A ‘love of loneliness’ marks demands for two-state solution in Cyprus

 March 31, 2024

Ozdil Nami

As the United Nations secretary-general’s personal envoy wrestles to break the seven-year standstill in the Cyprus negotiations, the Turkish Cypriot pro-solution camp seems to agree that the new process should have pre-deteremined timeframes and clear consequences of failure if it is to have any chances of success.

The Cyprus peace process has reached the deepest impasse in its history after the latest round of negotiations failed in Crans-Montana in July 2017. Since then, Ankara withdrew its support for continued negotiations on a bicommunal, bizonal federation and the current conservative nationalist Turkish Cypriot leader, elected with the strong backing of Ankara in 2020, wants to record the breakaway state’s ‘sovereign equality’ before participating in any settlement negotiations.

Long-standing federal solution advocates and opinion leaders in the northern part of Cyprus criticise the Turkish and Turkish Cypriot leaderships for this change of course, but warn that without a different methodology introducing significant changes to the negotiating process it would be impossible to reach a federal solution.

Nami

After the experiences of the Annan Plan, the Talat-Christofias negotiations and then the failure at Crans-Montana “all confidence has been lost,” explains former chief negotiator Ozdil Nami, who served under two former Turkish Cypriot leaders Mehmet Ali Talat and Mustafa Akinci.

An adamant supporter of a federal solution, Nami argues that the negotiations should be picked up from where they were left in Crans-Montana in 2017, finalised within a pre-determined timeframe and put to simultaneous referendums in which Greek Cypriots should be asked to choose between a federal solution and a two-state solution, and Turkish Cypriots should be asked to choose between a federal solution and an unrecognised, isolated breakaway state that also stands to lose all advantages it gained for the positive vote it gave in the Annan Plan in 2004.

“There is not a single Greek Cypriot leader anymore, who can convince any Turkish Cypriot or Turkish leader that they mean business,” insists Nami. “Without this setup, the sides, and especially the Turkish side will never have the trust to say its final word or make its final offer.”

This lack of confidence was also mentioned by the International Crisis Group in a recent report, which stated as “a fundamental issue” that now “neither party believes that the other will necessarily negotiate in good faith.”

In January, in response to a tweet by the UN announcing the appointment of Maria Angela Holguin as Secretary-General Antonio Guterres’ personal envoy on Cyprus “to search for common ground on the way forward,” Nami tweeted: “Asking if common ground exists is waste of time, there isn’t [common ground]… In Crans-Montana a solution was on the table, still we failed. Problem is not the content but the process.”

Nami explains that “the main job of the envoy should be to help determine where we should we start, how long should we allow ourselves to negotiate, what happens at the end of that timeframe, what kind of a deadlock resolving mechanism can we create and what happens when we go to referendum and if one side says no.”

He underlines that all these should be negotiatied and agreed on by both sides before any new process begins.

CTP’s Fikri Toros

CTP

The main opposition Republican Turkish Party CTP in a recent letter to Holguin, reiterated its commitment to a federal solution based on political equality in line with the UN Security Council resolutions and parameters, but also stated that any future process should have a timetable “determined with a sense of urgency”, ensure participation of the civil society, and guarantee “that there will be no return to the status quo”.

There must be “a set time frame if not a target date whereby negotiations must be concluded”, explains CTP’s Fikri Toros. “No peace process has reached success without a target date… And there must be a cost attached to a possible reccurencce of yet another failure. Measures must be taken to abandon any likelihood of the continuation of the status quo… There is no such thing as a frozen conflict. As long as it is not solved, it is bound to flare up.”

Toros says the CTP has no concrete proposals on what that ‘cost’ might be, but says it should be negotiated by the sides.

“Leaving the negotiations or rejecting the prospective political agreement must have a ‘cost’ attached to it… Cyprus and its people cannot afford another failure,” he says.

Toros also criticises the Turkish Cypriot and Turkish leaderships for abandoning the goal of a federal solution. He recently likened the new Turkish policy of demanding a two-state solution to the Cyprus problem as a “love of loneliness”.

Tatar after his most recent meeting with Holguin earlier this month reiterated his stance on ‘sovereign equality’ and equal international standing for the Turkish Cypriot side in order to resume talks.

“The demand of ‘sovereign equality’ is not new,” says Nami. “It dates back to Denktash’s confederation proposal in 1998. This is a repackaging of that proposal.”

Ipek Borman

Borman

Ipek Borman, who served in the negotiations teams of both Talat and Akinci, agrees that any new negotiations process should be much more results-oriented with benchmarks to keep the sides on track towards a final outcome; include mechanisms to overcome impasses; and bear a clear understanding that there will be no return to the status quo at the end of the process with clearly determined consequences of a failure. She also emphasises the importance of a more participatory process with the participation of civil society, especially women and youth.

She warns however against alienating one another when trying to lay the building blocks of a new process.

“I am not willing to consent to another open-ended process that is at the mercy of the two leaders. That would only lead to fostering disappointments and killing hopes,” says international relations expert Borman. “But if we truly want to achieve a result that will lead us to a common future, then we should be able to convince one another wholeheartedly as Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots to work together towards that goal.”

https://cyprus-mail.com/2024/03/31/a-love-of-loneliness-marks-demands-for-two-state-solution-in-cyprus/

Ergun Olgun: too yielding or too hardline?

By Esra Aygin

August 13, 2023

Speculation over the reasons for resignation of Turkish Cypriot leader’s representative

                                                                        Ergun Olgun

The Turkish Cypriot leader’s special representative Ergun Olgun recently unexpectedly resigned, sparking speculation that he was no longer seen fit for the job by Turkey. However, there are conflicting arguments over whether he was seen too yielding for a Turkey that has been insisting on a two-state solution in Cyprus; or whether he was seen too hardline for a Turkey that is recently signalling a more constructive stance.

Ergun Olgun, the 80-year-old die-hard advocate of an independent Turkish Cypriot state and the constant right hand of all hardline leaders from the late Rauf Denktash to Dervish Eroglu to the current Ersin Tatar, cited old age and said he was retiring rather than resigning.

“I am 80 years old. I don’t know how many more healthy years I have left. I want to spend time with my family,” he told the media, denying rumours of any disagreements on the Cyprus issue with Tatar or Turkey.

His resignation came a month after he was harshly criticised by ultra-nationalist circles for disclosing at a panel at Famagusta’s Eastern Mediterranean University DAU, that the Turkish side had abandoned its condition that the unilaterally declared Turkish Cypriot state – the ‘Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus TRNC’ – be recognised by the United Nations Security Council.

“We have right now passed beyond that link about a Security Council decision, and we have conveyed this to the Greek Cypriot side,” Olgun said at a panel on Turkey’s Foreign Policy in the Mediterranean. “We said…negotiations between the two sides can begin without that link, or condition… This is not something we made public, but we can say it in a closed setting… We are looking for ways to find alternative formulas.”

He was responding to former negotiator and leader of the People’s Party HP, Kudret Ozersay, who, at the same panel, criticised the Turkish side of setting the condition that the UN Security Council recognises the Turkish Cypriot state before starting any kind of negotiations. This condition was tabled by the Turkish side during an informal meeting with UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres in Geneva in April 2021.

“Where did you find the right to abandon our national policy, which is to demand that the UN Security Council acknowledges our sovereign equality and equal international status?” asked ultra nationalist Sabahattin Ismail in his column in the daily Kibris after the recording of the panel was uploaded on YouTube. “Is Turkey and President Tatar aware of this?… What kind of an insanity is it to say one thing to the people and then compromise from the national policy behind closed doors?”

To ward off speculation that the special representative had left his post as a punishment for making this revelation or even this compromise, Tatar and Olgun gave a joint interview to the semi-official news agency TAK, constantly repeating they had no problems or disagreements. This only served to amplify the rumours. During the interview, the two also reiterated that the negotiations can only start with the acknowledgment of sovereign equality and equal international status.

“There were those, who were not comfortable with Ergun Olgun, and who even did not find him enough of a Turkish nationalist or pro-TRNC and kept attacking,” wrote journalist Serhat Incirli in the daily Yeniduzen. “And Ersin Tatar could protect Ergun Olgun. He didn’t.”

Other observers, however, underline that a small window of opportunity may have opened for Cyprus due to Ankara’s recent interest in reconciling with the European Union after the Turkish presidential elections and draw attention to the fact that Olgun’s resignation comes at a time of a seeming slight shift in Turkey’s position vis a vis the Cyprus problem.

In a recent statement, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan not only referenced the Annan Plan and expressed hope for a lasting and just peace in Cyprus, but he also spoke of a renewed rapprochement with the EU especially on visa-free travel and the customs union.

“We will not hesitate to take responsibility for the island of Cyprus to achieve a lasting and just peace,” said Erdogan following a cabinet meeting in Ankara. “We have shown our sincerity on this issue in every process up to now, including the Annan Plan, and we will [do it] again if necessary.”

Erdogan mentioned his meetings with world leaders including US President Joe Biden, Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis and French President Emmanuel Macron at the recent Vilnius Nato summit and said: “We have seen during these meetings that we have no problems with any country that cannot be solved. Provided that dialogue and diplomacy are given a chance, we believe that misunderstandings will be overcome, and disagreements will be solved.”

Shortly after President Erdogan, Turkish National Defence Minister Yasar Guler called for a fair and permanent solution to the Cyprus problem.

“The immediate solution of the Cyprus problem through securing the legitimate interests and security of Turkish Cypriots is one of the most important priorities of our country,” he said. “We have cannot afford to lose another 50 years on this. Our wish is that…a strong will is put forward for the peaceful, equal, and fair solution of the Cyprus problem, based on international law…”

Asked about a possible policy change by Turkey vis a vis Cyprus, Turkish Cypriot leader Tatar was in full denial.

“The policy that we are pursuing is the correct policy,” he told the media. “AKP [Justice and Development Party] and MHP [Nationalist Movement Party] are supporting this policy. There can be no turning back after this point. This is now an established policy.”

Underlining that the fact that elections in Turkey are over also provides for a greater room for manoeuvre. Fikri Toros, a deputy from the main opposition Republican Turkish Party CTP, says he expects some movement in the Cyprus issue as of autumn this year when the UN General Assembly will be held.

“I believe that the fact that Turkey has prioritised the revival of its relations with the EU and the US will open a new window of opportunity for the solution of the Cyprus problem,” says Toros.

Former negotiator Ozdil Nami agrees:

“Turkey had to keep its guard up… before the elections in Turkey. Turkey backtracking to this extent in the Cyprus issue was not rational. It was about internal politics. It was aimed at winning the elections. And that has happened.”

Nami added that Tatar would change his current hardline policy with just a phone call from Turkey.

It is not unprecedented for Turkish Cypriot negotiators or special representatives to suddenly change when there is a shift in Turkey’s Cyprus policy. In 2014, during Dervish Eroglu’s leadership, Turkish Cypriot hardline negotiator Osman Ertug was replaced with Kudret Ozersay. This was seen as an indication of Ankara’s willingness to keep the process alive and even bypass Eroglu following the joint statement of February 2014.

Days after his resignation, Olgun warned against a Greek Cypriot aim to extort concessions from Turkey by exploiting its possible desire to improve relations with Brussels and said it is impossible for Turkey to change its Cyprus policy.

The coming days will demonstrate the true reasons of Olgun’s departure as the person to replace him will bear the hints of the course Turkey will want to take in the Cyprus problem.

https://cyprus-mail.com/2023/08/13/ergun-olgun-too-yielding-or-too-hardline/

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.

Crunch time for Cyprus

June  2015 

By Esra Aygin

The technical aspect of negotiations aimed at reuniting the divided island within 2016 is almost finalised, with the process soon becoming purely political.

The political course will require the two leaders, Nicos Anastasiades and Mustafa Akinci to display political will and courage to take decisions on some of the most difficult issues.

Greek Cypriot negotiator Andreas Mavroyiannis, who is running for president of the UN General Assembly, will leave for New York at the end of May.

The aim by then is for him and Turkish Cypriot negotiator Ozdil Nami to wrap up the negotiations on the four topics of the Cyprus problem– governance, property, European Union affairs, and economy.

EU affairs and economy have largely been completed and the two negotiators will be focusing on governance and property, during the eight meetings they are scheduled to have this month.

“The negotiations will then move on to the next level, which will be handled by the leaders themselves,” a source said.

According to the source, the governance topic has largely been covered, with the two sides now working on finalising the details about the competence of constituent states to make international agreements in certain areas, and the regulation of voting rights in the elections for local administrations.

Although rotating presidency has not formally been accepted by the Greek Cypriot side, the main point of disagreement between the sides is not this, but the periods of rotation, according to the source.

While the Greek Cypriot side wants the rotation to be based on a four-year to one-year mandate, the Turkish Cypriot side is insisting that the Turkish Cypriot president holds the office for at least two years.

The negotiators have also made considerable progress on property and the sides now, for the first time in the history of Cyprus negotiations, have a joint paper on the topic.

The property convergence paper is mostly made up of black ink, which signifies agreements, the source said.

With wide agreement on definitions including ‘current user,’ and who will get which remedy – reinstatement, compensation, exchange – under which conditions, the sides are now working on how exactly to define ‘emotional attachment’, which will be a criteria applied to solve property problems.

If the process goes as hoped, Akinci and Anastasiades will start to discuss the territory issue in June.

When adequate progress is achieved in territory, the sides will come together with the three guarantor powers, Turkey, Greece and the United Kingdom, to discuss the last topic of the negotiations, which is security and guarantees.

Some behind-the-scenes diplomacy has provided for a general understanding between the sides that the existing guarantee system will be amended to provide a feeling of security for both Turkish and Greek Cypriots.

Some ideas being pondered are the increased involvement of the UN in the security scheme, and working more with the Treaty of Alliance and less with the Treaty of Guarantee.

With August and December being holiday months, June and July will be crucial in determining whether or not Cyprus will be united this year.

Critical evening at Crans-Montana - Both sides need to take steps for progress

Esra Aygin

Both sides need to take steps for progress

Unilateral intervention outside SG’s framework and not included in Turkish proposals

UNSG to only come if there is progress

The sides have started substantial negotiations over the essential outstanding elements of the Cyprus problem in the conference in Crans-Montana.

The Turkish Cypriot and Greek Cypriot sides have submitted their package proposals on governance and power-sharing, property, territory, security and guarantees and the equivalent treatment of Turkish and Greek nationals in a federal Cyprus. Guarantor states Turkey, Greece and the United Kingdom submitted their proposals on security and guarantees only.

The United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres on Friday had secured an agreement between all sides at the conference to deal with essential elements of a comprehensive solution through a holistic approach and submit proposals in line with a framework he devised, which excluded extreme positions on both sides.

For example, in this respect, Secretary General Guterres excluded the 0 troops 0 guarantees on day 1 position because it is unacceptable to the Turkish Cypriot side and the right of unilateral intervention by Turkey because this is unacceptable to the Greek Cypriot side.

Yesterday, the United Nations asked the Greek Cypriot side to revisit and resubmit their package of proposals because it excluded rotational presidency, which was within the framework set by Guterres. Upon this request the Greek Cypriot side added rotating presidency in their package of proposals and resubmitted.

Diplomatic sources are stating that although all the package proposals on the table now are within the framework that the UN Secretary-General put forward, the sides are still holding on to their cards and expecting a step from the other side. Sources are saying that both the Turkish Cypriot side and the Greek Cypriot side need to take mutual steps especially in the governance and power sharing and the security and guarantees issues.

The UN was said to be working on some methods to have the sides take simultaneous steps.

Sources are saying that Secretary-General Guterres will only return to Crans-Montana if there is progress on the table.

“If there is no progress by tomorrow morning there is no reason for the Secretary-General to come here,” said a source. “He will not come here and repeat what he did last Friday or try to save the process. He wants to see real determination and effort.”

Political observers agree that if there is no progress in Crans-Montana by the end of this week the negotiations will move back to Cyprus and continue, but only because no side including the UN would declare the negotiations dead.

A new model for Cyprus talks

By Esra Aygin

Aware that the window of opportunity for a solution is closing rapidly, Turkish Cypriot leader Mustafa Akinci wishes to discuss on Sunday how the negotiations process can be redesigned.

The two leaders will have a social meeting over dinner this Sunday after a recess of six weeks. “There are about 10 make-or-break issues that remain to be agreed on,” said a Turkish Cypriot source close to negotiations.

“During the dinner, the leaders should define the way forward and how to achieve progress. Convergence on most of these issues would clear the way for a second meeting in Geneva.”

The Turkish Cypriot side feels that a different methodology should be followed once the negotiations resume, allowing the sides to focus on outstanding issues in a results-oriented manner.

The UN should also have an enhanced facilitation role with the aim of bringing the sides closer, the source said.

Negotiations stalled in February when the Greek Cypriot parliament voted for annual commemorations at state schools for a 1950 Enosis plebiscite in support of union with Greece.

The vote led to collective backlash among the vast majority of Turkish Cypriots, who consider the Enosis aim as the reason behind inter-communal clashes.

A new proposal that is expected to render the Enosis decision void will be taken up by the parliament next week.

The priority for the Turkish Cypriot side once the negotiations begin will be to reach an understanding over political equality-related issues, according to the source.

Akinci has been under immense pressure, both from circles in Cyprus and Turkey, for making too many concessions, especially by presenting a map with proposed territorial adjustments without having secured the political equality of Turkish Cypriots in a future federal Cyprus.

“The months of April and May will be decisive,” Akinci said earlier this week.

“It will be clear whether Greek Cypriots are willing to share governance between two equal constituent states.”

There is a broad understanding that a number of internal and external factors such as hydrocarbon exploration activities off the coasts of Cyprus and commencement of the campaign period of presidential elections in the south will complicate negotiations beyond May.

Concerned that the Enosis vote and the ensuing controversy led to a massive loss of confidence between the two communities, Akinci also wishes to discuss with President Nicos Anastasiades a number of confidence-building measures.

This includes the interoperability of mobile phones, interconnectivity of the electricity system and the work of the bi-communal education committee.

“The leaders should now, more than ever, focus on confidence-building measures,” the source said.

“It would be only natural for the leaders to discuss how to build or restore confidence between the two communities now. Not doing so would be reproachable.”

http://in-cyprus.com/new-model-talks/

Spectre of enosis casts shadow over peace talks

Esra Aygin

Turkish Cypriot leader Mustafa Akinci says the door is open for Greek Cypriot leader Nikos Anastasiades to return to negotiations after he rectifies a recent decision to annually commemorate a 1950 enosis petition in schools.

The two leaders had a tense meeting yesterday over the controversial vote by the Greek Cypriot parliament. The proposal was tabled by the far-right Elam, which is affiliated with the Neo-Nazi Golden Dawn in Greece. Only communist AKEL voted against the proposal. Anastasiadis’ party DISY abstained allowing the proposal to be approved.

It is understood that Greek Cypriot leader Nikos Anastasiades left the meeting room in fury during yesterday’s face-to-face meeting. Akinci in turn, stormed out of the building and returned to his office.

“Today we were told that we were exaggerating the issue and overreacting,” Akinci told journalists. “I believe that we even underreacted. There is no logic and no explanation to take a decision during the most critical period of negotiations to add Enosis, which is the reason for all this pain and tragedy, to the list of memorial days for schools as if it is something to be blessed… Instead of understanding us and correcting this step, the Greek Cypriot leader shut the door and left. “When they correct what they created themselves, the door is there for them to open and come back in.”

Last week’s vote by the Greek Cypriot parliament led to a collective hysteria and backlash among the vast majority of Turkish Cypriots, who consider the Enosis aim as the reason behind the inter-communal clashes in the 1960s that saw them withdraw from all state organs and move into enclaves throughout the island. A Greek-backed coup aimed at Enosis resulted in the Turkish military intervention in July 1974.

“Raising the issue of the Enosis petition now, serves nothing but to multiply the anxiety of the Turkish Cypriot community, which lived the most part of the 20^th century with the fear of Enosis,” said Niyazi Kizilyurek. “In the eyes of Turkish Cypriots, Enosis is an existential threat.”

In an open-book petition in January 1950, 96 percent of Greek Cypriots had given their signatures in favour of union with Greece. Turkish Cypriots had boycotted the petition with only about 45 participating.

According to Prof. Ahmet Sozen, the crisis arising from the vote highlights the lack of understanding between the two communities and the grave need for actual peace building in Cyprus.

 

“The majority of Greek Cypriots including the political elite don’t know the effect of the word ‘Enosis’ on Turkish Cypriots,” said Sozen. “They have past traumas and dominant narratives that lead to an existential anxiety in relation with Enosis… For Greek Cypriots however, Enosis has nothing to do with Turkish Cypriots. It symbolizes a communal struggle against colonialism, against the British rule… The majority in both communities is not in touch with each others’ fears, traumas and concerns.”