Cyprus-Forum.com

[zan]

By Loucas Charalambous

IN THE HANDLING of the Cyprus problem President Anastasiades is turning out to be just another Christofias. He is using the exact same tactics – provocative filibustering and time wasting so that nothing will happen.

It is the tactic the late Tassos Papadopoulos had christened “leaving by staying”. We constantly place obstacles and raise objections; we set up, dissolve and set up again technical committees; we ignore the substance and deal with issues of secondary importance (confidence-building, Famagusta, church restorations, etc) and lead things nowhere. We waste time so we can stay on the presidential throne.

Within this framework of devious tactical manoeuvring, we also exploit other developments in order to achieve our aim. Anastasiades knew, from the day of his election, that the time available for the securing of a deal was restricted to a few months. He knew that in the spring of 2014 there would be local elections in Turkey and these would be followed by the elections in the north.

This was mentioned by this column a year ago. The column suggested that the procedure for a deal should have involved negotiating a limited number of changes to the 2004 Annan plan, so that risky chapters such as territory would not have to be re-opened.

We had also suggested that he withdrew Christofias’ foolish proposal for a government with a president, vice-president, rotating presidency and ‘weighted voting’ and backed the wise provision of the Annan plan for a six-member presidential council, that would have been presided over by a Greek Cypriot for 40 months and Turkish Cypriot for 20 months, without anyone having the ‘casting vote’. Even Nicholas Papadopoulos agreed with this.

What did Anastasiades do instead? He wasted the first six months of his presidency doing nothing on the grounds that the issues of the economy took precedence over the Cyprus problem. Yet at the same time, he kept telling us that a settlement would bring speedy development; talk about contradictory messages.

He then wasted another four months in order to agree a totally unnecessary ‘joint declaration’ of a page, because the elections for the leadership of DIKO had to be held. And when at last the talks began, he insisted that he should meet Dervis Eroglu once every two months. The Vice-President of the US had to come here for Anastasiades to agree to two meetings a month. If he really wanted settlement he would have a meeting with Eroglu every day.

Now he is engaging in new tactical manoeuvres. He withdrew half of Christofias’ proposal for rotating presidency, but did not withdraw the other half regarding the president, vice-president, council of ministers and ‘weighted voting’. And he wants the president to always be Greek Cypriot.

He is thinking just like Christofias now. He does not want a presidential council, but a president because he sees himself taking this position. He is asking for a Greek Cypriot president and Turkish Cypriot vice-president who would be elected by the Greek Cypriots. He thinks he can take everyone for a ride with these proposals.

But his tactical manoeuvring does not end here. Now Anastasiades is persistently demanding that Eroglu submits proposals on territory, which is doubly nonsensical. First Eroglu has elections to think about and only a complete fool would make a proposal that would lead to a few thousands voters being forcibly moved out of their houses and being re-located.

Second, from the moment the issue of territory is discussed again it is well nigh impossible that Morphou and the areas north of Yerolakkos would be returned as was stipulated in the Annan plan. The Turkish Cypriots of Morphou have already made it clear they would not vote again for a settlement if this envisaged their re-location.

This was why we had suggested not to re-open the chapter of territory but stay with the 2004 map. But Anastasiades would rather play with fire, because his objective is not a settlement, but the maintenance of the status quo which would allow him to carry on being the president of half of Cyprus.

And this goes some way in explaining the insane decision to establish a ‘national security council’ that will provide a job for Fotis Fotiou for his support of Anastasiades. On the one hand he tells us he is working for a settlement and on the other he is setting up a ‘national security council’ for half of Cyprus.

If we are going for a settlement, why would we need such a council?

[zan]

Turkish Cypriot negotiator Kudret Oversay held a conference at London School of Economics titled as “Missing Elements in the Solution to the Cyprus Problem”. Kudret spoke about the latest development in the Cyprus Problem, about the challenges and ideas which he has for overcoming these challenges.

Kudret said the missing road map is the biggest challenge. The road map is essential in structuring the result-oriented process.
Kudret said,“It is important that the process remains under the auspices of UN and we want to see that the contribution of the international actors is done in this framework. We are not against international contribution as long as it is balanced and just.”

During the conference Ozersay spoke about the developments in the latest round of negotiations which began after the joint declaration. Ozersay underlined the basic principles stated in the joint declaration and emphasized that the steps forward are not included in the joint declaration.

Some of the important highlights from Ozersay’s speech:
Pointing out that the most important challenge during the process is the deviation from the past convergences Ozersay said that absence of a road map is a challenge as a road map is essential in structuring the result-oriented process.

“Negotiation process is not just a technical exercise it should be evaluated in a political framework. When we look from that perspective we see that there is a need for a deadlock which would be painful for both sides. For a long time the Turkish Cypriot community is experiencing challenges and therefore is acting with the awareness that the status quo is not sustainable. There are certain steps to be taken so that the same understanding applies to the Greek Cypriot community”, he stated.

He went on and said the following: “In 2004 prior to the EU membership a major opportunity was missed. If we don’t want to experience the same thing, different approaches to hydrocarbon can be developed in order to create an opportunity. So if extraction and processing of the hydrocarbon is tied to a comprehensive solution or if it happens before the solution it should be tied to the consent of the Turkish Cypriot community that way the process will be lot more simpler. When we look from the political perspective for the new structure to be formed, between the Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots, international actors should take some steps”, he stated.

- See more at: http://www.parikiaki.com/2014/06/turkis ... WbB1n.dpuf

[DT.]

Why should the consent of the TC's be taken before we extract hydrocarbons?

[zan]

Why should the consent of the TC's be taken before we extract hydrocarbons?

The sme reason that any of the chapters are discussed in the talks DT. If they are not suitable then they will have to be discussed again. If not then why come to the talks at all. You might as well call the whole thing off. I think this is what Kudret bey means by genuiness. If we are talking in terms of a deal being done and it is honest then we can take it for granted that we WILL be partners in a united Cyprus. If the GC side is serious then how can you then go off and do your own thing? You are a business man. Would you then trust a future partner? I think you would call the whole thing off, quite rightly.

[DT.]

Why should the consent of the TC's be taken before we extract hydrocarbons?

The sme reason that any of the chapters are discussed in the talks DT. If they are not suitable then they will have to be discussed again. If not then why come to the talks at all. You might as well call the whole thing off. I think this is what Kudret bey means by genuiness. If we are talking in terms of a deal being done and it is honest then we can take it for granted that we WILL be partners in a united Cyprus. If the GC side is serious then how can you then go off and do your own thing? You are a business man. Would you then trust a future partner? I think you would call the whole thing off, quite rightly.

I don't remember Mehmet asking me before he developed my land in Morphou? Or is land not a natural resource? Where was this genuine partnership all these years or does it only count if this side has something valuable? By strength of military you hold 60-70% of coastal land, the most valuable land on the island. Did the casinos and resorts you built ask this side to share profits? Had you discovered gas between Cyprus and turkey would you be falling over yourselves to share it with GC's? Would you ask our permission to extract it? Seriously Zan, even VP said that you've been claiming your own state for so many years wtf made you remember that it's one island again?

If you don't hurry up and agree to a solution we're not going to lose our earning potential on this side of the island. We've lost our assets in the north, what makes you think it's right to share our assets in the south?

The gas is not on the table, if we agree to a solution then it's for the Federal govt to decide, if not then it's ours. Simple.

[zan]

Why should the consent of the TC's be taken before we extract hydrocarbons?

The sme reason that any of the chapters are discussed in the talks DT. If they are not suitable then they will have to be discussed again. If not then why come to the talks at all. You might as well call the whole thing off. I think this is what Kudret bey means by genuiness. If we are talking in terms of a deal being done and it is honest then we can take it for granted that we WILL be partners in a united Cyprus. If the GC side is serious then how can you then go off and do your own thing? You are a business man. Would you then trust a future partner? I think you would call the whole thing off, quite rightly.

I don't remember Mehmet asking me before he developed my land in Morphou? Or is land not a natural resource? Where was this genuine partnership all these years or does it only count if this side has something valuable? By strength of military you hold 60-70% of coastal land, the most valuable land on the island. Did the casinos and resorts you built ask this side to share profits? Had you discovered gas between Cyprus and turkey would you be falling over yourselves to share it with GC's? Would you ask our permission to extract it? Seriously Zan, even VP said that you've been claiming your own state for so many years wtf made you remember that it's one island again?

I could say the same about the "RoC" even being allowed to exist DT but I am starting from the point of a joint declaration and a genuiness to unite not the old wars. We are now at a stage, as far as the talks go anyway, where we are crossing the Ts etc..... The joint declaration was a commitment to a settlement. Your presidents idea! So he needs to follow that up with a genuine effort and not put obstacles in the way. Now, if you are saying that you are not fully committed to an agreement then tear up the joint statement and let's get back to tit for tat propaganda wars. Why are we wasting time with talks that you are not committed to?

[DT.]

Why should the consent of the TC's be taken before we extract hydrocarbons?

The sme reason that any of the chapters are discussed in the talks DT. If they are not suitable then they will have to be discussed again. If not then why come to the talks at all. You might as well call the whole thing off. I think this is what Kudret bey means by genuiness. If we are talking in terms of a deal being done and it is honest then we can take it for granted that we WILL be partners in a united Cyprus. If the GC side is serious then how can you then go off and do your own thing? You are a business man. Would you then trust a future partner? I think you would call the whole thing off, quite rightly.

I don't remember Mehmet asking me before he developed my land in Morphou? Or is land not a natural resource? Where was this genuine partnership all these years or does it only count if this side has something valuable? By strength of military you hold 60-70% of coastal land, the most valuable land on the island. Did the casinos and resorts you built ask this side to share profits? Had you discovered gas between Cyprus and turkey would you be falling over yourselves to share it with GC's? Would you ask our permission to extract it? Seriously Zan, even VP said that you've been claiming your own state for so many years wtf made you remember that it's one island again?

I could say the same about the "RoC" even being allowed to exist DT but I am starting from the point of a joint declaration and a genuiness to unite not the old wars. We are now at a stage, as far as the talks go anyway, where we are crossing the Ts etc..... The joint declaration was a commitment to a settlement. Your presidents idea! So he needs to follow that up with a genuine effort and not put obstacles in the way. Now, if you are saying that you are not fully committed to an agreement then tear up the joint statement and let's get back to tit for tat propaganda wars. Why are we wasting time with talks that you are not committed to?

I completely agree with you, let's get this finished, we're at the final stages. Why are you now throwing the hydrocarbons in?

[zan]

Why should the consent of the TC's be taken before we extract hydrocarbons?

The sme reason that any of the chapters are discussed in the talks DT. If they are not suitable then they will have to be discussed again. If not then why come to the talks at all. You might as well call the whole thing off. I think this is what Kudret bey means by genuiness. If we are talking in terms of a deal being done and it is honest then we can take it for granted that we WILL be partners in a united Cyprus. If the GC side is serious then how can you then go off and do your own thing? You are a business man. Would you then trust a future partner? I think you would call the whole thing off, quite rightly.

I don't remember Mehmet asking me before he developed my land in Morphou? Or is land not a natural resource? Where was this genuine partnership all these years or does it only count if this side has something valuable? By strength of military you hold 60-70% of coastal land, the most valuable land on the island. Did the casinos and resorts you built ask this side to share profits? Had you discovered gas between Cyprus and turkey would you be falling over yourselves to share it with GC's? Would you ask our permission to extract it? Seriously Zan, even VP said that you've been claiming your own state for so many years wtf made you remember that it's one island again?

I could say the same about the "RoC" even being allowed to exist DT but I am starting from the point of a joint declaration and a genuiness to unite not the old wars. We are now at a stage, as far as the talks go anyway, where we are crossing the Ts etc..... The joint declaration was a commitment to a settlement. Your presidents idea! So he needs to follow that up with a genuine effort and not put obstacles in the way. Now, if you are saying that you are not fully committed to an agreement then tear up the joint statement and let's get back to tit for tat propaganda wars. Why are we wasting time with talks that you are not committed to?

I completely agree with you, let's get this finished, we're at the final stages. Why are you now throwing the hydrocarbons in?

I suppose it all depends on how loose you want this federal/confederal partnership to go. Not that I know where one finishes and the other starts and no one has been able to tell me for sure. Only personal barriers. It seems that anomaly goes into the realms of quantum physics. The goalposts are everywhere at once Are you saying that if we find hydrocarbons we should keep it to ourselves. Can we invite Turkey to drill tomorrow? You would soon be up in arms. A partnership is a partnership. Commit or don't. What if we started developing varosha tomorrow. Is that fair?

[DT.]

Personally I don't see the difference whether you develop varosha or not. It'll still not be under govt control. As for finding oil or gas in the north of the island then we have every right to be up in arms. You see despite all our shortcomings we've never waivered from the one island mantra. You on the other hand have been claiming a separate state in the north and a hand on assets in the south....wtf!

[zan]

Personally I don't see the difference whether you develop varosha or not. It'll still not be under govt control. As for finding oil or gas in the north of the island then we have every right to be up in arms. You see despite all our shortcomings we've never waivered from the one island mantra. You on the other hand have been claiming a separate state in the north and a hand on assets in the south....wtf!

I personally don't think that's true DT and the 16 or so high level agreements are testament to that. There was of course Taksim over ENOSIS and the declaration of the TRNC when all else failed but again that was then and this is now. It is also not clear because of this confusion over federal/confederal goalposts. Won't varosha be under government control as a federal/confederal government? Again, I suppose how loose it's going to be but by not allowing the hydrocarbons into the mix we can only look at a loose system. We can't have it all ways!!!