Statement by the General Secretary of AKEL A. Kyprianou denouncing the anniversary of the proclamation of the illegal regime in the occupied areas
If partition prevails, not only half but the whole of Cyprus will be lost
AKEL C.C. Press Office, 14th November 2020, Nicosia
The pandemic has forced us to cancel our annual meeting to denounce the anniversary of the proclamation of the pseudo-state in the occupied areas. Even under these conditions, we feel the need to send the message again that we condemn the proclamation of the illegal regime.
We declare yet again, no to partition!
No to Erdogan’s provocative actions!
No to the colonalisation of Famagusta!
We reaffirm our will to struggle for a solution of the Cyprus problem, for the liberation and reunification of Cyprus.
We denounce, once again, the invasion of the Turkish Army of Attila which spread death and cut Cyprus in half.
We denounce the crime of the ongoing occupation and its consequences.
We condemn Turkey’s provocative actions in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of the Republic of Cyprus.
We denounce Turkey’s policy which persists on destroying the future of Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots on the land that gave birth to them.
We denounce Turkey for seeking to impose its interests on a land that does not belong to it, on a people who paid and is paying for the crimes of imperialism and Turkish expansionism with the many bloody sacrifices it has made, with the uprooting and displacement of our people as refugees in their own country.
The treacherous coup d’état and the Turkish invasion in 1974 were the first part of imperialism’s plans to partition Cyprus. The permanent consolidation of the results of the 1974 twin crime, which has been Turkey’s long-standing goal, began to be promoted long ago. The mission of “incorporating” the occupied part of Cyprus in Turkey was assigned to Ankara’s chosen one, Rauf Denktash.
Denktash had long been preparing the culmination of secessionist activities. Using the stagnation surrounding the Cyprus problem as an excuse, he silenced every progressive voice of resistance inside the Turkish Cypriot community. He eroded any force that could resist his plans. In full coordination with the military establishment of Ankara, he set in motion the birth of the so-called “Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus”. Despite the fact that since the beginning of 1983, the UN General Assembly had approved a Resolution calling for the withdrawal of all the occupying troops and declaring full sovereignty of the Republic of Cyprus, Ankara has pursued its goals, provocatively ignoring the calls issued by the international organisation.
A few days before 15th November 1983, the occupying forces cut off all communications in the occupied territories. Denktash proceeded with the secessionist action when he received Ankara’s written order to proclaim “independence” on the night of 14th November.
AKEL reacted immediately to the Turkish establishment’s secessionist act, calling on the Cypriot people to develop patriotic joint action. For AKEL, the proclamation of the pseudo-state aimed at the partition of Cyprus through the promotion of double Enosis that would transform our country into a base of American-NATO imperialism. The proclamation of the pseudo-state was denounced by the entire international community. The UN called for of the proclamation to be revoked and urged its members not to recognize the occupational formation.
So far, only Turkey recognizes the illegal regime. However, its proclamation made the effort to resolve the Cyprus problem even more difficult. Its de facto existence and the efforts for its international upgrading impede and make the struggle for a peaceful solution of the Cyprus problem and the reunification of our homeland all these years incredibly difficult. It is a fact that the partitionist act of the pseudo-state’s proclamation was not accepted by the progressive Turkish Cypriots. Nevertheless, the pressure exerted by Denktash and Turkey, as well as the passage of time, “addicted” some of them to the structures of the illegal formation.
This does not mean, however, that there are no forces of our Turkish Cypriot compatriots who insist on resisting. They consider Cyprus to be our common homeland, the Republic of Cyprus as our common home. They were the ones who took to the streets of Nicosia on Tuesday night and shouted at Ankara to take its hands off them.
We hold out our hand to these forces as AKEL and are struggling with them, in a common patriotic, anti-occupation, anti-imperialist front for reunification and peace.
We know very well that all those who have been struggling all these years for the solution of the Cyprus problem are feeling disappointed and desperate today. The stagnation on the Cyprus problem all this time, as well as the assumption by Tatar of the leadership of the Turkish Cypriot community, have reduced the hope that something may change, that Cyprus can be saved. We should also add the ongoing Turkish provocative stand to these developments.
Despite his big talk and declarations, Mr. Anastasiades and his government failed to yield tangible results that create a perspective for the Cyprus problem.
If the criterion for the success of a policy is its results, then we can say with certainty that Mr. Anastasiades and the ruling DISY party have failed. In the eight years or so that they have been handling the Cyprus problem, it has been proven that they don’t have clear tactics on how we shall arrive at the agreed goal. They improvise, pursuing a “wait and see” policy.
They did not bring the Cyprus problem nearer to a solution. Quite the opposite has occurred.
They did not convince the international community that the Greek Cypriot side bears no responsibilities for the prolonged deadlock.
They did not effectively protect the interests and rights of the Republic of Cyprus.
They didn’t accept to take AKEL’s warnings seriously, which had predicted today’s developments with mathematical precision.
After the collapse at Crans Montana, we were warning that the prolonged stalemate posed dangers for the imposition of new serious fait accompli to the detriment of Cyprus and our people. We were not listened to. Eventually, what Turkey was threatening to do is in fact being implemented step by step, starting with the opening of the coastal front and not only of Famagusta.
AKEL warned that the absence of negotiations would give room to Turkish aggression. We weren’t listened to. They only took care to overwhelm the people that they have supposedly shielded our Exclusive Economic Zone. At the end of the day, Turkey’s violations of the Cypriot EEZ have become routine.
We as AKEL were trying to persuade Mr. Anastasiades to demonstrate a will and a constructive spirit as Mr. Akinci – a leader who wanted to work for a federal solution – was in the leadership of the Turkish Cypriot community. In the end time passed by, Mr. Tatar assumed the leadership of the Turkish Cypriot community and we’re left wondering what we could agree with him. This is because Mr. Anastasiades allowed time to pass by challenging/questioning convergences that had been agreed, discussing about the supposed existence of some 4th July framework and taking and bringing supposed “new ideas” on the Cyprus problem.
What is the result of all these careless and unfeasible actions? None. Today it is being proved in the worst way that the only real dilemma we have before us is federation or partition. This is also a reply to all those who raise the issue of abandoning the solution of federation, “new ideas” such as a loose federation, or even putting the proposal for a unitary state on the negotiating table.
Has anyone perhaps heard from all of them discuss any one of these scenarios? On the contrary, whoever doesn’t talk about federation, talks about partition, for a two-state solution. Is this what we want for Cyprus, for our own future and the future of our children? If this is what certain forces and circles on the Greek Cypriot side want they should come out and say so clearly. They should come straight out and say that they want a two states solution in Cyprus; that they share the same vision as Erdogan and Tatar and that they have the same goal that Attila had in 1974. That is to say, partition, borders with Turkey in our own country, the continuous colonalisation until Cypriots disappear from the island. These will be the consequences of partition.
That is precisely why we as AKEL insist on declaring that the only feasible solution is a bi-communal, bi-zonal federation.
A solution in which the human rights and fundamental freedoms of all Cypriot citizens will be guaranteed and safeguarded.
A solution based on the Resolutions of the United Nations, the High-Level Agreements, International and European Law.
A solution that will demilitarize Cyprus and exclude any guarantees or intervention rights in the internal affairs of our country by foreign powers.
A solution that will reunite the territory, the people, the institutions and the economy within the framework of a bi-communal, bi-zonal federation with a single sovereignty, a single citizenship, a single international personality and with political equality as described in the texts of the United Nations.
A solution that will lead to a united state, a continuation of the Republic of Cyprus.
Many justifiably wonder how we will enter into talks “with this aggressive Turkey”, “how shall we talk about a solution”? Whether we like it or not, the problem we have is with Turkey and we have to solve it with Turkey. Turkish aggression is directly threatening Cyprus and the very survival of our people. We therefore have to ask ourselves: will we give up and hand over our homeland to Turkey or shall we struggle to save it?
The situation is even more difficult today. Ersin Tatar is at the helm of the Turkish Cypriot community, a man who expresses Erdogan’s aspirations for a two-state solution. That is precisely why it is imperative that the Greek Cypriot side demonstrates its will and to find itself steps ahead. It should remind everyone of what has been agreed with the Turkish Cypriot and international community, of what the Resolutions of the United Nations provide for. It should demand an end to the Turkish provocative actions and the withdrawal of the unacceptable Turkish positions. It should remind that we have before us what was agreed up to Crans Montana and the Framework of the UN Secretary General. Above all, Mr. Anastasiades and DISY must realize that there is no time left. There is no time anymore for any other regressions. There must be no more room for Cyprus to be sacrificed for the sake of petty-political expediencies and considerations
Let us all reflect on what this country has suffered. How much it has struggled to hold on and survive. Let us reflect in what is at stake.
If partition prevails, not only half of Cyprus will be lost. The whole of Cyprus will be lost.
We will never compromise with those who have decided that they are comfortable with half of Cyprus under permanent Turkish occupation.
We are struggling because we want the whole of Cyprus united.
