Palestinians’ frustration increases as they see the world around them burn in civil wars and realize their cause is now at the end of the list.
Any solution is a solution while a lack thereof serves as a solution to Israel alone. The problem is not just due to Tel Aviv but it is also due to the continuous political failure of the Palestinian command, which is preoccupied with its quixotic disputes. The Palestinian president’s office is currently mostly focused on how to prevent Mohammed Dahlan from running for the presidential elections and how to eliminate him if he tries.
Meanwhile, all the second Palestinian authority in Gaza cares about is how to prevent leaders outside Gaza from competing with it and how to share jurisdictions and the budget with Ramallah’s government without giving up its powers and without engaging in elections that are not supervised by it. Actually, all three rivals do not want Palestinian elections whether in the West Bank, Gaza or Israel as no one wants to lose anything.
The Palestinians fighting for influence and jurisdictions today will leave tomorrow and will only pass to their people the tragedy, which they inherited from those who preceded them.
Israel does not want anyone to do anything as the current situation suits it. Obstructing the rise of the state, depriving the Palestinian authority from most of its jurisdictions, continuing to loot Palestinian territories and handing them over to Jewish settlers, pulling back developmental projects and resuming the policy of detentions, checkpoints and racial segregation are all means that aim to exert pressure and cancel others so Israel’s state stretches on all of the occupied territories.
The Israeli project today is old and it’s been on since 1967. What we cannot understand is the Palestinian authority and its partners’ inability to rise above personal disputes and to feel the responsibility required to serve their people’s interests. The authority, its partners and disputes are not a good model; therefore, no one in the world will care and offer political help to them. Greater causes with a higher priority, and that are more dangerous on the world’s interests and security, have surfaced.
Failed Initiatives
The relapses of the past failed initiatives also hinder proposing new political projects. The glimmer of hope which President Trump gave cannot be depended on. The problem is not the mediator but the rivals. I think it is highly unlikely that a solution can be reached considering the circumstances the region is passing through.
The problem is also not in lack of ideas as there are many proposals. Someone spoke about placing the West Bank under Jordan’s administration but Jordan rejects this and views it as a project of strife. Others propose that the Palestinian state be limited to the West Bank while placing Gaza under Egypt’s administration. However, Egypt feels the same way as Jordan and prefers a solution that does not involve it in any disputes.
Some propose only developing the Palestinian administration as the current status has been established based on the Oslo Agreement 23 years ago, and what’s new will be expanding the jurisdictions of the administrative authority. It is a model that resembles Iraq’s Kurdistan. Some hope to revive former American President Bill Clinton’s initiative to establish a demilitarized Palestinian state on all of the occupied territories and build a safe passage that links the West Bank with Gaza.
There are many ideas but there’s no serious desire. Israel hints that it does not have to accept any solution and believes the current situation is very comfortable even though it’s tantamount to a time bomb for it. The region’s countries are going through extremely difficult circumstances that drive each government to only want to ensure its own safety. This is why I said Palestinian leaders must end their disputes and try and work together to build confidence that there’s something to rely on.
Abdulrahman al-Rashed is the former General Manager of Al Arabiya News Channel. A veteran and internationally acclaimed journalist, he is a former editor-in-chief of the London-based leading Arab daily Asharq al-Awsat, where he still regularly writes a political column. He has also served as the editor of Asharq al-Awsat’s sister publication, al-Majalla. Throughout his career, Rashed has interviewed several world leaders, with his articles garnering worldwide recognition, and he has successfully led Al Arabiya to the highly regarded, thriving and influential position it is in today. He tweets @aalrashed
Source: english.alarabiya.net/en/views/news/middle-east/2017/02/23/For-Palestinians-any-solution-is-a-solution.html
-----
The UAE and the Formulas of Power and Success
By Abdullah bin Bijad Al-Otaibi
22 February 2017
The United Arab Emirates’ international and regional power formulas are a lot different than the past. It is currently a very strong and influential state thanks to the awareness of its leaders, special alliances and rapid development. The UAE has emerged as a model to the world of our times.
Under the leadership of President His Highness Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan, His Highness Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktoum and His Highness Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed efforts are on to further develop this model of a state. They are fully aware and keen to chart the future with innovative solutions to all the problems the world suffers from.
Keenness to undertake development projects and succeeding at innovation are important traits but what is parallel to it is maintaining heritage and culture and strengthening values. Adhering to the tenets of Islam and defending it is parallel to openness and co-existence with all religions, cultures and civilizations.
As the world takes pride in modern communication, the UAE takes pride in embracing different nationalities, which amounts to more than those recognized by an international organization the size of the UN.
The World Government Summit recently concluded in Dubai. The International Defence Exhibition and Conference (IDEX) kicked off in Abu Dhabi. This is an effective way to build and develop the Emirati model, which can be added to other models of cultural, political, military and economic development in modern times, such as the Japanese or Singaporean models or other models around the world.
Conscious thoughts and comprehensive vision are what make nations, governments and people’s lives different. Finding creative solutions to realistic and philosophical problems are what either push toward success and victory or loss and defeat. Imagination and its capacity to deliver must be governed by balanced realism and rationalism in order to achieve distinguished success and create a unique model.
The UAE found its special solution focusing on development in all its dimensions and which, at the same time, depends on gradual political development. This is an exemplary solution for many countries in the region. It’s a solution through which future can be easily foreseen without having to leap into the unknown. The models that sought to leap into democracy are shameful models. The Afghani and Iraqi models are examples of this and they do not inspire anyone across the world.
Keenness to undertake development projects and succeeding at innovation are important traits but what is parallel to it is maintaining heritage and culture and strengthening values
Tradition and Modernity
The UAE has also created its special solution in terms of tradition and modernism. The UAE is a modern and civil state by all standards. There is tolerance and co-existence among all religions and cultures and everyone finds their chance there on the condition that they abide by law and do not harm anyone.
At the same time, many programs have been launched and included in the work of governments, public institutions, charity organizations and others to teach young people the established habits, inherited traditions, values and high morals. The aim is to raise generations that stand on solid ground in terms of their awareness and culture and that look forward to a bright future.
As for the military aspect, the Emirati army has been well-known for its efficient participation in UN forces in different areas across the world, such as its participation in the second Gulf war, liberation of Kuwait in addition to its participation in Bosnia and Afghanistan.
All this was culminates into its major participation in the Operation Decisive Storm, which aims to restore legitimacy in Yemen by working with the Arab coalition. The UAE is the second country, after Saudi Arabia, to fully participate in defeating Iran’s agents, Houthi militias and forces loyal to deposed president Ali Abdullah Saleh, in Yemen. As a result, victory is near.
This is the Emirati model, which despite all its distinctions, continues to undergo development and renewal.
Abdullah bin Bijad al-Otaibi is a Saudi writer and researcher. He is a member of the board of advisors at Al-Mesbar Studies and Research Centre.
Source: english.alarabiya.net/en/views/news/middle-east/2017/02/22/The-UAE-and-the-formulas-of-power-and-success.html
----
Does The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor Worry India?
By Fahad Shah
Srinagar, India-administered Kashmir - The multibillion dollar China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, which is being called a "game-changer" in Pakistan, has raised apprehensions in neighbouring India.
In June 2015, barely two months after Chinese President Xi Jinping announced plans to invest $46bn to develop infrastructure and energy projects in Pakistan as part of the economic corridor, or CPEC, India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi told China that it was "unacceptable".
The ambitious project - part of China's "One Belt and One Road" or new Silk Road project - is a series of roads, railways, pipelines, hydropower plants and other development projects, being built from the restive Xinjiang province in China to Gwadar in south-western Pakistan.
The corridor, which came into operation last November, passes through Gilgit-Baltistan in Pakistan-administered Kashmir - a territory claimed by India. Both the South Asian neighbours claim the disputed Kashmir region in full, but control parts of it.
On January 17, speaking at a seminar in New Delhi, Prime Minister Narendra Modi said: "Only by respecting the sovereignty of countries involved, can regional connectivity corridors fulfill their promise and avoid differences and discord."
That Modi was referring to the economic corridor was confirmed by his foreign secretary, Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, two days later. "We expect they respect other people's sovereignty," he said.
"The CPEC passes through a territory that we see as our territory. Surely people will understand what [the] Indian reaction is. There needs to be some reflection and I am sorry to say that we have not seen signs of that."
Economic Integration
Dismissing New Delhi's concerns, Nafees Zakaria, a Pakistan foreign ministry spokesman, told Al Jazeera that the economic corridor is a "comprehensive and broad-based economic cooperation project".
"The project will contribute to [the] economic development of the entire region and not only for Pakistan and China," he said.
"It can be a catalyst for economic connectivity and integration in Central Asia, South Asia and West Asia. Objection by India or any other country to such an economic project is, therefore, beyond comprehension."
The project promises to be an immense economic and strategic windfall for China and Pakistan.
By 2050, according to a report by PricewaterhouseCoopers, China is projected to become the world's largest economy, with a GDP of $58.5 trillion, up from $5.7 trillion in 2010. The country's GDP growth rate has declined in recent years, however, from 7.3 percent in 2014 to 6.7 percent in 2016.
The CPEC is anticipated to boost Pakistan's economy, where the GDP is expected to grow by more than five percent by 2020, according to an IMF growth forecast. PricewaterhouseCoopers predicts that Pakistan's GDP will reach $4.2 trillion by 2050 from the current $988bn.
The 3,200km-long corridor is intended to connect the world's second largest economy, China, with the Middle East and Central Asia, reducing the alternative sea route distance - via the Malacca Strait - by 10,000km.
For Pakistan, the combined value of the CPEC's infrastructure projects would be equivalent to 17 percent of Pakistan's GDP in 2015, a report by Deloitte predicted. The report estimated that the economic corridor would create some 700,000 direct jobs between 2015 and 2030, and add up to 2.5 percent to the country's growth rate.
India's Concerns
The fact that the route passes through the disputed Kashmir region seems to have worried India, which has about half a million troops stationed in its part of the territory to quell more than two decades of armed rebellion.
"China is using Indian land area illegally occupied by Pakistan," said Seshadri Chari, a national executive member of the ruling Hindu nationalist Bhartiya Janta Party.
Beijing has been willing to address India's concerns though. Hua Chunying, China's foreign ministry spokeswoman told the media that Beijing is committed to developing friendly and cooperative relations with others and that CPEC would not affect China's position on Kashmir.
Suchitra Vijayan, a New York-based lawyer who has worked on India's borderlands including Kashmir, told Al Jazeera: "India doesn't want to internationalise the Kashmir issue but with Pakistan, China, and CPEC coming in, it happens."
Andrew Small, author of The China-Pakistan Axis: Asia's New Geopolitics, doesn't believe that the offers to India to join CPEC will elicit a positive response in the near future. But he believes there is a view among a number of officials in China and Pakistan that, in the long-term, that door needs to be kept open.
Small told Al Jazeera that keeping the door open does not mean that India will become enthusiastic about CPEC but that "it will be neutrally disposed - seeing some potential security benefits if Pakistan's economy is stabilised".
According to a report released by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute - a Swedish-based think-tank - India's opposition to CPEC reflects a concern over the internationalisation of the Kashmir dispute and the growing influence of China in the Indian Ocean.
It says that there is considerable concern within India that China, which has been neutral on Kashmir since 1963, can no longer be so now that its economic and security interests in these territories are growing.
After the 1962 India-China war, Beijing sought to cultivate good relations with Islamabad, which has emerged as the biggest buyer of Chinese defence equipment in recent years.
String of Pearls
New Delhi sees Gwadar - a deep-sea port located in Balochistan province - as part of China's "String of Pearls" bases, that extends from its eastern coast to the Arabian Sea. China is also developing ports in Sri Lanka and Bangladesh that are considered a potential military challenge to India.
The Gwadar port, overlooking one of the world's busiest shipping lanes in the Arabian Sea, has been leased to Beijing for 40 years. New Delhi fears that the port might become a Chinese naval outpost, thereby threatening India's energy and economic security, as more than two thirds of India's petroleum imports pass through the area.
Small says that India and Pakistan can expand their commercial interactions without resolving their larger conflict - a point echoed by a leading Kashmiri separatist leader Mirwaiz Umar Farooq.
He explains that India doesn't need to "join CPEC" anyway - in the future, it could maintain its formal objections to the initiative but still deepen trade relations with Pakistan, and in the process implicitly be utilising CPEC infrastructure, energy projects, industrial zones and more.
But Mihir Sharma, who is the author of Restart: The last chance for the Indian Economy, says that India's relations with Pakistan are simply too unstable for the former's primary land connectivity corridor to Central Asia, Russia and Europe, to run through the latter's territory.
"The risk of the investment and of trade through that corridor, in both geo-strategic and economic terms, might be too high," he said.
Chabahar Port
In May last year, India's Prime Minister Modi travelled to Iran and announced a deal to develop Chabahar port, barely 75km from Gwadar. India announced an investment of $500m but the project has been repeatedly delayed.
Many analysts have pointed out that the Chabahar port deal, which also includes Afghanistan, could be a parallel project to connect with Central Asia and Europe while bypassing Pakistan.
India has committed close to $2bn in development aid to Afghanistan, and it maintains close military cooperation with Kabul as it seeks to reinforce its geostrategic interest in the region. Chabahar will provide India with land access to Afghanistan - something Pakistan has denied India for years.
Iran could use Chabahar - about 843 nautical miles from India's commercial hub, Mumbai - to export more goods to India and the Asia-Pacific region.
This would open more investment opportunities to Indian firms, which could gain a foothold in Iran, which is emerging from years of sanctions. There would alos be benefits for landlocked Afghanistan, which would get connected to the Gulf, Arabian Sea and Indian Ocean.
The Chabahar port will be linked to Zaranj city, in Nimruz province, Afghanistan, which is connected to a highway built by India in 2009.
Small says that Chabahar is typically billed as an alternative and a rival port to Gwadar, and a counter-play to CPEC, but he points out: "It's still entirely possible that Chabahar and Gwadar would end up functioning as [a] network."
Source: aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2017/02/china-pakistan-economic-corridor-worry-india-170208063418124.html
----
Migration Is a Killer of Turkish Cyprus
By Yusuf Kanli
February/24/2017
What is the number of settlers from mainland Turkey in the population of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC)? Is the Turkish Cypriot community still the majority in their homeland, or has Northern Cyprus become flooded by settlers, making it a minority?
Many people in Northern Cyprus and in Turkey might not be happy with anyone writing on such potentially politically incorrect subjects. What do I mean? The late Turkish Cypriot leader Rauf Denktas always said:
“Those who go, and those who come, are all Turks” when encountered with such questions on whether he was not concerned about the changing demographics of his state, which is recognized only by Turkey. Was it indeed that irrelevant to ask such questions? Are those leaving and coming all Turks? What about Cypriotness? Are Turkish Cypriots not gradually losing their distinct, peculiar islander identity blended with their tribal shamanic past, Ottoman life, British taste, and of course cohabitation with Greek Cypriots, their resistance culture and of course self-reliance enforced by a very long period of isolation, solitude and obligatory solidarity?
Those leaving the island are Turkish Cypriots, the sons and daughters of the land, perhaps more so, the soul of the land. Turkey’s Deputy Prime Minister Tugrul Türkes, a second generation Turkish Cypriot living in Turkey, was criticizing Turkish Cypriot President Mustafa Akinci a while ago for wrongly putting the Turkish Cypriot population, who are now at the now-deadlocked Cyprus talks, at 220,000. According to Türkes, in Britain alone the Turkish Cypriot population exceeded that figure. Was he right? No statistics are available for now, but Türkes said efforts were underway to determine the Turkish Cypriot population living overseas.
Interesting. Perhaps Türkes should first try to discover the people with Turkish Cypriot backgrounds living in Turkey. There are many figures. Some say it is around 300,000, some claim it is well over 650,000. Which is correct? Furthermore, is there any meaning in establishing the size of the community with Turkish Cypriot background in Turkey, Britain, Australia, Canada or elsewhere? If these people are not citizens of Northern Cyprus and if the current legislature makes it extremely difficult for them to reclaim their rights in TRNC, is there a meaning in establishing a high but just romanticized number regarding the size of the Turkish Cypriot people of Cyprus? Perhaps, it is all a by-product of the minority obsession. Size does matter.
Cenk Uzunoglu, a colleague writing for Haber Kibris news portal in northern Cyprus, brought the emigration issue back to the forefront. Indeed, in the hardships of everyday life, buried in either the “No settlement is a settlement as well” antagonism or “A settlement now at any cost” submission, Turkish and Greek Cypriots as well as those interested in the Cyprus problem might be escaping a fundamental aspect threatening the very existence of the Turkish Cypriot people.
Coming from a family of three brothers and two sisters, this writer is a living example of the emigration problem of the Turkish Cypriot people. Two out of the five siblings have left the island; established lives abroad even though they’ve never cut ties with the island. But, from my family, there is a huge group living in Tarsus in Turkey’s southern province of Mersin, and another group in the Aegean province of Izmir. Both groups migrated to Turkey after the 1932 uprising of Greeks against the British colonial rule. They have mostly lost connection with the island.
How many people have not returned to Cyprus after the 1974 intervention? Particularly, how many of young Turkish Cypriots who left the island after 1974 for university education abroad returned so far? What is the percentage? Unfortunately, the state establishment in Northern Cyprus – southern Greek side is no better – is so deficient that no one has a figure on these issues.
While all attention is often focused on the number of mainland Turks who have settled in Cyprus since the 1974 Turkish intervention, what is the number of Turkish Cypriots who could not build a living in their homeland because of isolation imposed on them by their Greek Cypriot brethren living in next door to them?
The continuing Cyprus problem, hesitation of Turkish entrepreneurs in investing in Northern Cyprus, international investors fend off because of international isolation of the north, rampant favoritism, nepotism, mismanagement, corruption and all other typical ailments of closed, small town politics made it a must for young Turkish Cypriots to seek a future outside the island.
Uzunoglu asked in his article whether it was so difficult during censuses to ask people and record where the sons and daughters, brothers, sisters were now living. Indeed, that must have been done. But, mind you in the 2011 census, despite my insistence, the pollsters refused to record me on grounds I was at the house of my mother and that house was not my “first house.” I asked if they would register me if I was in my small hut a few miles away, they said: “That’s as well your vacation home, not first residence.” Why such an attitude?
Turkish Cypriots living outside the island cannot vote as they have lost their nationalities. Even if they maintain their nationality and can vote, cannot run for any public office because they would have to fulfill eligibility to become a candidate, which the constitution says they should be a “permanent resident” of that electoral region for at least 3 years prior to the election date.
Perhaps it is now time for Turkish Cypriots to stop crying for lost sons and daughters and work on what measures they might undertake to build bonds with those lost sons and daughters even if they might not be brought back now.
Is there any need to rediscover the Americas? Shall we reinvent the wheel? Just taking a look at Israel and copying some laws and constitutional articles that Israelis have written to make Israel a homeland for the Jewish people will be enough.
Source: hurriyetdailynews.com/migration-is-a-killer-of-turkish-cyprus-.aspx?pageID=449&nID=110099&NewsCatID=425
----
URL: https://newageislam.com/middle-east-press/netanyahu-rejects-peace-with-arabs/d/110185