Press Conference of the General Secretary of the C.C. of AKEL Andros Kyprianou surrounding the state of play on the Cyprus problem
AKEL C.C. Press Office, Tuesday 14th March 2017, Nicosia
The talks on the Cyprus problem have been suspended after the erroneous decision approved by the majority of the House of Representatives and Mr. Akinci’s decision. The possible collapse of the talks and a deadlock are now visible. After all that has happened, I meet people every day who are anxious to achieve a solution and hoped that something positive would emerge from this procedure; people who are evidently frustrated and pessimistic. We therefore felt the need to address the people tonight because we are also concerned about these developments.
Of course this is not the last chance for a solution of the Cyprus problem. There will always be the day after, the next opportunity. But we have to reflect on what the day after will be and under what conditions will the next opportunity arrive; reflect on what and how negative the consequences will be to the detriment of our country and people.
Colonization as the official Turkish policy, the financial protocols, the agreement for water and electricity, Turkey’s presence in the occupied territories (military, political and cultural-religious) are changing day by day the identity and perspective of the Turkish Cypriot community. Turkey’s greatest ally in its attempt to absorb the occupied territories is the continued occupation and division. No one should consider that the resistance of the progressive section of the Turkish Cypriot community is unlimited. Consequently, we shouldn’t have any illusions. We mustn’t think that we will put the talks to one side for now, that we will conduct undistracted the pre-election campaign and in March 2018 the newly-elected President of the Republic will find the Cyprus problem in the situation that it is today.
Certain circles and forces criticize the positions AKEL expresses, accusing us that we are ready to accept any solution. We categorically reiterate that AKEL will never accept a bad solution. On the other we see others, more hardened, who accuse us that we are promoting the “Turkification” of Cyprus. Cyprus will be “Turkified” if we fail to solve the Cyprus problem. It will be “Turkified” if we end up with partition and if we accept as the solution the idea that “They (Turkish Cypriots) should stick together to one side and we (Greek Cypriots) on the other side among ourselves” as those circles and forces say who are openly or indirectly promoting partition. In the event of such a development we will have borders with Turkey in our very own country. However, these forces and circles don’t tell the people that such a development will bring so many settlers to Cyprus who inevitably will at some stage seek a living space in the free areas. They don’t tell us that we will be living with the permanent threat of war in our own country. It is naive to believe that without a solution our life would simply continue as today. We will be living on a moving quicksand that we won’t know when it will swallow us up.
Some are attempting to safeguard for themselves the title of a patriot. To be patriotic is to struggle for the liberation and reunification of your country and not to seek or inadvertently to lead things to partition or worse still to the annexation of the occupied areas to Turkey.
For AKEL, the correct solution of the Cyprus problem is the only way for our people, Greek Cypriots, Turkish Cypriots, Maronites, Armenians and Latins, to live without their survival being threatened in the country of their birth. It is the only way to create preconditions for growth, progress and prosperity. Unfortunately, the battle to solve the Cyprus problem is not being waged in a united way. We are not all aspiring towards the same goal. Some circles and forces are seeking to “change our strategic goal”, abandon the goal of a federal solution and that we should fight for a unitary state solution. They call federation a treacherous and racist solution. They accuse us of making unacceptable concessions to Turkey. But if this solution is supposedly submissive why haven’t we reached an agreement? And if with so many supposedly concessions made we haven’t even managed to agree on a solution how we will agree if a maximalist goal is asserted? With whose support will we proceed? Who will force Turkey to accept an ideal for us solution? The easiest thing is sloganeering and empty words. But if these do not yield a result, their consequences will be paid by everyone.
Certain circles and forces are proposing the repositioning of the Cyprus problem as a problem of invasion and occupation. We all agree that the Cyprus problem is primarily a problem of invasion, occupation and illegal colonization. The key is how we proceed to fulfill our goal. If we believe that we first solve the Cyprus problem and then sit down to talk, we are fooling ourselves with illusions. The policy of “protaxis”, namely the policy of setting preconditions that predetermine the result of negotiation, has been tested in the past and has failed miserably.
We should, they say, render Turkey liable for its actions. We agree. But we have to know how far this possibility may go. Who will exert pressure on Turkey? Why didn’t they pressure Turkey on the refugee issue which affects the whole of the European Union? We mustn’t therefore be under any illusions because we will inevitably fall from the clouds and indeed in a very terrible way.
We are not walking on air, nor do we lose our hope. We don’t yield and give in. As AKEL, the day after the double crime of the coup and invasion was committed, we talked about the need of healing the wounds and the reunification of our country. We supported the honest and painful compromise of a bizonal bicommunal federation. We found the strength to build together with our Turkish Cypriot compatriots on the ruins of the occupation, the movement of rapprochement. Since then, we insist that our primary and unwavering goal is the solution of the Cyprus problem and the reunification of our country.
From the first moment of the election of Mr. Anastasiades AKEL made it clear that we would not reciprocate the destructive and vulgar opposition that DISY and the other political parties had waged against Christofias and AKEL. We didn’t do so because we owe something to Mr. Anastasiades, but because we owe it to our country and people to support the procedure of the solution of the Cyprus problem. From the outset we pointed out the need to continue the negotiations from where we had left off with Mr. Talat and that we shouldn’t start negotiations from scratch. Unfortunately, back then we were alone in our position. All the other political parties and the President himself followed the logic of rejecting the Christofias-Talat convergences, supporting negotiations from scratch.
This policy continued until February 2014. The result was a significant widening of the gap between the two sides. Even worse, in early 2014 the UN Secretary- General’s submitted a report to the Security Council, which was the worst for the Greek Cypriot side since 2004. This occurred while the Turkish vessel “Barbaros” was conducting investigations on the southern coast of the Republic of Cyprus.
In April 2014 Mustafa Akinci assumed the leadership of the Turkish Cypriot community. The hopes that the procedure for the solution of the Cyprus problem would move ahead were rekindled. Mr. Akinci’s positions were not under any circumstances identical to those of Mr. Eroglu. Nevertheless, AKEL stressed and does stress that everything will be judged at the negotiating table. That’s where everyone will demonstrate who he/she is.
The talks between Anastasiades and Akinci recorded progress from the moment the Christofias – Talat convergences began to be utilized. In the almost two years of talks the two leaders made steps forward. However, disagreements on key issues were also registered. This is attributable to both side’s regressions with regards the convergences agreed between Christofias and Talat, but also to existing disagreements between Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots.
We currently have convergences which include provisions, evidently improved both in relation to the Annan Plan and the 1960 Constitution. This applies to the issues of sovereignty and citizenship, the strengthening of federal competences, the mechanism of overcoming deadlocks, maritime zones, basic freedoms and the chapter of Governance.
The meetings held in Mont Peleran and Geneva demonstrated that there was and there is still a way to go.
Unfortunately for some months it was obvious that the negotiation procedure was blocked. The reason was that on the one hand Mr. Anastasiades was not ready to discuss the rotating Presidency, and Mr. Akinci did not want to discuss at this stage the territorial issue. It doesn’t matter who started this tactic. What is important is that the procedure did not move forward. While we were looking for a way to unblock the talks by submitting proposals the decision of the majority of the House of Representatives on the Enosis Referendum arose.
The two leaders instead of seeking to defuse the situation, through their daily statements played into the hands of the extremist forces in both communities. While the Cyprus problem was getting “lost” between declarations and counter statements, Mr. Akinci would withdraw from the talks, while Mr. Anastasiades presented himself as the divine intervention that would solve the problems in the General Health Scheme, the port of Limassol, the psychiatric hospital Athalassa and elsewhere.
Indeed acting in a petty-political manner DISY began a communication counterattack trying to persuade the people that AKEL is to blame for the developments. Instead of assuming its responsibility and thinking about how it could correct the mistake about the Enosis decision, it turned against AKEL. As if this weren’t enough, DISY tried to bulldoze everything, saying the inimitable “we are neither ELAM, nor AKEL”. For sure AKEL is not DISY, but DISY has people who are also ELAM.
Now is not the time to be waging a destructive in-fight between us. It is absolutely imperative that the two leaders rise to the occasion. They mustn’t do the forces of nationalism any favours and be led astray by any petty considerations. We strongly believe that the crisis created can be overcome and negotiations can resume if we unwaveringly seek to do so. If this happens we have views on how they must subsequently proceed. AKEL supports this position, despite any short-term political costs it may suffer because what primarily interests us is the next generations and not the next elections.
So hoping that the procedure will be put back on the track of substantive negotiations, what should be done is that we must focus on certain key issues. I refer to the issues of executive power, effective participation, and the four freedoms, the issues of territory, property and security. On this last point there needs to be preparation, recognizing that in the discussions the participation of the three guarantor powers, the European Union and the UN Security Council are also demanded. The above issues must now be discussed together and any convergences on these will only apply if all the issues are resolved. Otherwise the whole exercise must be considered as void and no position whatsoever that is submitted on the table will apply.
If these key issues are addressed, we will reach the major issue of security and guarantees. We have no illusions about the difficulty of this chapter. However, any solution of all the other key issues will make it easier to address the security issue. Our goal is the security of one community cannot be guaranteed at the expense of the security of the other. Our goal is for Cyprus to be demilitarized and allowed to march on its path – independent, sovereign and without any guardians.
I see that it’s said and written that we who are working intensively for the solution of the Cyprus problem are “dangerous.” We aren’t the ones who are dangerous as we are struggling to reunite our homeland. Dangerous are those who if the policy they propose is pursued it will lead Cyprus to stagnation and a dangerous setback that will permit Turkey to promote its goals.
AKEL has a vision for a Cyprus of peace; for a reunited federal Cyprus that will be a beacon and an example for the whole world. It will be a modern model of harmonious coexistence of two different ethnic communities, languages and religions who will co-manage their joint state. It will be a country that will have managed to rid itself of the armies and channel all its power and resources to social investment and economic growth. We will not waste this hope, neither in the past, nor now, for the sake of any pre-election rhetoric. On the contrary we have been building this vision for years. Little by little, step by step with the progressive Turkish Cypriots on the solid foundations of rapprochement, reconciliation and understanding so that we can bequeath it to the future generations. This is what everyone’s vision of Cyprus should be.
Our people have had enough of “pledges”. It has been betrayed many times by sloganeering and empty rhetoric. It is thirsty only for truth and honesty. Let’s denounce nationalism and fanaticism. Let’s therefore reject the “schizophrenia” of the Anastasiades-DISY government and others to lay wreaths to those who destroyed the country, while at the same time declaring that they want a solution and reunification. They should stop appeasing and caressing the monster of neo-fascism, because it will never be tamed.
As far as AKEL is concerned, yes, the progressive Turkish Cypriots were and will remain our natural allies in the struggle for the reunification of our country. If the Right-wing and extreme right in Cyprus fail this time as well to understand the anguish and aspirations of the progressive Turkish Cypriots they will cause irreparable damage, this time, to the whole of Cyprus.
As AKEL, we don’t expect any divine intervention out of nowhere to save us. What we are seeking and we declare it boldly, is an honorable compromise with our Turkish Cypriot compatriots; a compromise not with the occupation, nor with the big powerful interests. We are a force and voice that is struggling and asserting for the whole of Cyprus. AKEL doesn’t perceive the cause of Cyprus and its future as a strictly communal cause. That is why we insist and will continue to insist that the Turkish Cypriot, as well as the Greek Cypriot community, will eliminate once and for everything threatening their survival only when they manage to live together within the framework of a federation and a reunified state with a single sovereignty, a single citizenship and a single international personality, which will ensure that the two communities will live together and cooperate in a united and independent homeland. This for sure cannot be guaranteed by any solution, but only by a solution that will terminate the occupation and colonization; by a solution that will restore the sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and unity of the Republic of Cyprus; by a solution based on the UN resolutions, the High-Level Agreements, International and European Law; by a solution that will demilitarize Cyprus and exclude any rights of guarantee or intervention in the internal affairs of the country by foreign forces; by a solution that will reunite the territory, the people, the institutions and the economy under a bicommunal, bizonal federation with political equality, as described in the UN texts. Such a solution must be put to a referendum after having been agreed at the negotiating table.
We, Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots, can hope for in the future only when we start building together again the foundations of our common life, common social and political struggles, only when our homeland is liberated and reunited.
