Cyprus-Forum.com

[EPSILON]

Divided Cyprus

A hawkish problem
Apr 23rd 2009 | ISTANBUL
From The Economist print edition
A nationalist election win in northern Cyprus dims reunification hopes

THE prospects of a united Cyprus receded when a nationalist party won the parliamentary election in the north on April 19th. The National Unity Party, led by the hawkish Dervish Eroglu, took 44% of the vote, giving it 26 of the 50 seats. The vote for the ruling Republican Turkish Party, which backs reunification, fell to 29%. This reflects voters’ disillusion over the UN-sponsored peace talks that have dragged on since Turkish troops seized the northern third of the island in 1974 after a failed attempt by ultra-nationalist Greek-Cypriots to unite with Greece.

The result will also damage Turkey’s faltering membership talks with the European Union. Turkey faces a December deadline to open air- and seaports to Greek-Cypriots. It refuses to do so until the EU eases trade restrictions on northern Cyprus. Sweden, which takes on the EU’s presidency in July, is looking for a way to avert yet another train-wreck between Turkey and the EU. One idea is for Turkey to open a symbolic port or two only (though this was also tried two years ago by the Finnish EU presidency).

Hopes of a breakthrough now hinge on talks between the Greek-Cypriot president, Demetris Christofias, and his Turkish-Cypriot counterpart, Mehmet Ali Talat. Mr Talat led the campaign to persuade Turkish-Cypriots to vote in favour of the UN’s Annan plan to reunite the island in 2004. But the Greek-Cypriots overwhelmingly rejected the plan in a separate vote, so Cyprus joined the EU as a divided island. The Greek-Cypriots have been subverting Turkey’s EU membership talks ever since.

The mood improved markedly when Mr Christofias, who like his fellow left-winger, Mr Talat, favours a settlement, was elected president in February 2008. Substantive peace talks began last year with the backing of Turkey’s government, still keen on a settlement similar to that proposed in the Annan plan. This calls for the establishment of a bi-zonal, bi-communal federation between Greeks and Turks.

Mr Eroglu publicly espouses the idea of reunification, saying that talks between Mr Talat and Mr Christofias must continue. Yet many suspect he prefers the status quo, which means continued dependence on Turkey and keeping 30,000 Turkish troops. Mr Eroglu talks of sending “a representative” to the peace talks. If he sticks to his campaign pledge to scrap a commission set up under Mr Talat to return occupied properties to Greek-Cypriots, the talks may collapse altogether.

Despite all this, Mr Talat met Mr Christofias again on April 21st. In a show of support, Turkey’s prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, made clear that he would not tolerate mischief-making by Mr Eroglu. “We will not be supporting any steps that will weaken the hand of the president,” Mr Erdogan insisted. Some fret that Mr Erdogan may yet yield to hawks in his own party. Another worry is whether Turkey’s generals really want a deal.

What is clear is that the EU complicated matters hugely by letting a divided Cyprus join. “Had [the EU] been less rigid and cleverer, it would have lifted the sanctions long ago and thereby minimised the dependency of northern Cyprus on Ankara,” argues Yavuz Baydar, a commentator. It would also have eased Turkey’s accession to the EU. But that is just what Turkey’s detractors inside the EU do not want.

[YFred]

Spot on. Unfortunately the Europeans proved to be more rigid then cleverer.

What is clear is that the EU complicated matters hugely by letting a divided Cyprus join. “Had [the EU] been less rigid and cleverer, it would have lifted the sanctions long ago and thereby minimised the dependency of northern Cyprus on Ankara

[EPSILON]

Spot on. Unfortunately the Europeans proved to be more rigid then cleverer.

What is clear is that the EU complicated matters hugely by letting a divided Cyprus join. “Had [the EU] been less rigid and cleverer, it would have lifted the sanctions long ago and thereby minimised the dependency of northern Cyprus on Ankara

What you expected from a British article to suggest.?American voice of course.

[Piratis]

Spot on. Unfortunately the Europeans proved to be more rigid then cleverer.

What is clear is that the EU complicated matters hugely by letting a divided Cyprus join. “Had [the EU] been less rigid and cleverer, it would have lifted the sanctions long ago and thereby minimised the dependency of northern Cyprus on Ankara

Bollocks. The "trnc" is a pseudo state that 100% depends on Turkey because without the Turkish troops to illegally occupy the north part of Republic of Cyprus the pseudo state could not exist.

Therefore the argument that lifting the sanctions on the pseudo state would make TCs less dependent on Turkey is total nonsense.

[Piratis]

Spot on. Unfortunately the Europeans proved to be more rigid then cleverer.

What is clear is that the EU complicated matters hugely by letting a divided Cyprus join. “Had [the EU] been less rigid and cleverer, it would have lifted the sanctions long ago and thereby minimised the dependency of northern Cyprus on Ankara

What you expected from a British article to suggest.?American voice of course.

And why are you re-posting it here? Most of the British press is pro-Turk, but The Economist, the Independent, and some other British newspapers are among the worst.

[EPSILON]

Spot on. Unfortunately the Europeans proved to be more rigid then cleverer.

What is clear is that the EU complicated matters hugely by letting a divided Cyprus join. “Had [the EU] been less rigid and cleverer, it would have lifted the sanctions long ago and thereby minimised the dependency of northern Cyprus on Ankara

What you expected from a British article to suggest.?American voice of course.

And why are you re-posting it here? Most of the British press is pro-Turk, but The Economist, the Independent, and some other British newspapers are among the worst.

Is always better to know how some people/press/states consider our case than to here what DIKO or AKEL or , worst Karamanlis saying.Reminder-we are not North Korea. We must behave like European citizens in all respects.

[The Cypriot]

(LETTER SENT TO ECONOMIST)

Dear sir

Perhaps The Economist's unnamed analyst was treated to a few too many rakis in Istantbul, which might explain their confusion in relation to the incredibly complex issue of Cyprus (A Hawkish problem, The Economist, April 23rd 2009). As a publication that prides itself on the quality of its news analysis I'm sure you'll welcome therefore this intervention to help set your analyst straight.

In regards to the Annan Plan – which you're still carping on about a full five years after the event – the overwhelming majority of the people of Cyprus exercised their democratic right to reject it. Why? Because suddenly, after decades of Turkish intransigence, a last-minute botch was presented aimed at exonerating an invading power for her crimes, just before Cyprus – having met all the accession criteria – joined the European Union. Over 75% of the electorate in the areas not under the control of Turkey's military said "No", an irrefutable indicator of the plan's relative merits as an equitable solution.

The plan was rejected because it sought to restrict the rights of Cypriots to have their property restored and to settle freely within their own homeland. It would have entrenched a repulsive system of apartheid on a tiny island and legitimised the presence of foreign occupation troops in perpetuity. No freedom-loving people in Europe, or the world, would have accepted such a settlement – except perhaps through desperation of a kind faced by Cypriots in the north under foreign military rule.

Not letting Cyprus into the European Union because more than a third of her territory remained occupied by a massive foreign army, in breach of dozens of UN Security Council resolutions, would have been unjust and against European principles.

Cyprus as a whole joined the European Union but with the acquis communautaire suspended in the north while the legitimate government of the island's entire territory is unable to exercise effective control. Lifting sanctions against and easing trade restrictions with this occupied territory has nothing to do with "rigidity" or not being "clever" but with respecting the wishes of a full member state. There is no trade with the northern part of Cyprus that cannot be undertaken through legitimate means and via legitimate ports of entry.

The government of Cyprus has made clear to its European partners the absurdity of proceeding with Turkey's accession while its military maintains upwards of 40,000 troops on European Union soil. And why shouldn't it? Cyprus has been held hostage by Turkey for more than 35 years, and the world has done nothing. Now that Cyprus is safely in the European Union, who can blame her for wanting to hold Turkey’s entry talks hostage until justice is done? She doesn’t have a massive army or powerful friends to take back what is rightly hers. Unlike Kuwait, the only oil she has is made from olives.

Perhaps the European Union has complicated matters for Turkey, by letting Cyprus join, but perhaps matters needed to be made complicated. And they certainly eased matters somewhat for a small island, at the mercy of an aggressive regional power for centuries.

[EPSILON]

(LETTER SENT TO ECONOMIST)

Dear sir

Perhaps The Economist's unnamed analyst was treated to a few too many rakis in Istantbul, which might explain their confusion in relation to the incredibly complex issue of Cyprus (A Hawkish problem, The Economist, April 23rd 2009). As a publication that prides itself on the quality of its news analysis I'm sure you'll welcome therefore this intervention to help set your analyst straight.

In regards to the Annan Plan – which you're still carping on about a full five years after the event – the overwhelming majority of the people of Cyprus exercised their democratic right to reject it. Why? Because suddenly, after decades of Turkish intransigence, a last-minute botch was presented aimed at exonerating an invading power for her crimes, just before Cyprus – having met all the accession criteria – joined the European Union. Over 75% of the electorate in the areas not under the control of Turkey's military said "No", an irrefutable indicator of the plan's relative merits as an equitable solution.

The plan was rejected because it sought to restrict the rights of Cypriots to have their property restored and to settle freely within their own homeland. It would have entrenched a repulsive system of apartheid on a tiny island and legitimised the presence of foreign occupation troops in perpetuity. No freedom-loving people in Europe, or the world, would have accepted such a settlement – except perhaps through desperation of a kind faced by Cypriots in the north under foreign military rule.

Not letting Cyprus into the European Union because more than a third of her territory remained occupied by a massive foreign army, in breach of dozens of UN Security Council resolutions, would have been unjust and against European principles.

Cyprus as a whole joined the European Union but with the acquis communautaire suspended in the north while the legitimate government of the island's entire territory is unable to exercise effective control. Lifting sanctions against and easing trade restrictions with this occupied territory has nothing to do with "rigidity" or not being "clever" but with respecting the wishes of a full member state. There is no trade with the northern part of Cyprus that cannot be undertaken through legitimate means and via legitimate ports of entry.

The government of Cyprus has made clear to its European partners the absurdity of proceeding with Turkey's accession while its military maintains upwards of 40,000 troops on European Union soil. And why shouldn't it? Cyprus has been held hostage by Turkey for more than 35 years, and the world has done nothing. Now that Cyprus is safely in the European Union, who can blame her for wanting to hold Turkey’s entry talks hostage until justice is done? She doesn’t have a massive army or powerful friends to take back what is rightly hers. Unlike Kuwait, the only oil she has is made from olives.

Perhaps the European Union has complicated matters for Turkey, by letting Cyprus join, but perhaps matters needed to be made complicated. And they certainly eased matters somewhat for a small island, at the mercy of an aggressive regional power for centuries.

Cypriot, thanks on behalf of many of us

[The Cypriot]

Pleasure.

[Get Real!]

"What is clear is that the EU complicated matters hugely by letting a divided Cyprus join. “Had [the EU] been less rigid and cleverer, it would have lifted the sanctions long ago and thereby minimised the dependency of northern Cyprus on Ankara,” argues Yavuz Baydar, a commentator.

It’s not a “divided Cyprus” that entered the EU, but the single legitimate Republic of Cyprus with 37% of its territory under illegal Turkish occupation.

That some Turkish Cypriots cannot comprehend this, or pretend not to comprehend it, is irrelevant to reality and their problem entirely.