‘Step by step’ moves to annexation of north

By Esra Aygin

February 6, 2023

The current extent of integration with Turkey is unprecedented

(At the time) Prime Minister of Turkey Binali Yıldırım with former Turkish Cypriot leader Mustafa Akıncı in 2017

It has been almost six years since the then-prime minister of Turkey, Binali Yıldırım, who was visiting former Turkish Cypriot leader Mustafa Akıncı to discuss the crisis in the ongoing federal solution negotiations, proclaimed: “Whatever there is in Turkey, it will be in Cyprus.”

In these six years, the United Nations-sponsored negotiations failed, Turkey declared the UN parameters for a solution invalid and started promoting a two-state solution in Cyprus. Meanwhile, with the collaboration of the obeying Turkish Cypriot politicians, Turkey’s control over the northern part of Cyprus grew bigger than ever. Among other things, the Turkish Cypriot community saw unprecedented interventions in their elections; a stark rise of political Islam, reactionism and conservatism in the north; suffocating control of the Turkish embassy over every single internal dossier from education to health; increased daily financial, administrative and political dependence on Ankara; smashing pressure on media and civil society; plans to establish more military bases and open the fenced-off city of Varosha; and an accelerated demographic change.

Turkish Cypriots learned the hard way that Yıldırım was not joking, and almost everyone in the community admits that right now, there is an unprecedented integration of the northern part of Cyprus with Turkey. However, recent developments – from an Ankara-appointed mufti, who is pushing the buttons of the secular Turkish Cypriot community to a bid to change the legislation and enable Ankara to go ahead with any building project in the north without local approval – are making more and more people question what Ankara’s ultimate aim in Cyprus is, and whether the annexation of the northern part of Cyprus may be on the cards.

Most recently, the north Cyprus representation of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s Justice and Development Party AKP organised a meeting with the Turkish Cypriot mukhtars, who are elected local authorities, in Kyrenia, during which, head of the representation Fahri Yönlüer told them to convey their problems to Ankara instead of the Turkish Cypriot administration.

“I know the capacity of the TRNC,” Yönlüer was reported as saying. “You cannot rely on help from the central administration. The right address for meeting your needs is the Republic of Turkey.”

“Nothing that is happening is a coincidence,” wrote the daily Özgür Gazete earlier this week, saying that all these developments are step by step taking the Turkish Cypriot community to an annexation.

“The footsteps of Turkish Enosis,” was the title of journalist Hasan Kahvecioğlu’s column in the daily Halkın Sesi. He argued that the upcoming difficult presidential elections in Turkey is likely to make a panicking Erdoğan “from whom anything can be expected” to annex the northern part of Cyprus.

“The essence of the deep ‘two-state’ project is becoming more and more clear,” wrote Kahvecioğlu. “And the excuse is ready: ‘Federation was not possible; we said two states, this was not possible either; so, what should we do? Wait for the Greek Cypriots for another 50 years?’ And then they will say that the only option that remains is ‘annexation.’ This will make Erdoğan – the ‘Conqueror of Cyprus’ – come out of the 14 May elections victorious.”

Akp representatives meeting with mukhtars in the north (ozgur gazete)

Kahvecioğlu also claimed that gatherings are already being held at Turkish Cypriot leader Ersin Tatar’s office with civil society organisations, which bring together people of Turkish origin living in Cyprus, to prepare for a possible annexation referendum.

This week, many Turkish Cypriot social media users posted on their pages a black background with the word “Enosis” written on it, implying that the northern part of Cyprus is being united with Turkey.

Adding fuel to the flames, right-wing Turkish Cypriot leader Tatar, who is a strong opponent of a federal solution in Cyprus and a staunch supporter of Turkey’s increased role, in an interview to The Guardian newspaper last week, said unless there is a two-state solution on the island, the northern part of Cyprus would integrate even more with Turkey.

“Obviously, if there is no agreement, in the long run we will have more and more Turkish influence on the island because we will over time become more and more dependent on Turkey,” he asserted.

According to Mine Atlı, who is the head of the Social Democracy Party TDP of former Turkish Cypriot leader Mustafa Akıncı and the current mayor of the Nicosia Turkish municipality Mehmet Harmancı, the foundations of an annexation were laid through the latest financial aid protocol between the northern part of Cyprus and Ankara.

The ‘Economic and Financial Cooperation Protocol’ promised loans for the Turkish Cypriot community in exchange for conditions that call for limited fundamental rights and freedoms including the freedom of expression; an undermined civil society; a strengthened role of Islam; easier Turkish Cypriot citizenship for Turkish nationals; no restrictions on Turkish nationals to acquire property and to invest; and the preparation of Varosha for daily use.

Atlı argues that Turkey finds little resistance from the international community, the Republic of Cyprus, and the Turkish Cypriot opposition in reaching its objective in the north and that the current environment enables Turkey to implement every policy it has on Cyprus.

“Turkey is carrying out its project with utmost diligence and ease,” says Atlı.

While conceding that an annexation of the northern part of Cyprus is possible, PRIO Cyprus Centre’s Senior Researcher Mete Hatay underlines that this will have consequences for Turkey and warns that talking so much about this possibility may prove to be a self-fulfilling prophecy.

“Yes, it’s possible, Turkey may annex the north,” Hatay says. “But is Erdoğan ready to pay the price of doing this? We already have a de-facto integration. In the past, Turkey would let us play in our middle earth [the world between heaven and hell according to Islam]. Now that middle earth too has collapsed, and Turkey is directly in control… Therefore, it doesn’t really need to annex the north. But as we voice such an eventuality over and over again, we are, in a way, preparing the grounds for it. Because no matter how well-meaning, such presuppositions serve to break people’s mental resistance.”

https://cyprus-mail.com/2023/02/06/step-by-step-moves-to-annexation-of-north/

Sunday’s election a choice for Turkish Cypriots between submission to Ankara and freedom

 Esra Aygin 

 

Turkish Cypriots are going to polls once again on Sunday for the second round of the elections for a Turkish Cypriot leader. The vote is widely seen as a choice between submission to Ankara, and freedom and dignity. 

 

Two candidates will be competing in the second round: The current Turkish Cypriot leader Mustafa Akinci and right-wing National Unity Party UBP’s Ersin Tatar. In the first round of elections on 11 October, Tatar led the polls with 32,34 per cent of the votes. Akinci got 29,80 per cent. 

 

“On the one hand we have submission to Ankara… and on the other hand we have dignified relations with Turkey,” wrote Turkish Cypriot Sami Ozuslu in the daily Yeniduzen. “The votes for Akinci will show what this community prefers.”  

 

The elections are marred by serious accusations of intervention by Ankara in favour of Tatar. In a declaration that came shortly before the first round, Akinci stated that he had received death threats from a Turkish official. “By an official of the Turkish government, I was told that not becoming a candidate would be better for myself and my family,” Akinci said. 

 

In an attempt to support the right wing candidate, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, days before the election, opened a part of the sealed-off city of Varosha for visits. There were numerous reports of Turkish officials visiting villages and telling voters not to vote for Akinci. In an effort to remove Akinci, Ankara in early August, invited Turkish Cypriot right-wing party leaders to encourage them to agree on a joint candidate to compete against the Turkish Cypriot leader. It has also been revealed that the Turkish ambassador in the northern part of Cyprus invited a number of deputies to his residence to garner support for Tatar. Tatar also paid two unexpected visits to Ankara in the week before elections where he was promised cash injections to the Turkish Cypriot economy. There have also been reports of a spate of phone calls and visits to leaders of local communities, club managers, a and businessmen offering them generous support in exchange for votes supporting Tatar. 

 

“You do not have the authority to say ‘This will be you president’” Akinci said after the first round. “Intervention in the elections to this extent is unacceptable. This is extreme. I believe that my community will say ‘I have the right to live with dignity’… These elections have turned into a choice about my community’s fate, about the existence of my community on this land, and about what kind of a future it wants.” 

 

The European United Left/Nordic Green Left group at the European Parliament released a statement last week calling on Turkey to cease its intervention in the Turkish Cypriot leadership elections. 

 

“In the last few months, we have been witnessing unprecedented interference by Turkey on Turkish-Cypriot affairs, and this rose dramatically during the recent elections for the Turkish-Cypriot leader,” said the group. “Turkey has been openly challenging the candidacy of the current leader Mustafa Akinci, who believes in a federal state and peaceful co-existence of the two communities. Turkish authorities used and are still using all possible means to make sure that he loses these critical elections.”

 

Akinci has a good chance of winning the elections as the Republican Turkish Party CTP, whose candidate Tufan Erhurman came third in the first round last Sunday, decided to back the incumbent Turkish Cypriot leader in the second round. Erhurman had won 21,71 percent of the votes and his party’s support is likely to tip the balance for Akinci. 

 

Many Turkish Cypriots – already increasingly restless in the face of what they describe as the ever-growing oppression by the Justice and Development Party AKP  – see Turkey’s intervention not only against Akinci but also their own dignity.

 

“This election is closely connected to the issue of dignity,” said assistant professor Dr Umut Bozkurt from the Eastern Mediterranean university. “The elections on Sunday are no longer elections but a referendum on the future of the island and the intervention of Turkey in the northern part of Cyprus.” 

 

Mustafa Akinci and Ankara have been at odds mainly over the solution of the Cyprus problem after negotiations failed in July 2017. Their relationship deteriorated further earlier this year when Akinci, in response to a question by the British newspaper The Guardian on the possibility of Turkey’s annexation of the North, said: “It’s a horrible scenario.” The Turkish Cypriot leader was relentlessly criticised and, some would say threatened, by Turkish officials.

 

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan described Akinci’s comments as “very unfortunate,” while Cavusoglu said Akinci is “unreliable” and accused him of “supporting terrorism.” Turkish Vice President Fuat Oktay said Akinci’s attitude would “not be tolerated,” while Erdogan’s chief advisor Yagi Bullet wrote they would “fight with the last drop” of their blood against a fait accompli in Cyprus. Among other statements, were calls “to go to Cyprus and work so that he doesn’t win” and “blow him up like one of the PKK leaders.” AKP senior official Meting Yavuz said Akinci “needs to be a man before he can be a leader.” Yavuz added, “If it weren’t for us, you couldn’t have even become a trashman, let alone becoming a president.”

 

There was another crisis in the relations back in October 2019, when the Turkish Cypriot leader, commenting on Turkey’s operation in Syria, said: “Although we call it Peace Spring, it’s not water that’s flowing, it’s blood.” Akinci “should know his place,” responded Erdogan. “The office he presides over is not an office he secured with his own power. It is an office won by the fight of the Republic of Turkey.”

 

AKP and Erdogan see Akinci’s presence as the Turkish Cypriot leader as a direct insult, according to senior researcher Mete Hatay from the PRIO Cyprus Centre. “Turkey is intervening in these elections with everything it has; through oppression, threats, promises because AKP and Erdogan have turned this into a matter of honour. Akinci’s victory will stain their honour.” 

 

A brief look at Akinci’s past reveals that he has consistently stood up to Turkey, even when the political cost was high.

 

When he was in the ruling coalition in 2000, Akinci got into a big row with the commander of the Turkish security forces in the north over transferring the control of Turkish Cypriot police from the Turkish military to civilian authority. During a ceremony, Commander Brigadier Ali Nihat Ozeyranli harshly criticised this decision, prompting Akinci to stand up, say the commander’s statements were not in line with democratic principles, and leave. Akinci later organised a press conference, where he famously stated: “The commander has exceeded his authority.” His coalition collapsed as a result.

 

Later, in 2003, during a conference in Majorca, Spain, Akinci publicly called upon the then-Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan, who was also present, to stop transferring population to Cyprus. Many political analysts believe that if it weren’t for these incidents, Akinci could have played a more central role in Turkish Cypriot politics during the Annan Plan period leading up to the referendum in 2004.

 

With the current rule in Turkey, where opponents are penalised, many analysts believe that Akinci’s victory would act as a strong message from little Cyprus to an autocratic giant.

 

“Akinci is not only competing against Ersin Tatar, but also against Erdogan, who intervened in the elections directly, openly and without feeling the need to do so in secrecy,” wrote seasoned Turkish journalist Zeynel Lule in his column in T24.com. “Will Turkish Cypriots vote to protect their own identity and freedom, or will they choose dependence and submission?”

 

 

Turkish Cypriots vote amid serious election meddling by Ankara

 ESRA AYGIN 

 

Turkish Cypriots are going to the polls on Sunday to elect a leader amid serious accusations of intervention in the elections by Ankara, a charade of opening the fenced-off city of Varosha and a collapsed coalition. 

 

According to latest polls the current Turkish Cypriot leader Mustafa Akinci is leading the polls followed by Republican Turkish Party CTP’s Tufan Erhurman and National Unity Party UBP’s Ersin Tatar. 

 

“No matter what kind of intervention or steering is done, Turkish Cypriot people will act with their own mind and conscience, and exercise their free will at the polls,” said Akinci during a TV programme earlier this week. “On 11 October the people will make a decision and not others.” 

 

The allegations of election meddling by Ankara began with reports of Turkish officials visiting villages and telling voters not to vote for Akinci. The Turkish Cypriot leader and Ankara have been at odds mainly over the solution of the Cyprus problem. 

 

“The latest developments have showed once again how problematic our current relationship with Turkey is. Some think they are entitled to intervene in the Turkish Cypriot democracy and elections. They are saying ‘I can elect your president… The Turkish embassy is calling clubs, associations and asking for a list of their needs,” continued Akinci. “Some deputies from Turkey are visiting villages and telling people not to vote for me… This behaviour is opening deep wounds in the conscience of Turkish Cypriot people.” 

 

On Tuesday, in a move seen widely as an attempt to favour one candidate against Akinci, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and National Unity Party candidate Ersin Tatar – who was the head of the Turkish Cypriot ruling coalition at the time - announced the partial opening of the fenced off city of Varosha. The joint press conference was carried live by the Turkish Cypriot state TV with the subtitle: “Fenced-off city of Varosha is opening.”

 

The announcement, which came during a ceremony initially planned to mark the completion of the repair works on the water pipeline that carries water from Turkey to Cyprus, was widely condemned by the other candidates as well as the United Nations Security Council. 

 

“This is a disgrace for our democracy” Akinci stated. “This organization…aimed at providing an advantage to one of the candidates constitutes another dimension of the intervention in our elections… I am sure the Turkish Cypriot people will give an answer to this with their free will.” 

 

“The unilateral decision to allow civilian access to some parts of the fenced city Varosha is not only a violation of the UN Security Council resolutions which suggested transferring the area under the UN control but also Turkey's attempt to interfere in the Turkish Cypriot elections that will take place this weekend,” said the multi-communal peace movement UniteCyprusNow in a written statement. “From what we understand from yesterday's developments, the decision for partial opening aimed to bypass the elected leader of the Turkish Cypriots and to take a position in favour of UBP candidate Ersin Tatar.”

 

On Thursday, a beachfront and the Demokratia and Kennedy avenues within the fenced-off city were opened to visitors only between certain hours. Around 2,000 people were allowed to enter the abandoned town and use the beach. Access to most of Varosha still remains off limits and naming this move as ‘opening Varohsa’ is largely deceptive. Varosha is a town in the northern part of Cyprus which has been fenced off as a forbidden military zone since 1974, when its Greek Cypriot population fled from the advancing Turkish army. It is among the places to be returned to its lawful former Greek Cypriot inhabitants under the control of the future Greek Cypriot constituent state within the framework of a comprehensive federal solution on the island. Recently however, Turkey has been vocal about plans to open Varosha under Turkish Cypriot control despite United Nations Security Council resolutions prohibiting the move.[1]

 

The decision to partially open Varosha, led the junior partner People’s Party HP of Kudret Ozersay to withdraw from the coalition arguing that Tatar was exploiting Varosha for election gains. Ozersay, who has been calling for Varosha to open under Turkish Cypriot administration, said he was not informed about the move and did not agree with the way the partial opening took place. 

 

The UN Security Council early on Saturday called for a reversal of the decision to open the coastline in the fenced-off area of Varosha in Famagusta and to adhere to UN resolutions.

The Council expressed concern over Turkey’s actions and called on the parties to avoid any unilateral action that could raise tensions on the island. 

 

The disagreement between the Turkish Cypriot leader and Ankara over the nature of a solution deteriorated further earlier this year when Akıncı, in response to a question by the British newspaper The Guardian on the possibility of Turkey’s annexation of the North, said: “It’s a horrible scenario.” The Turkish Cypriot leader was relentlessly criticised and, some would say threatened, by Turkish officials.

 

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan described Akıncı’s comments as “very unfortunate,” while Çavuşoğlu said Akıncı is “unreliable” and accused him of “supporting terrorism.” Turkish Vice President Fuat Oktay said Akıncı’s attitude would “not be tolerated,” while Erdoğan’s chief advisor Yiğit Bulut wrote they would “fight with the last drop” of their blood against a fait accompli in Cyprus. Among other statements, were calls “to go to Cyprus and work so that he doesn’t win” and “blow him up like one of the PKK leaders.” AKP senior official Metin Yavuz said Akıncı “needs to be a man before he can be a leader.” Yavuz added, “If it weren’t for us, you couldn’t have even become a trashman, let alone becoming a president.”

 

It has been revealed that in an effort to remove Akıncı, Ankara in early August, invited Turkish Cypriot right-wing party leaders to encourage them to agree on a joint candidate to compete against the Turkish Cypriot leader. However, there was been no agreement. It has also been revealed that the Turkish ambassador in the northern part of Cyprus invited a number of deputies to his residence to garner support for Tatar. Photographs published in the media have also shown that Tatar met with the media advisor of Turkish Vice President Fuat Oktay, who is allegedly working for Tatar in his election campaign. Tatar also paid two unexpected visits to Ankara in the week leading to the elections where he was promised cash injections to the Turkish Cypriot economy. There have also been reports of a spate of phone calls and visits to leaders of local communities in the north offering help with solving localised problems in exchange for votes supporting Tatar.

 

“In none of the elections until now have there been so much intervention,” Akinci said during a TV programme last week… Certain officials saying they are acting on behalf of Turkey are doing everything they can to have a certain candidate elected and to have the current president lose the elections. They are doing this openly. Without feeling the need to hide it… The Turkish embassy has turned into an elections headquarter… The embassy is doing nothing else but working for the elections.”

 

I am disappointed that not all candidates are able to say that “this is an intervention and we don’t want this to happen,” said another candidate Serdar Denktash. “We want to freely exercise our democratic rights. But we are witnessing that there are unbelievable interventions in these elections.” 

 

In the face of accusations of election meddling the Turkish embassy in the northern part of Cyprus made a statement denying the allegations and saying that opposing Turkey has been adopted as an election strategy by some candidates. The statement said it is unacceptable that Turkey is being used as an election tool.”  

 

A total of 11 candidates are running in the elections. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

---

[1] UN Security Council Resolutions 550 (1984) “Considers attempts to settle any part of Varosha by people other than its inhabitants as inadmissible and calls for the transfer of this area to the administration of the United Nations” UN Security Council Resolution 789 (1992) urges “That, with a view to the implementation of resolution 550 (1984), the area at present under the control of the United Nations Peace-keeping Force in Cyprus be extended to include Varosha.” With the new attempts to open the fenced-off city on 9 October 2019, the UN Security Council discussed the issue of Varosha in closed consultations and subsequently issued a press statement in which they recalled the importance of the status of Varosha as set out in previous Council resolutions, reiterating that no actions should be taken in relation to Varosha that were not in accordance with those resolutions and stressing the importance of implementing the Council’s resolutions.

Akinci: A lone fighter who won't give up

By Esra Aygin

ONLY two years after the devastation and division of 1974, when nobody could dare dream of it, the 28-year-old Mustafa Akinci imagined a single, united Nicosia.

In the 14 years he served as the Turkish Cypriot mayor of the divided capital from 1976 to 1990, he pioneered cooperation with his Greek Cypriot counterpart Lellos Demetriades to develop a common Nicosia Master Plan and common infrastructure works reuniting the city.

The future Turkish Cypriot leader was a solid social democrat and a strong believer that Cyprus should be united.

“He had to fight for what he did in Nicosia as a mayor,” says Akinci’s long-time friend and confidant, journalist Hasan Kahvecioglu. “The war had just ended and the majority was psychologically not ready for cooperation with Greek Cypriots. Society excluded him. He was branded a traitor. The then-Turkish Cypriot leader Denktash ostracised him and cut the allowance to the municipality. But he faced up to all and reunited Nicosia in terms of infrastructure and heritage.”

Akinci is stubborn and knows how it is to fight alone. Today, Akinci, who was widely seen as the best chance for the solution of the Cyprus problem, finds himself fighting alone once again.

During the recent visit by Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu to the island, the longstanding disagreement between Akinci and Ankara over the nature of a settlement could not have been made clearer.

“Some people in north Cyprus keep on saying, ‘According to my ideology federation is the best’ and dictate what should happen,” said Cavusoglu, referring to Akinci. “The Cyprus issue is too grand to be sacrificed to someone’s political ideologies or political ambitions.”

“Of course nobody can single-handedly dictate the solution model for Cyprus,” Akinci snapped back. “But this rule is valid for everyone.”

The only reason Akinci ran in the 2015 elections was to solve the Cyprus problem through a federal solution, says Kahvecioglu.

Akinci showed Ankara he would not yield to bullying when, only a day after he was elected, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan attacked him for calling for “brotherly relations” with Turkey rather than one of a “mother” and her “baby”. Erdogan warned Akinci to watch what he said and not forget that Ankara financed the Turkish Cypriots.

“I am behind everything I have said,” responded Akinci on live Turkish TV. “Not only I know what I say, I say it with my conscience, my heart and my mind.”

“He is very honest and direct,” says Kahvecioglu. “And he expects people around him to be the same.”

Throughout the negotiations, Akinci had to tread the very thin line between being flexible, compromising and courageous to take the necessary steps to reach an agreement with his Greek Cypriots counterpart, but at the same time, convincing Turkey and keeping it on board. Contrary to popular belief, the communication between Akinci and Ankara was not a one-way channel where Ankara dictated and Akinci delivered.

“There were harsh, hours-long bargains behind closed doors with President Erdogan especially in the territory and guarantees topics,” explains Kahvecioglu. “He even threatened a couple of times to leave the negotiation table if Ankara would stick to maximalist positions.”

In doing this, Akinci fully believed that Greek Cypriot leader Nicos Anastasiades would stand by him and that they would walk together until the end, according to Kahvecioglu. “He believed that they both knew where they were going and wanted to go there.”

On more than one occasion during the negotiations, Akinci took steps despite Ankara’s reservations, even objections.

“The first fight with Ankara was at Mont Pelerin [November 2016] when Akinci said he was ready to increase the percentage of area that would be returned to the future Greek Cypriot constituent state,” said Kahvecioglu. “Anastasiades didn’t reciprocate and asked for a recess. Then in Geneva, when he gave a map before securing a rotating presidency, just before Greece disrupted the conference.”

These were irreversible tactical mistakes in the negotiations according to Ankara. When such compromises did not lead to a successful result, Akinci was left exposed.

“Akinci is being reminded at every opportunity that he showed his cards too soon, that Anastasiades didn’t reciprocate,” says Kahvecioglu. “Erdogan is displeased that Akinci acted independently. And Erdogan’s displeasure is behind today’s crises.”

Since a solution in Cyprus is not possible without Ankara’s contribution and consent, why didn’t he manage these sensitive relations better?

“Akinci puts a lot of faith in people he trusts,” stresses Kahvecioglu. “He trusted Anastasiades a lot. He first and foremost saw him as a friend, and then a political counterpart. He trusted that they could overcome any political differences through their friendship.”

Akinci’s absolute trust in Anastasiades could even be seen as political naivete.

“Akinci should have been conscious of the fact that there is a politician opposite him,” says peace activist Okan Dagli. “He should have foreseen that certain political calculations, interests, ambitions may alter Anastasiades’ priorities. For Akinci, federal solution was the absolute priority and he believed this was also the case for Anastasiades. His good faith and trust got ahead of political foresight.”

Although a series of disappointments throughout the process disheartened Akinci, he still believed that things could work out in Crans-Montana in July 2017 when all the international actors would come together, encourage the sides and help formulate mutually acceptable solutions to outstanding issues.

The failure was devastating for an overemotional Akinci, which manifested itself in his final statement at Crans-Montana: “This was the last effort by our generation. We failed.”

“He was without hope. He could not see the way ahead,” says Kahvecioglu to explain why Akinci made such a dramatic statement. “And later he probably regretted having ever said that.”

Akinci retreated into silence and withdrew from everyone, even his supporters for months after the failure in Crans-Montana.

According to Kahvecioglu, the reason for his resentment was not just the failure to reach a solution but also the loss of a friend: Anastasiades.

“If Mustafa Akinci is disappointed and hurt, it is because his personal relationship has also been destroyed,” says Kahvecioglu. “He cannot come to terms with the fact that personal friendships can be destroyed because of political reasons.”

But the lone fighter is not willing to give up easily. “Not because he is a romantic or a dreamer,” says Kahvecioglu. “But because he truly believes this is the best future for both communities in Cyprus. And he will stand up for this till the end.”

“At the moment, it is not Akinci personally, who is being disrespected and attacked by Ankara,” explains Dagli. “It is the Turkish Cypriot community, 60 per cent of which elected him for a five-year term for his vision of a united, federal Cyprus.”

With an Ankara that is clearly trying to steer the process away from a federation and an uninterested, even disruptive Greek Cypriot leader, he has to be ever more adamant and creative if he is to succeed, Dagli adds.

https://cyprus-mail.com/2019/02/03/akinci-a-lone-fighter-who-wont-give-up/

The way is clear if there is will

ESRA AYGIN

Greek Cypriot leader Nicos Anastasiades, who was recently reelected in the presidential elections in the southern part of the island, and Turkish Cypriot leader Mustafa Akinci are expected to meet soon. During this meeting, the two leaders will have to assess whether there is a possibility to revive the talks that failed in July, and discuss what kind of a roadmap a possible new process should follow.

Provided that both sides have the will to return to a results-oriented negotiation process, the way forward is actually very clear.

Guterres framework should be formally confirmed

On 30 June 2017 in Crans Montana, United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres tabled a document for the simultaneous resolution of the outstanding core issues across the six chapters of the negotiations.

This document, which came to be called the “Guterres framework”, eliminates extreme positions on highly sensitive issues – territory, political equality, property, equivalent treatment, and security and guarantees - which the sides saved for the ‘big give-and-take’ at the end.

Although both leaders have said they accept it, they must now formally confirm the Guterres framework and make it public as a joint statement. This would preserve the agreements and convergences reached until now, provide a solid basis for the resumption of negotiations, and serve as a concrete roadmap for the process.

Such a step would also encourage the UN, which is looking for a clear determination on both sides before it decides to assist another process.

A strategic agreement

As UN Secretary General highlights in his report dated 28 September 2017, he wants the two leaders to return to the table not for random negotiations, but to reach a strategic agreement that will serve as a basis for a comprehensive solution. The Guterres framework contains the elements of this strategic agreement. After confirming the framework, the two leaders can discuss the elements included in it with a package approach, resolve them simultaneously and reach a strategic agreement.

As a matter of fact, the Secretary General says that the two leaders were very close to reaching this strategic agreement that is basically the essence of a comprehensive solution in Crans-Montana, and states that the UN is ready “to assist the sides, should they jointly decide to engage in such a process with the necessary political will, in order to conclude the strategic agreement that was emerging in Crans-Montana.”

According to the Secretary General, “an early agreement at the strategic level would immediately provide each side with the needed reassurance that the overall settlement would contain those elements that are of key importance for each community and thus provide impetus for completion of the remaining technical details.”

As the Secretary General points out, the details may be concluded at a technical level after an agreement at the strategic level within the Guterres framework.

UNSG will make the final decision

Inarguably, the resumption of such a process, and the conclusion of an agreement in line with the Secretary General’s suggestions, depends entirely on the sincere will of the two leaders.

The Secretary General points to this fact by writing in his report:

“Even if all the core enablers are in place, as they appeared to be in Crans-Montana in late June, I am convinced that the prospects of finally pushing this process over the finishing line will remain elusive without the strongest of political will, courage and determination, mutual trust and a readiness on the part of all parties to take calculated risks in the last and most difficult mile of the negotiations.”

Exactly for this reason, UN’s support to a new process is conditional to the determination of the two leaders. Through his representatives here, the UN Secretary General, is currently closely following everything that is said, done, and not done by the sides. He will make a decision on the viability of a new process in the near future. Although there is no timeframe for this decision, signs are that the UN Security Council is determined to scale back the UNFICYP and UN Good Offices presence in Cyprus in July 2018 if prospects for a resumption have not emerged by then.  

xxx

Guterres Framework

Territory

Need to adjust the map presented by the Turkish Cypriots to respond to concerns expressed by Greek Cypriots regarding some locations.

Political equality

Rotating Presidency with 2:1 ratio

Decision-making (effective participation): simple majority with one positive vote with deadlock resolving mechanism/ in cases where issues are of vital interest for the communities

Property

Two property regimes: for areas under territorial adjustment and the rest regime to be constructed in a way that would lend itself to give priority to dispossessed owners, for areas not under territorial adjustment regime to be constructed in a way that would lend itself to give priority current users. Specific elements to be further elaborated.

Equivalent treatment

Free movement of goods (= customs union + a quota to be agreed for primary agricultural products), services and capital are ok.

Free movement of persons: the regime will permit tourists, students and seasonal workers. For those seeking permanent residence, equitable treatment will be granted to Greek and Turkish nationals in Cyprus.

Security and guarantees

Secretary General outlined that he did not think that a system in which right of intervention would remain would be sustainable. He said that areas that are under the Treaty of Guarantees could be replaced by adequate implementation monitoring mechanisms, covering various aspects, to be mutually agreed. In some of these, Guarantor Powers could be involved. A security system should ensure that both communities feel safe in a united Cyprus, while the security of one should not come at the detriment of the other.

The issue of troops is a different question relative to the Treaty of Guarantees, and to be handled in a different format. Issues related to troops (numbers, withdrawals if and when they will need to leave, timelines, etc.) to be agreed at the highest level when time is ripe.

Shall We Build Mistrust or Confidence?

Esra Aygin

Crans Montana, So Near But Still So Far

In a little over two years, Turkish Cypriot leader Mustafa Akinci and Greek Cypriot leader Nicos Anastasiades made unprecedented progress in the six chapters the negotiations were organised into: governance and power-sharing, economy, European Union matters, property, territory, and security and guarantees.

For the first time in the history of Cyprus negotiations, the sides presented each other with maps of territorial adjustments, while in another unprecedented development, the 1960 Treaties of Guarantee and Alliance were opened to negotiation. The two sides in Cyprus and the guarantor powers , Turkey, Greece and the United Kingdom sat around a table for the first time in mid-January 2017 in Geneva to discuss a new security and guarantee model for a future federal Cyprus with the overarching principle that the security of one community could not come at the expense of the security of the other.

Besides achieving unprecedented progress at the table, other important efforts were carried out in preparation of a solution. The European Commission conducted hundreds of working group meetings, seminars and fact-finding missions on subjects like customs, immigration and border control with the aim of preparing the north for a solution. Financial institutions, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank provided technical assistance on the financial sectors, macroeconomic and fiscal frameworks and the public administration of a future united Cyprus.

The Conference on Cyprus convened in Crans Montana on 28 June as a culmination of all these efforts for the final give-and-take on the outstanding issues relating to governance and power-sharing, property, territory, security and guarantees, and the equivalent treatment of Turkish and Greek citizens.

To make it easier to reach an understanding on these issues, UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres, on 30 June, tabled a framework, which eliminated extreme positions and provided a tool to deal with them in the form of a package.

When the final dinner at Crans Montana came to an abrupt end in the early hours of 7 July 2017, everyone around the table knew what the final deal on a bizonal bicommunal federal Cyprus would have looked like. It was not a lack of agreement, perhaps a lack of political will and courage that led to the collapse of the process.

As Guterres wrote in his report on his mission of good offices in Cyprus on 28 September 2017:

“…the essence of a comprehensive settlement to the Cyprus problem is practically there. The parties had come close to reaching a strategic understanding on security and guarantees, as well as on all other outstanding core elements of a comprehensive settlement.” The Secretary General highlighted that the reason for the collapse was not a lack of agreement on core issues but rather, of “political will, courage and determination, mutual trust and a readiness on the part of all parties to take calculated risks…”

Building Mistrust, Not Confidence

Ever since the negotiations to unite Cyprus under a bizonal, bicommunal federation collapsed in Crans Montana in the early hours of 7 July 2017, elements in the northern part of the island with a vested interest in the continuation of status quo, have been vocal and active in promoting separation and division in an effort to complicate future federation attempts.

Clearly encouraged by Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu’s statement that solutions outside UN parameters should now be sought for Cyprus right after the talks failed, Tahsin Ertugruloglu, the right-wing Turkish Cypriot official responsible for foreign affairs, declared that the federal model is dead. He suggested two options: an independent state in the northern part of Cyprus or the delegation of defence and foreign policy matters to Ankara, much like the relationship between Monaco and France.

Although Ertugruloglu’s comments do not seem to reflect any serious considerations on the ground, the hawkish official has taken some measures that seriously hamper relations between the two sides of the Green Line and led to an increase in nationalist and separatist sentiments. 

Saying that the north’s relations with the south and the United Nations should change, Ertugruloglu imposed customs duties on humanitarian aid like food supplies and baby diapers delivered weekly by the UN to Greek Cypriots and Maronites living in the north. The delivery of humanitarian aid to the Greek Cypriots and Maronites, which is based on the 1975 Third Vienna Agreement, has been limited to medical aid supplies since 1 October.

The third Vienna Agreement provided that Greek Cypriots in the north of the island were free to stay. They were to be given every help to lead a normal life, including facilities for education and practicing religion, as well as medical care by their own doctors. They were entitled to free movement in the north of Cyprus.

Turkish Cypriot leader, Mustafa Akinci, publicly criticised Ertugruloglu for imposing the tax, saying his decision was akin to shooting oneself in the foot. However the Turkish Cypriot leader’s authority and powers are limited to the negotiations to solve the Cyprus problem and he has no say in the running of domestic issues in the north. 

In another controversial move, Tahsin Ertugruloglu has been giving less and less permissions to Greek Cypriots to conduct religious services in the churches in the north. When he came to office in April 2016, Ertugruloglu introduced new rules for permissions, according to which, religious ceremonies in churches except major sites Ayios Barnabas, Apostolos Andreas and Ayios Mamas, were restricted to once a year.

However, in September, Ertugruloglu also refused to give permission to a religious service at the Ayios Mamas Cathedral in Morphou. This was the first time a request to hold a religious service at Ayios Mamas was declined by Turkish Cypriot authorities since 2003.

Although no Greek Cypriot political party or politician has spoken publicly in favour of a partition, forces that are opposed to a settlement in the south have also used the collapse of negotiations to take certain actions to the detriment of peace prospects.

Immediately after the Conference on Cyprus closed, the Greek Cypriot side requested that a bicommunal EU ad-hoc committee established to prepare the Turkish Cypriot community – with the help of European Commission experts - for the implementation of the EU legal order, cease its activities. Other bicommunal technical committee such as the committee on culture and arts, education and cultural heritage, which have been operating since 2005, were ordered to immediately freeze their activities.

In another move, the foreign ministry in the south issued instructions for non-EU tourists arriving in Cyprus airports, Larnaca and Paphos, and planning to stay in hotels in the north to be denied entry and sent back.

Most recently, Greek Cypriot leader Nicos Anastasiades’ ruling DISY, together with a number of other right-wing parties on the Limassol municipal council approved the construction of a monument dedicated to George Grivas, the leader of Greek Cypriot paramilitary groups EOKA and EOKA B, who is viewed by many Turkish Cypriots as the man responsible for the inter-communal clashes that led to the division of the island.

The mistrust, resentment and increase in nationalist sentiments that result from such actions on both sides of the island are conducive to the continuation of the status quo and are celebrated by elements that have vested interests in the current division of the island.

The collapse of the political process also had a detrimental effect on the public sentiment on both sides of the island. The lack of involvement of civil society in the negotiations and failure of leaders to set up a joint public communication strategy from the very beginning of the process, followed by the tragic collapse of talks led to a crisis of confidence between the two communities and a rise in nationalist sentiment and rhetoric.

Building Confidence, Not Mistrust

What all Cypriots need to realise is that the status quo is not sustainable and will

eventually lead to permanent partition in Cyprus, as in the absence of a solution the northern part of Cyprus will rapidly integrate/disintegrate into Turkey. It is therefore high time for ordinary Cypriots to recognise where their interests lie and raise their voices against the separatist elements on both parts of the island.

It is exactly for this reason no time should be lost in meeting shortly after the final round of presidential elections in the southern part of the island to seal a strategic agreement on the core elements identified in the framework set out by the United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres in Crans Montana. Delaying this would risk losing all convergences that have been achieved – most of them unprecedented - and could put the Cyprus solution on hold for many years to come.

The ‘dead’ time until the elections should be used by both sides to implement unilateral and bilateral confidence building measures with the aim of improving trust between the two communities, which has taken a huge blow with the collapse of negotiations and the ensuing blame game.

Cypriots can still reclaim the chance they lost in Crans Montana after the elections in the south, if their leaders, this time, can display the necessary political will, courage, determination and understanding to go that extra mile for a strategic agreement within the Guterres framework and work jointly to engage the public and build support for a unified future.