Diplomat opens its pages this month to Dr. Tamer Gazioðlu, the ambassador of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus to Ankara. Citing historical examples, Ambassador Gazioðlu emphasises that the international community and the Cypriots themselves have always officially recognised the existence of two separate peoples on the island, neither of which has the right to represent the other. Accordingly, he argues that the entry of one of the Cypriot parties - the Greek Cypriots - into the EU has created a Union not of 25 members but of 24-and-a-half. The ambassador also points out that it was the Greek Cypriots who refused to back the United Cyprus Republic foreseen in the Annan Plan while the Turkish Cypriots approved it. He blames this on the fact that the Greek Cypriots had already been assured of EU membership before the referendum.
In 1960, as a result of the 1959 Zurich and London Agreements, the “Republic of Cyprus” was established on a basis of equal partnership and bi-communality. Rights and responsibilities were shared by the two partners - i.e., the Turkish Cypriots and the Greek Cypriots - as well as the Guarantor States namely Turkey, Greece and the United Kingdom
Due to the Greek Cypriots’ everlasting desire for union with Greece, the Partnership Republic had to break up in 1963, which resulted in the isolation of the Turkish Cypriots from all organs of the Republic by force. In 1964, United Nations Peace Keeping Forces came to the island for the maintenance of the peace.
Peace talks between the Turkish Cypriots and the Greek Cypriots got under way in 1968, under the auspices and good offices of the UN, and continued until 1974 with the aim of restoring the partnership republic. But at the same time the Greek Cypriots proceeded with their campaign of ethnic cleansing against the Turkish Cypriot partner.
Bi-zonality affirmed
In 1974, the Greek junta instigated a coup d’etat in conjunction with the Greek Cypriot National Guard with a view to annexing the island to Greece. Thereupon, the Turkish Cypriots asked the Guarantor States of Cyprus to intervene and stop the genocide which the Greeks and Greek Cypriots were implementing widely against the Turkish Cypriot people. To this call for help, only Turkey responded. Invoking her rights deriving from the Treaty of Guarantee, Turkey intervened in Cyprus on July 20, 1974, to end the killings and make possible reconciliation.
The principles of bi-zonality and bi-communality were affirmed with the Exchange of Populations Agreement signed in Vienna in 1975, accommodating the Turkish Cypriots in the north of the island and the Greek Cypriots in the south.
Intercommunal talks began with the 1977 Summit Meetings between Rauf Denktaþ and Archbishop Makarios, and resumed in 1979 between Denktaþ and Spyros Kyprianou. It was agreed that a solution should be based on a bi-communal and bi-zonal federal structure with two administrations.
From De Cuellar to Annan
In his report on the Summit Meetings, H.E. Mr. Perez de Cuellar, the Secretary-General of the UN ad-interim, stated that the envisaged federal republic would comprise the Turkish Cypriot community and the Greek Cypriot community with separate provinces or federated states.
Resolution 649, adopted by the UN Security Council on March 12, 1990, called upon the leaders of the two communities “to pursue their efforts to reach a mutually acceptable solution providing for the establishment of a federation that will be bi-communal as regards the constitutional aspects and bi-zonal as regards the territorial aspects...”
When the succeeding UN Secretary-General, H.E. Mr. Boutros B. Ghali, put forward the “Set of Ideas” as a formula for a solution, he too underlined that a solution should be based on a federal structure formed by two communities, two regions and two administrations.
The comprehensive settlement plan initiated by UN Secretary-General H.E. Mr. Kofi Annan in 2002 was strongly supported by the members of the UN as well as the 15 EU member states. According to the Plan, there existed in Cyprus two constituent states - namely the Turkish Cypriot Constituent State and Greek Cypriot Constituent State.
2004: separate referenda
As history has shown, this Plan was bound to fail since the Greek Cypriot side was privileged with EU membership, whether or not a solution was reached to the Cyprus problem.
The Annan Plan foresaw - and both of the parties consented to this – that the Plan should be submitted to separate referenda among the two Cypriot sides as a condition for its adoption. The referenda were held on April 24, 2004, and resulted in 76% of the Greek Cypriots voting against the Plan, while an overwhelming 65% of the Turkish Cypriots cast their votes in favour of the Plan and in support of a peaceful settlement in Cyprus. The fact that separate referenda were held is indicative of the fact that there are on the island two separate peoples with separate administrations, and that neither has the right to represent the other or act on its behalf.
On May 1, 2004, the Greek Cypriot administration acceded to the EU, regardless of the fact that it only represents the Greek Cypriot people and hence only part of the island. The part of the island which the Greek Cypriot administration represented, moreover, was the side which had rejected a solution that would have permitted the unification of the island under the banner of a “United Cyprus Republic”.
Rewards and punishments
On May 28, 2004, Kofi Annan stated in his report on the developments that “The Turkish Cypriot vote has undone any rationale for pressuring and isolating them”. He called on the Security Council to support cooperation with the Turkish Cypriots and to eliminate unnecessary restrictions and barriers which isolate the Turkish Cypriots.
Speaking in Brussels on December 17, 2004, Secretary-General Kofi Annan stated: “We had hoped, it (Cyprus) would have entered the (European) Union as a unified state. We didn’t make it but there is a tomorrow” (Turkish Daily News, December 18, 2004)
It is an undeniable fact that there exist two separate peoples on the island whose future should be based on a lasting peace and a viable partnership. The Turkish Cypriot party affirmed its willingness to reach a solution and displayed a political desire for unification in accordance with the Annan Plan. It should not be punished for the “No” vote of the other party. The Turkish Cypriots should instead be rewarded with greater commitments internationally.
How many members?
In the light of the facts and realities mentioned above, it is apparent that the European Union presently has 24-and-a-half member states, since there are two distinct peoples and two separate administrations in the island, and the Greek Cypriot Administration does not in any way represent or have any authority over the Turkish Cypriot people.
It is therefore of utmost importance that the EU, and the rest of the international community, in order to eliminate this awkward situation, should encourage a comprehensive and lasting solution of the problem under the auspices of the UN and its good offices, rather than treating the Greek Cypriot Administration as the “government of the whole of Cyprus” – an approach which only encourages the Greek Cypriot party to maintain its intransigency. Otherwise, the case of Cyprus will be a case of half-membership, and the EU will be composed of 24½ member states.
(DIPLOMAT - January 2005 - Ankara)