Speech of Andros Kyprianou, General Secretary of the C.C. of AKEL, to the Ambassadors

 

 

Monday 20th April 2015, “Cleopatra Hotel” Nicosia

 

On behalf of the Central Committee of AKEL I welcome you all to this meeting – dialogue. Ι thank you for having responded to our invitation. This meeting is now a custom as it is useful from time to time to hear your views on various topical issues on our island. At the same time we would like to explain to you our positions on the major issues of concern to the people of Cyprus.

It is a fact that our country is facing many problems in recent years; complex and pressing problems demanding solutions so that the Cypriot people can look to the future with optimism. In our meeting today I shall focus on the two most important problems of these, namely the Cyprus problem and the state of the Cyprus economy.

Everything indicates, barring a sensational incident and after months of suspension, that the negotiation procedure on the Cyprus problem will resume soon. The termination of the Turkish NAVTEX and the departure of the Turkish vessel “Barbaros”, makes the lifting of the suspension of the negotiation procedure possible.

We consider this development as positive. I want to remind you that in the last meeting, we had last October, I had stressed that the inter-communal talks under the auspices and within the framework of the UN is the only way to solve the Cyprus problem. I also underlined that it was Turkey and nobody else who was responsible for the suspension of the negotiations through its provocative actions. Finally, I had stated that the suspension of the negotiations is one thing and the definitive termination of the talks, on the other, is something completely different. Given that for AKEL the solution of the Cyprus problem is a high priority, we never could have consented to a final termination of the negotiation procedure. We hope that there won’t be any new provocative actions so that the negotiation will at last proceed unobstructed.

The overall solution of our political problem is today more necessary than ever before. A correct solution of the Cyprus problem will give an impetus to growth, due to the enormous needs that will arise regarding the reconstruction of entire regions. Growth will put the economy as a whole on a path of progress, which is the pressing need of our times for our country. It is therefore important that the negotiations this time arrive at a successful outcome. To make this possible, concrete preconditions need to be met to, which I consider useful to outline.

We are struggling for a solution based on the principles of International Law, on the principles on which the European Union is founded, on the relevant UN resolutions and the 1977 and 1979 High-Level Agreements. We are striving for a solution that will safeguard a single sovereignty, a single international personality and a single citizenship of the United Cyprus Republic; for a bicommunal, bi-zonal federal solution with political equality as set out in the relevant UN Security Council resolutions; for a solution that will ensure human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the right of the refugees to return to their homes and properties; for a solution that provides for the withdrawal of the occupation troops and the settlers, whose number already far exceeds that of the Turkish Cypriots. The anachronistic system of guarantees has no place in this solution whatsoever and even more so for a state which is a full member of the European Union. Moreover, there can be no room whatsoever for any unilateral rights of military intervention, which besides are incompatible with the UN Charter itself.

As you know, the Turkish Cypriot side declares that it wishes negotiations lasting a few months and then the convening of a four-party conference. I want at this point to emphasize that we first and foremost are the ones seeking a solution as soon as possible. We are fully aware that time is working against the solution we ourselves are seeking. We consider, however, that the trends, objectives and prompting for a swift solution are counter-productive. The reason is simple. To reach the point that would enable an international conference to be convened we must previously conclude within range of an agreement, with regards the internal aspects of the problem; aspects that can and should be resolved with an agreement between the two communities and not through artificial timetables or any arbitration.

The bitter experience of the recent past must make us all wiser on this matter. The convening of a conference, despite the fact that the addressing of the internal aspects of the Cyprus problem is pending, would not serve any useful purpose, but instead it would be totally inappropriate and counterproductive. I think you’ll agree with us that it’s not up to third countries to solve these issues, but the Cypriots themselves, nor is it possible to convene the conference and subsequently the discussion on the internal aspects would follow. The conference should be the final act, with its successful, as we aspire, outcome so that we can achieve the comprehensive settlement.

Therefore, when we get within range of an agreement on the internal aspects, only then can a representative international conference be convened. The UN Security Council, the European Union, the guarantor powers, the Republic of Cyprus and the two communities must participate in this international conference. This is where the international aspects of the problem will be discussed too. That is, mainly the issues of security and guarantees, the withdrawal of the occupying troops and in general demilitarization and the withdrawal of the settlers.

Given that AKEL is seeking in practice and not in words a solution as soon as possible, it remains consistent on the position that the talks must not start from scratch, but from where they had left off with the significant Christofias – Talat convergences and Christofias – Eroglu minimum convergences. I recall once again that three of the six in total chapters on the Cyprus problem (Governance and power sharing, EU matters and Economy) had reached an advanced stage of convergence, indeed I would say quite near to the point that they were almost sealed. The Downer document represents an irrefutable witness, which despite our observations reflects quite objectively the convergences that had been achieved. Our advice to President Anastasiades is to continue the negotiations from that point. If he wishes, let him reserve the right to himself to negotiate further 2-3 issues.

You know very well that the reason why there has been no progress on the remaining three chapters was that the Turkish Cypriot side refused to discuss comprehensively the territorial issue before all the other chapters had been agreed. This inevitably also impedes progress on the inextricably linked with this chapter property issue. As far as the chapter on security is concerned it referred it to a four-party meeting.

If, therefore, the Turkish Cypriot side and Turkey mean what they say about a speedy solution, they have only to accept in practice the significant Christofias – Talat convergences and continue the talks from where they had left off. It is utterly contradictory for the Turkish Cypriot side to claim that it is seeking a solution within a few months, whilst undermining all the significant agreements which had been achieved and to bring back unacceptable positions that clash with the convergences.

 

We are all called upon to draw lessons from the negative experience over the last two years, which is judged by the result to date of its last result so far, and to proceed with prudence, determination and confidence. It is imperative that a proper preparation is made, aiming for both sides to go to the negotiations fully prepared to conduct serious discussion on the pending core issues, as had been agreed, and not negotiations from scratch. We need to move forward not with rambling academic analysis but with negotiating positions which are based on principles and at the same time demonstrate our good will for a solution.

At this point I would like to stress that the stand of the UN itself is also among the preconditions for the procedure to proceed smoothly. I am referring, as you are aware, to the public statements issued by the UN Secretary-General’s Special Advisor Mr. Eide which in our opinion are politically harmful and legally unfounded. These statements, inter alia, are in conflict with the Charter of the United Nations itself, with general International Law and especially the UN Law of the Sea. We do not understand why these statements were made at a time when, at last, the right conditions had been created for the resumption of the negotiating procedure. Such actions are wrong and cause unimaginable difficulties for the forces backing the negotiation procedure. We in good faith call on Mr. Eide to be more careful and focus on the primary task which, I reiterate, is the negotiation on the basic pending issues.

As the main focus of Mr. Eide’s statements is the subject of hydrocarbons, I recall what I had underlined during our previous meeting. Namely, that the only realistic way for our Turkish Cypriot compatriots to also benefit from natural gas is the solution of the Cyprus problem. As AKEL we will do everything on our part towards this end. During the Demetris Christofias Presidency we proved that we could move forward. The convergences on the maritime zones, natural resources and the allocation of federal revenues, which I had comprehensively analyzed before you, make it clear that a solution with the Cyprus problem the issue of natural gas will essentially be solved – provided of course that the above convergences are respected. This is the most convincing reply to Turkey’s position that the natural gas belongs to Turkish Cypriots too. I want to express our satisfaction because President Anastasiades has accepted these convergences. We must all give him credit for this positive stand.

Natural gas can and should serve as a strong incentive for a solution. Referring to an incentive I not only mean the Turkish Cypriot community and Turkey. I also mean the Greek Cypriot community as well. Those who want to participate in the benefits from the utilization of this valuable commodity. We, on our part, want a secure and stable environment that will ensure the unhindered use of hydrocarbons. The recent crisis created by Turkey must make us all wiser. The lesson is that only through a solution of the Cyprus problem can the utilization of natural gas proceed irrevocably and unimpeded.

The message I want to convey is clear. The Cyprus problem can and must be solved. It is imperative that the new effort that will commence soon has a successful outcome. The solution to our political problem is in everyone’s interest. Primarily it is in the interests of the Cypriot people as a whole, Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots, Greece, Turkey, the European Union and the sensitive area of ​​the Eastern Mediterranean. I urge all of you to help as much as you can towards this end.

I would now like to turn to the second major issue which is the state of the Cyprus economy two years after the disastrous decisions agreed by the Eurogroup and the Anastasiades government.

Two years after the signing of the Memorandum, the situation for the Cyprus economy and society is at a deadlock. The course within the Memorandum has tragic consequences for working people and the people in general. The truth is that this negative situation cannot be reversed as long as the government continues to stick to the dead-end policies of the Memorandum and austerity.

Our people have lived through and are living through an unprecedented situation. The last “Eurobarometer revealed that the overwhelming majority of the people of Cyprus consider that not only will the situation remain very bad, but that it will get even worse.

The unemployed have exceeded 70,000 with the unemployment rate rising to over 16%. Youth unemployment stands at 35% while many young people choose to migrate abroad to find work. Emigration from Cyprus to abroad has increased dramatically, whilst for the first time the outflow of labour force to abroad exceeds the advent of immigrants to Cyprus.

Wages and pensions have been reduced, in some cases by more than 30% while poverty is approaching 29%. Pensioner’s living standards have fallen by more than 30%.

Fundamental human rights, such as the right to housing, are in danger as a result of the Government’s and the Troika’s recent decisions in relation to foreclosures and the insolvency framework. AKEL’s position is that the primary residence and small commercial premise for loans up to 350,000 Euros must be protected.

At the same time privatizations of Semi-governmental organizations, which are strategically important for the Cyprus economy and profitable, are being promoted at sell-off prices.

The Government is constantly trying to portray a different picture. It uses a number of economic indicators to create the false impression that everything is progressing well. However, it remains silent on what is obvious, namely on the state of the real economy and burdens continuously borne by society. The strong impression we are forming is that the government is living in its own world; that it has no contact with society.

It’s not enough for economic indicators to improve. It is not enough, for example, that the difference between the Cyprus and the German bond is decreasing when the gap in wages and incomes continues to grow. This isn’t just our own conclusion. A Ministry of Finance study concluded that the crisis has mainly affected the low income strata of society. The effects and costs of the crisis have not been distributed according to each one’s financial capability, but instead the poorest of our fellow citizens have suffered a reduction in their incomes, while the richest have seen theirs increase.

In these conditions there is no easy answer to the crisis. I want to be honest about this; however I believe that there are specific values ​​that we can apply if we want to create conditions for growth and development.

Before I refer to how we perceive growth I would like first to comment on an argument that is widely used. Both the President of the Republic, as well as the members of the government, say that for society to prosper economic indicators and numbers must prosper beforehand. They argue that when economic indicators and figures prosper society prospers too!

It sounds like a nice slogan, but reality however is different. Let’s look at the example of Ghana. Ghana has experienced “bailout” schemes from the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Since 1966 it has applied five times for “assistance” from the IMF, the most recent in 2009 for a sum of $ 602 million.

The government, faithful to the IMF’s recommendations, proceeded to shrink the public sector, the liberalization of the market and privatizations. That is to say, it implemented exactly what the IMF and the Troika demands from each country it provides “assistance.” Indeed, according to the IMF Ghana’s case is an example that should be followed since the country fulfilled the numerical targets that had been set and is ranked among the 20 fastest developing economies in the world, while it is ranked the first in Africa.

At the same time, however, 4,000 schools do not have buildings and school pupils have lessons under trees. In clinics in the north of the country there is one doctor for 161,000 inhabitants. Small-holder farmers, without any support from the state whatsoever, have been left to starve, notes the research carried out by the “Exandas” programme of Greek Television on Ghana.

Does Ghana represent a case of “economic recovery” which our government wants us to have as a model?

Is that our vision for the Cyprus of the future?

In our view this cannot be the recipe for salvation.

But what do we mean by growth and development? Many will say it means positive annual GDP growth rates, others will say profit generating business opportunities. Although both describe growth, in our view this is not the essence. Growth should mean the overall improvement of the terms of production, whether this concerns wages, profits or return on capital.

Growth is the country’s ability to adequately address unemployment, especially among young people; to combat rising poverty rates and improve its people’s overall level of prosperity.

For sure our own contribution and effort in this process is not sufficient. The context in which this effort is conducted also plays a significant role. The European Union, and particularly the Eurozone, in a series of decisions it has approved, has institutionalized as its official policy, policies for austerity, deregulation and “less state”, depriving the peoples of the possibilities of intervening at a national level.

The Government addresses the Cypriot people calling on it to have a little more patience because “we will exit the Memorandum”. It promises that after this development it will pursue different policies that will take into account people’s needs. I regret to say it but this is a great inaccuracy, I won’t use another word.

We will exit from the Memorandum but not from the Loan Agreement. Furthermore, the need for compliance with policies of the European Union will remain; policies that demand the continued taking of painful decisions for the people.

The latest example of such policies is the banking union and the attempt for a trade agreement unifying the markets of the EU and the US.

With the banking union, the EU sought the control of the banking institutions, arguing that in this way it will improve its capabilities to forecast, prevent and deal with future crises. This is the reason why it transferred the control and financial supervision of the banking system from the national to the transnational level. The recent crisis has proved whether or not such a development is negative. The increasing degree of mergers of banks on a global level led to a crisis in the US suddenly transformed into a universal systemic crisis of the global economy.

We retain similar concerns also with regards the attempt to promote a new trade and partnership relationship between the EU and the US. The Translantic Trade and Investment Partnership Treaty (TTIP) is a free trade and investment treaty whose main objective is to get rid of regulatory “barriers”. In reality, however, these “barriers” represent some of our fundamental social rights. Its goal is the drastic compression of labour rights, the relaxation of regulations in the areas of environment and food security, as well as the liberalization of the services market such as health, education and water.

With the provisions of this agreement Small and Medium Enterprises (SME’s) will close down due to reduced capacities in view of the competition they will face from large companies as part of a much bigger market. The agreement is expected to serve the interests of the European and American multinational companies. It will contribute towards eliminating any potential obstacles that set restrictions on their profits and will play a decisive role in expanding the access of these business conglomerates to the market.

Unfortunately this is the context within which the peoples of Europe are called upon to tackle the consequences of the crisis and to overcome their long-standing problems; a framework that in effect imposes a single policy on countries with different capabilities, with different structures and characteristics.

Besides, many of the decisions approved in the European Union are not taken based only on economic, but mainly according to political criteria. The repeated practice of blatant blackmail and ultimatums, as the Cypriot people experienced with tragic results as well two years ago, has proven by developments themselves to be the revered way the European Union and its institutions function.

This is the reason why we denounced the unacceptable stand taken by the members of the Eurogroup against Greece and the Greek people. We expressed our support to the efforts the Greek Government is making to be granted the right to implement policies that Greece itself will plan on a national level in order to minimize the consequences against working people. We believe that if the EU ruling circles genuinely want the unity and prosperity of the peoples, when they demand measures in each country they must follow a process of mutual respect and dialogue.

In conclusion, I want to reiterate the wish, but also the assessment I addressed to you a few months ago. The future of Europe cannot be trapped in stagnation. Real solutions are required immediately, both on a local and European level.

The vision and hope must be a united Cyprus, a Europe of peace and progress.