On the so-called “new strategy” of N. Papadopoulos
Article by Yiorgos Loucaides, member of the Political Bureau of AKEL
Sunday 8th October 2017, “HARAVGI” newspaper
Mr. Papadopoulos is continuing his expensive election campaign by paying for advertisements calling on the people to read his “New Strategy” on the Cyprus problem. We indeed advise everyone to read it carefully. Those reading it who want a solution, liberation and reunification will almost certainly be persuaded not to support the presidential candidacy of Nicolas Papadopoulos.
The reason is quite simple. First, they will conclude that it proposes a “strategy” – but without a strategic goal. Indirectly, but very clearly it is being claimed that it doesn’t matter at all if we do not assert a bizonal, bicommunal federal solution, a unitary state solution or if ultimately “we must sacrifice ourselves for Enosis”. All this constitutes nothing more than a pseudo-dilemma for Mr. Papadopoulos, since he may be thinking that he can succeed in converting the status of the Turkish Cypriots into something resembling the status of the Muslims in Thrace.
Secondly, he does not say a single word about the basis of the negotiation procedure, which is the most basic tool for the solution, without which we cannot achieve anything or to incur costs on Turkey, which he himself points out as a major goal of his strategy.
Obviously, however, with his approach for starting negotiations from scratch, no negotiation whatsoever will begin if he is elected to power. Such an approach, on the contrary, will lead us to a complete disagreement with the UN and the clear prerequisite set by the UN Secretary-General Mr. Guterres for the continuation of the negotiation procedure.
Thirdly, the “New Strategy” is old, since it has been fully implemented and tested in practice during the administration of Tasos Papadopoulos.
What was the result of this strategy back then? After dozens of meetings with the respective Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot negotiators Tzionis – Pertev, negotiations not only never began, but not even the establishment of a single technical committee or working group was achieved.
As was the case back then, perhaps even worse today, not only will we not be understood, but we will be driven into a direct confrontation with the international community. Consequently, the references to a “New Strategy” and making Turkey pay a cost not only will remain empty sloganeering devoid of content, but it is our own side that will be exposed before the international community and our national cause will suffer devastating consequences, perhaps irreparable, this time, fatal blows.
The report submitted by the UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres reveals the disastrous handlings of Anastasiades in Crans Montana.
In his report, the UN Secretary-General fully exonerates Turkey when, among other things, he praises the commitment of all the guarantor powers to finding a mutually acceptable solution on the issue of security and the guarantees. More specifically, the relevant report states that, “Despite differences in their opening positions and public rhetoric, I could see from my in-depth engagement with the three guarantors in Crans-Montana that they had all come to Switzerland committed to seeking mutually acceptable solutions.”
Unfortunately, AKEL’s fears are confirmed, since Mr. Guterres – now officially – proves wrong Mr. Anastasiades’ narrative with regards the reasons for the breakdown in Crans Montana.
In addition, Mr. Anastasiades’ narrative is not shared by anyone else in the international community, not even by Cyprus’ fellow EU states, despite the fact that EU-Turkish relations may be at their lowest point.
The reason why Mr. Anastasiades, in a favourable environment for our side, failed to either exploit the unique conjuncture for a correct solution or even to expose Turkish intransigence, is we believe very clear. Mr. Anastasiades succeeded in achieving the impossible, because regrettably he sacrificed the future generations for the sake of the upcoming elections. The tragic consequences of the disastrous Anastasiades handlings are already visible. We have moved away from the solution, while Turkey has been facilitated in the promotion of new possible fait accompli.
