One year after the collapse of the Crans Montana conference

Article by Stavri Kalopsidiotou, Lawyer – International Law expert, Member of the Cyprus problem Bureau of AKEL, Member of the Central Committee of AKEL

Newspaper «HARAVIGI» Sunday 8 July 2018

War doesn’t have a friendly face and occupation has never, in any country, coexisted with normality no matter how many years may go by. On the other hand, people can forget how we have been led to destruction and who betrayed us, but the feeling of fear, insecurity and an unknown future never abandons neither those who have experienced it, nor those who do have a historical conscience. Inevitably, this reminder today weighs heavily first and foremost on the shoulders of those who promised heaven and earth to the people that they would be at the forefront of the efforts for a solution to the Cyprus problem.

One year has elapsed since the breakdown of the Conference on Cyprus at Crans Montana with responsibilities in two subsequent UN General Assembly Reports being apportioned on both sides in Cyprus and not on Turkey, the occupying power. And this, with the Presidential Palace insisting on a narrative that the UN Secretary-General repeatedly refutes and which the EU does not confirm either, with Turkey intensifying its provocativeness and not being denounced for its illegal activity in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of the Republic of Cyprus, but denounced only for this activity within the region of the eastern Mediterranean in general. And with the danger visible of Turkey’s threats being realized for drilling in the Republic of Cyprus’ EEZ in the period ahead.

It is in these conditions that a period of stagnation in the negotiations is being completed and it is these conditions that Turkey is gearing in order to reduce its own shockwaves as regards the Cyprus problem internationally, but also within the Turkish Cypriot community. And it is these conditions which the Anastasiades-DISY government should have been working to reverse because they prescribe the multiple dangerous nature of the deep roots of partition with devastating preciseness.

The visit of the Special Envoy of the UN Secretary-General to Cyprus represents an excellent opportunity for the procedure of the solution to get back on track. It is an excellent pretext for the President of the Republic to prove in practice that his sole goal remains the solution of the Cyprus problem on the basis of the agreed framework.

Does he have the political will to commit himself to a procedure that should be meaningful, as UN Secretary-General proposes?

Does he agree or not that we should accept anew cross-negotiation, the result of the convergences that have already been achieved?

Does he accept or reject the Guterres Framework, which, regardless of date, outlines the solution which we are seeking on security-guarantees, terminates the Treaty of Guarantee and any rights of intervention of third parties, leaving only the issue of the Treaty of Alliance outstanding?

Does he consent or not to a continuation of the negotiations from where they had remained and that he should discuss the remaining internal aspects of the Cyprus problem on the basis of the Guterres Framework?

And if our own understanding differs from that of the other side, is he ready or not to exhaust every avenue for a positive outcome, something which cannot arise without waging a meaningful dialogue?

AKEL takes a very clear position: the procedure must resume precisely as the UN Secretary-General proposes. The Turkish Cypriot leader has recently adopted a similar approach as well. We expect to hear the same thing from Mr. Anastasiades too, given that this is the only path and way to test Turkey in practice.

At Crans Montana we got lost in translation, in written and oral assurances. A year onwards, we remain entrenched behind slogans, petty positioning and the confusion caused by the many dates projected, the selective leakage of documents and so on. These are tactics and practices that AKEL strongly denounces, insisting that the Cyprus problem is very close to decision time. Both time and history do not spare anyone…particularly those who get elected promising to win the bet which is common for the generations that are passing away and for the future generations: our tragic history should cease casting a shadow over the future.