Α woeful show – Article by Andros Kyprianou, former AKEL General Secretary

 

15 October 2021

It was with great sadness that I watched the “show” given by Mr. Anastasiades at the anti-occupation rally organised annually by the occupied Municipality of Morphou. I say “show” because those who know situations inside-out know very well that Mr. Anastasiades is not interested in the solution of the Cyprus problem, but only in his own posterity and image.

In a strong manner and addressing Greek Cypriots, Mr. Anastasiades said that he is not going to retreat by accepting sovereign equality no matter how much pressure anyone may put on him.

He even went on to say in a dramatic tone that he will not hand over (the Republic of Cyprus) a protectorate.

It would be interesting if Mr. Anastasiades were to tell us who is exerting pressure on him to accept sovereign equality, instead of making vague references and leaving questions hanging over anyone who criticizes him. The only person I know who has talked to many people about a two state solution is Mr. Anastasiades himself. From 2017 to 2020, when Mr. Tatar assumed the leadership of the Turkish Cypriot community, Mr. Anastasiades forgot about bizonal, bicommunal federation and flirted with partition. Are we to assume that Mr. Anastasiades at the Morphou event was replying to N. Anastasiades of 2017 and 2020?

If he is suggesting that AKEL is putting pressure on him to make concessions, then the President should be ashamed of himself. At no time did AKEL ever raise such an issue, either in writing or verbally.

The President told us that he feels the pain of the refugees from Morphou. That he never misses an opportunity to demonstrate his readiness and genuine political will for a resumption of the talks and a solution. That after Crans Montana he has not neglected to take initiatives for a resumption of negotiations. That he has put forward ideas for decentralized power, a parliamentary system and a return to the 1960 Constitution in order to facilitate the resumption of negotiations. During that time, he told us that Turkey was only interested in ousting Mr. Akinci.

The only thing he is right about is that Turkey immediately after Mr. Akinci rejected its demand to put a two state solution on the table, Turkey engineered his ousting. What did Mr. Anastasiades do then – the one supposedly taking initiatives to continue the talks from where they left off at Crans Montana, as soon as Mr. Akinci proposed doing that to him in April 2018, how did he respond? Mr. Anastasiades told him “do you have Turkey’s permission to submit this proposal?”, “What Guterres framework are you talking about – the 30 June or the 4 July one?”

A discussion then began about what was the correct framework that ended in Mr. Anastasiades becoming the object of unprecedented ridicule a year later with the UN issuing a statement that a framework did exist, namely that of 30 June. We then heard the notorious ruling DISY party’s claim that “the 4 July document is verbal”.

When Mr. Akinci was no longer the leader of the Turkish Cypriot community, Mr. Anastasiades remembered Bi-zonal, Bicommunal Federation.

As far as Mr. Anastasiades’ ideas are concerned, these ideas negate and undo his supposed commitment to the convergences that have been recorded and his position for a continuation of the talks from where they left off at Crans Montana.

As regards the position of the Government and DISY that it is the UN Secretary-General who asked for new ideas, I recall what the UN Deputy Secretary-General Rosemarie Di Carlo had told us: “why are you telling us about new ideas? It is the President who is putting them forward”.

At the Morphou anti-occupational meeting Mr.Anastasiades also repeated his own version of what actually happened at Crans Montana. Unfortunately for us, no one in the international community who was present at Crans Montana, agrees with Mr. Anastasiades’ version of events. On the contrary, they say that Turkish Foreign Minister Mr. Cavusoglou conveyed in the afternoon before the working dinner that Turkey was ready to discuss the possibility of abolishing the guarantees, provided that Mr. Anastasiades accepted political equality. Unfortunately, the subsequent Report submitted by the Secretary General of the UN also relieved Turkey of any responsibilities for its stand at Crans Montana, while assigning responsibilities on the Greek Cypriot side too.

It’s easy for Mr. Anastasiades to believe that we are naive and that he can fool us (those he can, of course). Unfortunately for us, those who take decisions in the international community know what’s going on.

It is obvious that Mr. Anastasiades will not take any real initiative so long as he is President. He will stall for time until his term expires and seek to shift the responsibility for the Cyprus problem on to the next President. Our own obligation is to convince and exert pressure for a meaningful initiative. Otherwise we will go towards partition, with Mr. Anastasiades going down in history as the leader who brought about the partition of Cyprus.