The Anastasiades government’s insistence on sanctions on Turkey is wrong
Statement by AKEL C.C. Spokesperson Stefanos Stefanou on the Declaration by the European Council
AKEL C.C. Press Office, 26th March 2021, Nicosia
It is clear that the Declaration of the members of the European Council is once again an attempt at a compromise between the different approaches of member states on the position that must be taken towards Turkey. The explicit reference that the development of a relationship based on co-operation and mutual benefit with Turkey remains for the EU of strategic importance is not a coincidence at all.
Assessing Ankara’s termination of illegal drillings, the resumption of Turkey-Greece exploratory contacts and the setting of the informal five-party meeting as a sign of goodwill, the Summit concludes with proposals for the adoption of a positive agenda on the precondition that Turkey continues to adhere to a consistent stand. Along with the effort to address the difficulties in the implementation of the existing customs union, the start of the processes for its upgrading, the beginning of high-level contacts on issues of common interest and the strengthening of cooperation for the movement of citizens is proposed.
In contrast to the Borrell Report, which the Conclusions approved merely welcomes and takes into account, the measures that could be taken in the event of Turkey backing down and proceeding to commit new violations are not being considered. Instead, it is stressed in general and vague terms that in such a case the EU may use the tools it has at its disposal.
With regards to the Cyprus problem, the reference that the EU’s support towards a comprehensive solution of the Cyprus problem in accordance with the relevant resolutions of the UN, more specifically Resolutions 550, 789 and 1251, is important. Furthermore, it is made clear that the EU will participate in the informal conference with the status of an observer and that it intends to play an active role in the negotiations by appointing a representative in the Good Services Agency. The absence of an explicit reference to the agreed basis for the solution of the Cyprus problem, as well as the need for the negotiation to continue from where it had remained at Crans Montana, represent a serious omission.
The two-pronged stance that was adopted by the Heads of state and governments, who, while directly promoting the positive agenda (with Ankara), refer to a review of Turkey’s stance at the next Summit, does not surprise us at all. It confirms our concern regarding the Anastasiades government’s erroneous insistence to place the imposition of sanctions at the centre of its policy for the past two years, while it has once again proved that the axis of our policy to rid ourselves of Turkey’s aggression must be the resumption of substantive negotiations and their continuation from where they had remained at Crans Montana, because only in this way will the way be paved for a comprehensive solution of the Cyprus problem on the agreed basis. .
