The results of the meeting of the leaders of the two communities have been disappointing
Statement of Toumazos Tsielepis, Head of the Cyprus problem Office of the C.C. of AKEL
AKEL C.C. Press Office, 3rd June 2014, Nicosia
The purpose of yesterday’s meeting between the leaders of the two communities was to give an impetus to the negotiating procedure, which took fifteen whole months to enter its substantive phase.
The results of the meeting were not encouraging. Mr. Eroglu first proclaims that he is in a hurry for a solution, and on the other he does not intend to grasp the self-evident. That is to say, for the negotiation procedure to proceed to the third phase, all the chapters and all their aspects, including the territorial issue, the settlers and the security issue, must be discussed thoroughly beforehand. The stubborn refusal of the Turkish Cypriot leader to discuss these issues as well is objectively leading to a waste of valuable time and is preventing substantial progress at the negotiating table.
The distress expressed by Mr. Eroglu about the withdrawal of the Christofias-Talat convergences, and in particular with regards the convergence recorded on the rotating presidency can only cause amusement. It is a fact that the rotating presidency was at the negotiating table since the early 1990’s and was included in all five variants of the Annan plan. However, it is also true that in the Christofias-Talat convergence, which Mr. Eroglu is invoking, the rotating presidency was a package together with the crossover vote. It was Mr. Eroglu himself who subsequently rejected the crossover vote. As a result, Demetris Christofias tabled a proposal at the negotiating table that is recorded on page 23 of the Downer document (Note: former Deputy Special Adviser to the UN Secretary-General on Cyprus) on the convergences as follows: “The Greek Cypriot side replied that if the Turkish Cypriots do not confirm the agreement between Christofias and Talat (i.e., to accept crossover and weighted voting, then there cannot be no rotating presidency, but only a Greek Cypriot President and a Turkish Cypriot Vice- President.”
It is patently clear that Mr. Eroglu is bluffing when referring to respect for the convergences, exploiting the weakness of President Anastasiades to unequivocally call for the respect of the convergences and the continuation of the talks from where they had left off. In this way Mr. Eroglu achieves on the one hand his long-standing goal for disengagement from the main convergences recorded and on the other, he apportions the responsibility on the Greek Cypriot side.
As the substantive phase of the negotiations are on-going, now is not the time for a handling of the Cyprus problem serving communication expediencies, but for commitment towards the goal of the solution based on principles. On this occasion we repeat for the umpteenth time that AKEL supports the negotiating process as the only existing way to solve the Cyprus problem, without this meaning offering a blank cheque to the President of the Republic.
