Interview with T. Tsielepis, member of the Political Bureau of the C.C. of AKEL, on the Cyprus problem
“AVGI” Greek daily newspaper Saturday 10th December 2016
* How important is it for a meeting between the Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras and the Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan to precede the Conference on the Cyprus problem in Geneva?
TT: It is important because there are two reasons why they should consult each other. One reason is substantive: if they manage to find a common language with respect to the result being sought, you realize that this increases the chances of a successful conclusion to the degree of course that they will manage to do so, because the end result cannot be judged before you get there. One can’t call on the other side to accept the result before it goes to a conference.
But there is another issue, namely the question of what form this conference will take. At this point there mustn’t be any shadow of doubt and misunderstanding whatsoever. We must all go to the conference with a clear mind as to how it will be held, given that some issues that seem to be procedural in reality have substantial implications. And for this reason they must agree on what form of conference we will attend, who will participate in it, what will be discussed there and what the subject will be. All of these issues have their importance. That is the reason why a preparatory meeting, let’s say, would be very useful.
* Do you therefore think that the structure of the conference will also be discussed between the two leaders?
TT: I would say “also between these two” as they are both contracting parties to the Treaty of Guarantee. They will inevitably be there. To be able to amend or abolish a Treaty, of course there must be consultation between the parties to the Treaty, and that is why the consultation between them is absolutely essential as well.
* Briefly, what is the difference between a five-party Conference with the participation of the EU and a multilateral conference with the participation of the EU, the permanent members of the UN Security Council and perhaps another partner that may emerge in the course of developments?
TT: These two conferences have significant implications. It is logical that our side has as a “red line” not to accept at any stage of the procedure the “de-recognition” in any way of the Republic of Cyprus for whatever reason. However, we know that the Turkish side has its own “red line” as well. They will not recognize de jure the Republic of Cyprus before the solution of the Cyprus problem. The problem is that the five-party conference as proposed by the Turkish side creates dangers for the “derecognition” of the Republic of Cyprus, because the three guarantor powers can’t be there which is one part of the Treaty of Guarantee and the second part, which is the Republic of Cyprus, not be there and only the communities there. Such things don’t happen. On the other hand, we are aware that Turkey will not sit alongside with the Republic of Cyprus in such a discussion because that would mean a de jure recognition. This is why a way must be found for this just demand of ours (namely “no to derecognition”) to be respected, without reaching to the point of forcing Turkey to recognize us because it will not do so. To avoid a procedural deadlock there needs to be consultation. That’s what I told you is of vital importance, it is not just a matter of symbolism.
* Could you answer the question as to what should be the maximum length of time that could be accepted for the full withdrawal of the Turkish troops?
TT: No, I can’t. It is the subject of negotiation and expertise. It certainly cannot be for a long period of time. We cannot accept, for example, that they will leave in a timeframe lasting a decade. The withdrawal of the Turkish troops must have a beginning and an end. One – two years, I do not know how long the withdrawal will take, but it must be in a short period of time.
* Why must the UN Security Council and the European Union participate in the conference?
TT: Because, inter alia, we want a resolution that will endorse the solution. We want a peacekeeping force which cannot be deployed without the adoption of a UN Security Council resolution. We want the EU because of the acquis commautaire issue, so they won’t tell us tomorrow that what we have agreed doesn’t comply with the acquis. They must all be there about.
* Is there consultation between the Greek government and AKEL?
TT: There certainly is. As you know, the General Secretary of AKEL comrade Andros Kyprianou visited Athens last Sunday and I accompanied him. And it should be said that there was a very good consultation with the Greek Prime Minister in the presence of Foreign Minister Nikos Kotzias.
* To what extent do you think that Turkey is using the Cyprus problem to renegotiate Greek-Turkish relations as a whole?
TT: I can’t rule out even such tendencies on the part of Turkey. But certainly, at this precise moment, it is very difficult for Turkey to try to connect the Cyprus problem with Greek-Turkish relations. We are going to the talks with a specific mission, namely for the Cyprus problem. I believe that the solution of the Cyprus problem will help both Turkey and Greece in the effort undertaken to overcome the different approaches between them. If there is an attempt by Turkey to link them it will simply dramatically increase the probability of not getting anywhere, not only with regards Greek-Turkish relations, but also on the Cyprus problem as well.
* Do you share the view that says that the timetable of 12th January was set in order to anticipate the 20th of January, when the resident in the White House changes?
TT: I’m not so sure that this is so much the case, in the sense that US foreign policy is not determined by the given President. Of course the given President does play a role, but in some limited context he plays a role. I consider that US policy on the Cyprus problem is determined according to the interests they have and not depending on who is the President of the country.
* Does the change in the figure of the UN Secretary-General play a role?
TT: I would say that the same applies to the Secretary-General. The UN Secretary-General is obliged de facto to respect the UN Charter in the efforts he undertakes. Of course this does not mean that the given Secretary-General doesn’t have some relative autonomy in the handling of the problem. The only real problem I can see is that the new UN Secretary-General needs some time to comprehend precisely what he has ahead of him. Right now this may not help us – in this sense however.
* What message would you send to Greek citizens in view of any possible developments?
TT: The message that I think should be conveyed is that Greece is of course Cyprus’ most reliable and loyal ally in this effort. Consequently, the absolute understanding and alignment between Greece and Cyprus is required. And of course the objective cannot be anything other than the solution of the Cyprus problem, based on principles and on the basis of the agreed framework. Today’s partitionist situation does not suit us. We are not in a normal situation where some people are trying to bring partition on us.
The opposite applies. We are in a partition and are trying to get out of it. The worst possible choice is the current partitionist status quo, which is not a status quo. It is a situation that is changing every day to our detriment, disappearing the Greek Cypriot community gradually and driving the Turkish Cypriot community into a kind of extinction as it is being absorbed by Turkey. This is why it is imperative that we do everything on our part to reach a solution of the Cyprus problem, always on the basis of principles and the agreed framework, because otherwise we will be left with the de facto partition that harbors enormous dangers for Cyprus and Greece itself. That’s what we must all focus on. This must be the message. We are going to the talks to solve the Cyprus problem.
