President of the partition of Cyprus
10th January 2021, HARAVGI newspaper
Article by Stefanos Stefanou, AKEL Political Bureau member
The Archbishop didn’t need to reveal that the President of the Republic is discussing a two-state solution. N. Anastasiades spoke about a two-state solution to many people both inside and outside Cyprus, which is precisely why the presidency cannot now clear up the mess on the issue, no matter how much assistance it receives from communication specialists and a large section of the mass media.
The question wasn’t just what N. Anastasiades was saying to his interlocutors. It was also what he did or did not do, both during the Crans Montana conference and during the period after the failure of the conference. N. Anastasiades, instead of focusing on resuming negotiations by taking specific initiatives, did exactly the opposite. With the policy pursued, he undermined and complicated the effort to resume negotiations instead of facilitating it.
From Crans Montana onwards, N. Anastasiades’ policy is characterized by contradictions which have undermined the credibility of both himself and the Greek Cypriot side too. Although he was declaring that he accepted the position of the United Nations for the resumption of the negotiations from the point where they had remained with the safeguarding of the convergences agreed, N. Anastasiades proposed “new ideas” which annulled significant convergences. The most characteristic example is his backtracking on the issue of political equality and the effective participation of the Turkish Cypriots in the central government’s decisions. N. Anastasiades initially agreed with the one Turkish Cypriot vote in the Council of Ministers and subsequently changed his mind! And this occurred at the same time as he knew that Turkey set political equality as a precondition so that it could officially too commit itself to the immediate termination of the Treaty of Guarantee and the speedy withdrawal of the occupation troops.
- Anastasiades also changed his mind in relation to other convergences and he withdrew them. He changed his mind on the question of the state formation which even though there was agreement that it would be a presidential system, he subsequently asked for a parliamentary system. He changed his mind on the 4: 1 ratio with regards naturalizations and afterwards…he changed his mind on his initial regret, but it was by then too late since the Turkish side does not accept bringing it back. Such regressions and contradictions cost the Greek Cypriot side, as a result of which the Secretary General of the United Nations has noted in the Reports he submitted that he has not been convinced of the political will of the two sides for him to take the initiative to resume negotiations.
- Anastasiades’ policy is currently characterized by the cultivation of illusions among the people about the possibility of confronting Turkey’s provocative actions. Having used Turkey’s illegal actions as a means to an end to create an excuse for his inaction surrounding the Cyprus problem, N. Anastasiades sought substitutes for the solution instead of working for it.
The first substitute were the trilateral and four-party meetings (Note: between Cyprus, Egypt, Greece and Israel), which the government ruling forces were claiming that these meetings “shielded the Exclusive Economic Zone” (EEZ) and “assisted the implementation of the energy program”. Despite the communication fiestas organised by the government ruling forces each time, the failure to confront Turkey’s illegal actions ruined their… web of illusions. When the illusion of “shielding the EEZ” was completely shown up and exposed by Turkey’s pirate actions, N. Anastasiades raised the banner of the imposition of EU sanctions that would hurt Turkey. Here, too, N. Anastasiades saw his policy crumble and exposed to the point where he was forced in public to (some degree) complain about the attitude of Germany and Merkel personally.
Time passed by with all these developments happening and Turkey, exploiting the prolonged stalemate and with the international community relieving it of responsibilities, created new serious fait accompli, both in the Cypriot EEZ and in the enclosed area of Famagusta. The assumption by the staunch advocate of partition, Tatar, of the leadership of the Turkish Cypriot community, which has aggravated the situation even further, was a culmination in developments.
Tatar, encouraged by Turkey, is seeking – officially now – a two-state solution. In view of this situation, N. Anastasiades – playing it safe – remembered bi-communal, bi-zonal federation. But time does not turn back. History isn’t written with soundbites, but by developments and facts. And these point to the permanent consolidation of partition during N. Anastasiades’ rule…
