Cyprus-Forum.com

[zan]

Lord Maginnis of Drumglass (Crossbench)

My Lords, I am grateful for the opportunity to speak about the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus in this debate.I last addressed this House on the Cyprus issue in July 2005. Since then, our Government have done virtually nothing other than rehearse their good intentions—meaninglessly and without achievement. While one cannot force an agreement if either of the two traditions in Cyprus is unwilling, there are things that the United Kingdom Government could and should do. They can take action on matters within their own competence and influence the policy of other nations within the European Union and the United Nations.

In April 2004, the Annan plan for a Cyprus settlement was endorsed by virtually the whole world as a fair and reasonable compromise. Despite the fact that it contained considerable risks for them, the Turkish Cypriots accepted it. The Greek Cypriots rejected it. They were entitled to reject it but—and this is the crucial point—having rejected it, they should no longer expect the world to assist them to keep the Turkish Cypriots in isolation.

I shall address some of the practical effects of this isolation. It denies Turkish Cypriots the right of representation in almost every international forum. It prevents or restricts the use of ports and airports in Northern Cyprus. It precludes Turkish Cypriots having access to financial markets, curtails trade and tourism, and hampers all cultural and sporting relations between the TRNC and other countries.

Turkish Cypriots have done nothing to deserve this treatment, nor has it ever been authorised by a sanctions resolution under Chapter 7 of the United Nations Charter. Neither did this situation emanate simply from the 2004 Annan plan referendum. Turkish Cypriots have been under isolation from as long ago as 1963, when the Greek Cypriots massacred hundreds of their men, women and children and drove them into defensive enclaves. The Turkish defence of these people in 1974 was necessary and justifiable. In his memoirs, Sir Alec Douglas-Home wrote:

"I was early convinced that if [the Greek Cypriot leader] could not bring himself to treat the Turkish Cypriots as human beings, he was inviting the invasion and partition of the island".

Perhaps I may remind your Lordships what world leaders have said about the isolation of the Turkish Cypriots after they accepted the Annan plan. On26 April 2004, the European Council said in a statement:

"The Turkish Cypriot community have expressed their clear desire for a future within the European Union. The Council is determined to put an end to the isolation of the Turkish Cypriot community and to facilitate the reunification of Cyprus by encouraging the economic development of the Turkish Cypriot community".

A foreign affairs committee report in another place, dated 1 February 2005, said that,

"undertakings given to Turkish Cypriots by the international community must be honoured. We recommend that the Government do more to turn its words into action".

One particularly urgent matter is the denial of direct flights to Turkish Cypriot airports. This means that all flights to Ercan have to stop over at a Turkish airport, adding considerably to time, cost and inconvenience, and putting Northern Cyprus at a major competitive disadvantage. On 18 May 2004, Prime Minister Blair had this to say:

"I think it is important...that we end the isolation of northern Cyprus... that means lifting the embargoes in respect of trade, in respect of air travel".

Again, the Foreign Office Minister told this House that,

"the British Government fully support the agreed EU policy of ending the isolation of Turkish Cypriots. Direct flights to Northern Cyprus could play a useful role in bringing that about".—[Official Report, 8/7/04; col. 916.]

Yet, when I asked the Foreign Office Minister on1 February 2005 when direct flights were going to commence, I was told that the Government were considering the legal issues. I accept that the legal issues may be complex, but even the slowest lawyers would have come to a conclusion by now.

The Government have not produced any legal argument as to why direct flights should not be permitted. I therefore conclude that none exists, a conclusion I have had confirmed by two eminent British legal counsel. I understand it is a matter within the United Kingdom Government's own competence, not a matter for the EU. Therefore, direct flights could commence without further delay. Thereafter, I would also expect our Government to encourage other Governments, within and outside the EU, to follow suit. Turkish Cypriots earned the right to be relieved of their isolation when they voted for the Annan plan. As the United Nations Secretary-General said at the time:

"The Turkish Cypriot vote has undone any rationale for pressuring and isolating them".

If time had permitted, I would have sought to address the property issue, which is one of the most contentious. Suffice that I should draw attention to the Orams case, where the English judge intimated that property issues in Cyprus are international issues which cannot be settled in the courts. I trust that his judgment will be upheld on appeal. The Turkish Cypriot government have now, unilaterally, established a claims commission, and Greek Cypriots, despite official disapproval and hindrance by the Greek Cypriot Government, are already applying for reinstatement or compensation. When considering the property issue, however, we must never forget that there is a quid pro quo—those thousands of Turkish Cypriots who lost properties in the south that are now occupied by Greek Cypriots.

In conclusion, I challenge the Government to say whether this farce has not gone on long enough. Are a quarter of a million Turkish Cypriots, living at peace with their neighbours, not as important in human rights terms as Iraqis, Afghans or ourselves? Let us have an end of hypocrisy and mere lip service and ensure that Turkish Cypriots at long last achieve their rightful place in a democratic Europe.

[theresa]

Hear Hear I agree totally!
Tess (now even more isolated)

[rawk]

He's obviously had experience of 2 communities who have problems with each other in N. Ireland.

Maginnis, ('Ken') Kenneth (Life Peerage 2001) (b. 21 January 1968)
Politician; Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) MP 1983-2001

Ken Maginnis was born in County Tyrone and educated at the Royal School Dungannon and Stranmillis Teacher Training College, Belfast before pursuing a career as a teacher. In addition Maginnis was to serve in the Ulster Special Constabulary ('B-Specials') and later the Ulster Defence Regiment (UDR). He was first returned as a public representative in May 1981 as an Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) councillor on Dungannon District Council (1981-93). In August 1981 Maginnis was the party's unsuccessful candidate at the Westminster by-election in Fermanagh and South Tyrone. This defeat however was overturned at the general election of 1983 when he won the seat with a comfortable majority (1983-2001). In addition to his role as an MP, Maginnis also sat in the Northern Ireland Assembly (1982-86) and acted as the UUP's spokesman on security matters (1982-2001).

Following the resignation of James Molyneaux, then leader of the Ulster Unionist Party (UUP), in 1995 Maginnis contested the leadership and was widely seen by many commentators as representing the liberal wing of the party. Although his attempt failed Maginnis soon emerged as a close ally of the new leader of the UUP, David Trimble, and this became more evident when in May 1996 he was returned to the Northern Ireland Forum (1996-98). As a member of the UUP's delegation to the all-party talks that were to finally produce the Good Friday Agreement (GFA) he was a firm supporter of the stance and tactics adopted by Trimble. Furthermore in the subsequent referendum campaign on the GFA in May 1998 Maginnis actively campaigned for a 'Yes' vote. Later he was also to prove a prominent defender of the approach taken by his leader in the face of internal party criticism and in particular over the decision to participate in a power sharing Executive with Sinn Fein (SF) without complete decommissioning by the Irish Republican Army (IRA). Prior to the 2001 Westminster general election Maginnis announced his intention to retire as an MP and later in 2001 after receiving a life peerage took his seat in the House of Lords as Lord Maginnis of Drumglass.

Source: Cain Biographies of Notable People.

Rawk

[Piratis]

This person referrs to the illegal "trnc", the pseudo state that his own country does not recognize, as if it is a normal country, something that indicates what this person is all about and whom it supports.

Now lets leave behind this Turkophile, and move on the topic:

In 1974 200.000 Greek Cypriots had been ethnically cleansed from their homes, and 1/3rd of Cyprus has been illegally occupied by Turkey.

The rights of all those GCs had been violated, and as a consequence the TCs who are supporting the crimes against GCs, have some of their rights limited as well.

Since then numerous UN resolutions had called for the immediate withdrawal of all foreign troops from Cyprus, the respect of the sovereignty of Republic of Cyprus and the illegality of the pseudo state of "trnc". Turkey was OBLIGATED to obey the UN resolutions, but they have rejected them and refused to do so.

So I am asking you: When the Turks rejected the UN resolutions that they were obligated to obey, did any GC got any of his rights back?

The answer as you all know is NO.

So then we come in 2004 and we have a proposal for the solution of the Cyprus problem, that Greek Cypriots were not obligated to accept, since accepting that proposal would mean accepting several human rights and democratic violations against them, and of course nobody had the right to force such thing on us, unless we voluntarily wanted to suicide. Nowhere it was written that the side that accepted that proposal would have any gains from doing so, or that the side that rejected it would face penalties.
This is why in the Annan plan itself it is written that if the plan is rejected it will become Null and Void.

Therefore in the same way that no GC got even a single of his rights back when Turkey rejected to obey the UN resolutions even if she was obligated to do so, in the same way no TC will have any benefit because GCs rejected a proposal that they have every right in the world to reject it.

TCs will get their rights back when we will get back ours, since the limitations of some of their rights is a direct consequence to their insistence on crimes and illegalities against us.

Coming back to Lord Margin Dumbass, if there is one thing the UK should do for Cyprus it is to fulfill their responsibility which according to the treaty of guarantee is to : "recognize and guarantee the independence, territorial integrity and security of the Republic of Cyprus, and also the provisions of the basic articles of its Constitution. They likewise undertake to prohibit, as far as lies within their power, all activity having the object of promoting directly or indirectly either the union of the Republic of Cyprus with any other State, or the partition of the Island."

[rawk]

I used to live in N.Ireland, you'd have fitted in well there Piratus. They keep on banging on about 1690, alien invasion, land issues, different cultures, languages and land. In the end they had to start talking.

Rivers don't flow uphill. There has been too much water under the bridge, grievances need to be negotiated. If they can't now, then we will all have to wait a little longer. and in the long run we're all dead and the further you move away from an event, the less immediate relevance it has to those who address it.

Time is not kind to us, mankind should really have a longer lifespan, I am sure we would not have such short term views or have such an urgency to attain such instant gratification. Maybe we would have time to develop a broader outlook on things and events and weigh them up.

Rawk

[Piratis]

I am not looking for any "instant gratification" I know that it is going to be a long struggle. Rivers might not flow uphill, but nations do get liberated from foreing occupation. As an example Greece was liberated after being ruled by the Ottomans for 400 years.

They didn't give up, and we will not either. And what would we gain from giving up anyways?

Therefore our struggle for liberation will continue, and even if we don't live to see it, we will be satisfied enough if our enemies that insist on the illegalities and crimes against us, not only they did not gain from these crimes, but on the contrary they have lost, maybe more than we did.

Sooner or later we will return to our homeland. It might not be us, it might be our children or grandchildren. What is for sure is that we will never sign away our homeland where we have 3500 years of history.

[rawk]

Maybe you do have a long term view of events after all, Piratus.

Rawk

[billcarmicheal]

Piratis comes accross as the Ian Paisley of Cyprus

[zan]

Piratis comes accross as the Ian Paisley of Cyprus

Cheers Bill, now I have got Paisleys' voice (if you can call it that) and Piratis' words in my head, frightening combination. I liked it better when he sounded more like a chipmonk.