Cyprus-Forum.com

[halil]

‘Where were you?’ or ‘Winning a lost case’

27.02.2009

Niyazi Kizilyurek

The statement of “We are working to win a lost case” belongs to Mehmet Ali Talat. He used to express the statement often after the referendum in 2004. If we reconstruct the thing he wants to say in its own discourse, such a meaning can be seen: The Turkish Cypriot side did not appraise the period from the end of 2002 and until the March of 2003 which was suitable for the settlement and helped the Greek Cypriot side to be a member of the EU on behalf of the whole island. When the Turkish Cypriot society said “Yes” to the settlement in the 2004 referendum, it was already too late. Now we are trying to win a lost case and finding the settlement opportunity again which was lost.
This assessment of Mehmet Ali Talat is correct and accurate. As a matter of fact, Kofi Annan also made a similar assessment in the Cyprus report he presented in 2004 to the Security Council and he stated that the Turkish Cypriot side was late for the settlement.
We named the upper title of the booklet in which we summarised the negotiations in Cyprus as “Where Have You Been Before?” and this was chosen to tell the story of “being late” to the settlement in the late Cyprus history. However the “being late” phenomenon is not just limited to the 2002-2003 period nor with just the attitude of a society. It is a fact that the sides are late to the settlement negotiations “alternately” which have been continuing actively since 1964 and officially since 1968. Although the “being late” phenomenon, which was extended to such a long period and that was repeated continuously, cannot be at random; it cannot be explained by “bad coincidences”. The phenomenon that we face is a SYSTEM; it is a SYSTEM of ‘SOLUTIONLESSNESS’ [not achieving a solution].
As every system, this System of ‘Solutionlessness’ has structures, systems of values and practices. This is the reason for always going back and entering into a deadlock like an ‘eternal comeback’ and which we frequently saw in our recent history.
When we start to look at the System of Solutionlessness from the view point of Greek Cypriot society, we need to go back to 1960, the establishment of the Republic of Cyprus. Greek Cypriot elite people perceived the Cyprus island as an ‘Hellenic island’ more than anything and the Turkish Cypriots as a ‘minority’ objecting to the two-society nature of the Republic of Cyprus and they made efforts either to remove the Republic of Cyprus by Enosis or turn it into a Greek Cypriot state. This is the main reason of not gaining results from the Cyprus negotiations until 1974. Also there are similar reasons behind the Greek Cypriot side accepting the federal state idea after 1974. The majority, that thinks the island belonged to them, therefore they were the ‘fundamental element’, do not lean towards federalism just like every majority. They perceive the federal state form as an ‘unfair settlement’ with a pre-acceptance and instead of working by executing the requirements of federalism for Cyprus to have a political union over federalism, they argue a Greek Cypriot centred conception like ‘the reunification of the island’. Even if you adopt the political energy that was produced by such an attitude and the federal settlement on paper, it will not be enough for a federal state to be established.
The Turkish Cypriot side also just apparently supported the Federal state formula based on the geographical principle which they put on the negotiation table after 1974. The politics they actually run after was abolishing the Republic of Cyprus and ensuring the establishment of two different states in the island. Therefore, terminating the existence of the Republic of Cyprus was the prior aim of the Turkish politics that were developed after 1974, although the idea of turning the Republic of Cyprus state into a federal state was expressed.
These are the reasons that lie behind the politics that sentenced the island to ‘solutionlessness’ until 2004.
It is too early to tell where the negotiations, started by Mehmet Ali Talat and Demetris Christofias, are going; however it is a fact that it is too late for a settlement. Despite everything, it is possible to say that, without taking any risks: If the political mentality that sentenced the island to ‘solutionlessness’ for a long time is followed, the System of ‘Solutionlessness’ will not be demolished and there will not be a settlement. Einstein’s famous phrase says that “The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them."

[Nikitas]

As much as I respect professor Kizilyurek I think he is missing some major reasons in his assessment of why there is no solution in Cyprus, what he calls solutionlessness.

Point one- the itnereference of outsiders who have agendas clashing with the natural course of establishing a democrtic system on the island. Turkey is the biggest obstacle, followed by Britain and Greece coming last in the relative scale of clashing demands since 1974. When Turkey insists that it has vital interests in Cyprus obviously there will be solutionlessness no matter what the Cypriots want.

Each side has demands that are anathema for the other. Additionally each side fails to appreciate the fears of the other. Dissolution of the RoC is one such problem, which for GCs means a first step to oblivion. A unitary state is the equivalent for the TCs, where they fear they will be forced to relive the 1964-68 period all over. A Federated RoC is a way out, but it clashes with the aforementioned "vital interests of Turkey" on which the professor is totally silent.