Beyond federation there is only partition

Statement by the AKEL C.C. Spokesperson Stefanos Stefanou

AKEL C.C. Press Office, 18 February 2019, Nicosia

From the President of the Republic’s interview with “Politis” newspaper two issues stand out with regards the Cyprus problem.

First, it is the President’s readiness to discuss other frameworks beyond federation, which he reiterated in his interview that was published yesterday in the press.

This is something that has never been done before by any President of the Republic. No President has done so because beyond federation there is only partition, no matter what form it will take.

Partition is the beginning of new dangers and new adventures for Cyprus and our people. Partition is rejected by all the political forces and excluded. Furthermore, despite the fact that the President continues to repeat such statements, all political forces – except AKEL – remain silent and dont say anything. Havent they realized that the framework beyond federation to which Mr Anastasiades refers to is not the unitary state, but a variant of partition? Doesnt this bother them?

In truth, how sincere is the rejection of partition, which was Denktash’s vision and Turkey’s long-standing goal?

The second issue concerns the President’s insistence on the Minutes of July 4th. One wonders, doesnt the President know that at Crans Montana no official minutes were kept on any matter, and that each side simply took down its own notes?

The President’s insistence is incomprehensible given that the UN Secretary General, during the Crans Montana Conference, set out his positions in a very clear way on the issues of security, guarantees, intervention rights and the occupying troops. The UN Secretary General’s positions are those which the President states were outlined in the clarifications given on 4 July.

So, why does the President convey negative messages to the international community that he is in conflict with the UN General Secretariat and that he is setting new conditions for the resumption of negotiations? Why is he making things for the continuation of negotiations even more difficult?