Ambitious and proactive: Ozersay steps into limelight

The split at the top of Turkish Cypriot politics deepened this week as new moves by Kudret Ozersay, who is the deputy head of the new ruling coalition, further isolated Turkish Cypriot leader Mustafa Akinci and challenged his authority.

Observers say the passiveness of the pro-solution powers like Akinci has left a vacuum

Esra Aygin 

23 June 2019

The storm caused by the revelation of a secret dinner held on June 4 between Ozersay and Nicos Anastasiades cascaded when Ozersay, on the same day announced the ruling coalition’s decisions to establish a team of experts to carry out an inventory study in the fenced-off town of Varosha as well as initiating the process of allowing Maronites to return to their villages in the northern part of Cyprus.

“I will not accept certain people being patted on the back and placed on stage with a totally different agenda,” wrote a furious Akinci, who had been kept in the dark about all these developments on his social media account. “Turkish Cypriot people are proud of their democratic, secular, tolerant character and do not have a culture of submissiveness.”

On Friday, in a 1.5-hour long press conference Akinci said the Turkish Cypriot people, who gave him the authority to handle the Cyprus problem, would never accept moves to “by-pass” him. As the only internationally recognised official, Turkish Cypriot leader is traditionally responsible for handling Cyprus negotiations and all issues related to the Cyprus problem.

He was referring to the widespread conviction that Ozersay is supported and promoted by Ankara, which is openly critical of Akinci’s handling of the Cyprus problem. With the collapse of the former four-party coalition and the establishment of a new two-party, right-wing National Unity Party UBP – People’s Party HP coalition earlier this month, Akinci is now the only Turkish Cypriot politician in power, who still supports a bi-zonal bi-communal federal solution. Many argue that the collapse of the four-party coalition was orchestrated by Turkey in a bid to see in power parties aligned with her policies on the Cyprus problem and other issues.

UBP and HP, in their coalition manifesto, have openly excluded a federal solution.

“The negotiation processes that have been going on for more than half a century have essentially shown that the federal partnership model, which is based on sharing power and wealth, has been exhausted and that under the current circumstances federation is not a realistic solution model,” reads the manifesto.

“New and much more realistic and feasible ideas including two states within the EU, should come to the table.”

At a time when Anastasiades too is alleged to be exploring the idea of a two-state solution, the two men have not been able to convince Cypriots on either side of the divide that the dinner was of purely social nature and there was no substantial discussion. Ozersay’s comment that unofficial and secret  “dialogues are often more constructive than official meetings” as well as the statement of the dinner’s host Yiannakis Moussas that he takes such initiatives when he knows “people, acquaintances and friends who can affect the course of things in the country” added to speculation.

“The fact that this dinner was not publicised for two weeks means that there was a decision to keep it secret,” said Akinci during the press conference. “Informal dialogue should not be secret and it should only serve to take us closer to sustainable peace. Otherwise, it would only serve to entrench separation and division.”

The passiveness of the left, pro-solution political powers, their failure to think out of the box, be creative and do anything substantial with regard to reconciliation and reunification of Cyprus, as well as their lack of dialogue with relevant circles have created a gap, which is now being filled by a proactive, ambitious Ozersay, according to some political commentators.

“Akinci and political parties who should have been active in the Cyprus peace process have lately been inert,” wrote journalist Cenk Mutluyakali in the daily Yeniduzen. “They froze with the negotiations… You cannot pursue an active policy on peace by blaming the Greek Cypriot leadership every once in a while and…touring festivals. There is need for creativity and dynamic, persistent, diligent efforts. You cannot build peace by taking the easy way out and pursuing the blame game. Nature doesn’t allow for vacuums. A day will come when the vacuum you create is filled by those, who are padded on the back for different agendas. And all you are left to do is to cry out.”

On Varosha, which was one of Akinci’s main election promises in 2015, the coalition has decided to form team of experts to conduct a scientific inventory to study its land registry records, the condition of its movable and immovable properties, the identification properties and environmental risks. After much speculation about how and when Varosha would be opened, Ozersay clarified on Friday that there is not yet a decision on what the next steps would be. On the issue of the return of Maronites to their villages in the northern part of Cyprus – also originally Akinci’s project – the coalition is moving to remove current residents living in the village of Karpasia to allow the Maronites to return.

Some analysts suggest that the Varosha and the Maronites moves, as well as the recent exchange of suspects between the two sides in which Ozersay played a role, could have been timed to overcome widespread criticism he has received for partnering up with UBP, which has come to symbolize the corrupt system in the northern part of Cyprus. Many analysts believe that Ozersay’s main objective is to challenge Akinci in the April 2020 elections and become the next Turkish Cypriot leader.

 “Ozersay is not concerned with a federal or comprehensive solution,” said political scientist Bilge Azgin. “He is trying to show Turkish Cypriots that things can be done in the absence of a comprehensive solution. He is trying to show that he can do things that Akinci cannot do. Regardless of what the calculation or agenda behind his moves are, these initiatives will have his name next to them. He wants to be the leader, who offers solutions to Turkish Cypriots in the absence of a solution… At a time when Akinci is on bad terms with Turkey and with the Greek Cypriot leadership, Ozersay is engaging with everyone, being proactive, utilising his good relations with Turkey, and getting things done.”

“Akinci on the other hand will probably build his election campaign on defending the modern, secular, democratic Turkish Cypriot society against Ankara. He wants to be the leader who stands tall and defends his community against Turkey,” added Azgin.

Clashing claims over Varosha

By Esra Aygin

1 September 2019

Despite the hype, few believe Turkey is sincere about letting the Greek Cypriot residents of Varosha return

Lifeless, deserted hotels lined up alongside the beautiful turquoise waters. Shattered glass, frameless windows, crumbling mossy walls, rusty iron rails, vegetation springing up from cracks in the concrete. This is all that remains of what was once a wealthy town bustling with tourists.

On Thursday, a group of Turkish Cypriot and Turkish journalists was allowed to enter the fenced-off city of Varosha, which has remained a forbidden military zone since August 1974 when its Greek Cypriot population fled from the advancing Turkish army.

“Sorrow in closed Varosha,” posted journalist Cenk Mutluyakali on his social media page. “How did you have the heart to do this to such a beautiful place?”

“My heart is torn out,” lamented Fatma Kismir.

The media visit, led by deputy head of the Turkish Cypriot ruling coalition Kudret Ozersay, came shortly after a team of experts began a scientific inventory in Varosha earlier this month.

Journalists, accompanied by army personnel, were allowed to get off the bus that took them around city at three locations only. Trespassing, filming and taking photographs in or around Varosha would normally be punishable with up to 15 years in prison.

“Our plan is to gradually turn Varosha into a civilian area taking into account human rights and international law, and in a manner which is suited to the conditions of the 21st century,” Ozersay told journalists at a luxurious military recreational facility situated in the middle of the ghost town. “We don’t think it is reasonable or logical to keep this place as a military area with facilities enjoyed by only a few.”

Ozersay was talking about plans to lift the military status of Varosha in stages, give it a special status under Turkish Cypriot control and start reinstating individual property rights through the Immovable Property Commission (IPC) in the northern part of Cyprus, a source close to the matter said.

Work to record the immovable and movable properties, including relics, icons and strongboxes is continuing, while efforts to assess infrastructure like electricity and roads will begin soon, Ozersay added, underlining that they want to move as quickly as possible.

Under its current military status, the IPC has no jurisdiction in Varosha and cases concerning Greek Cypriot properties there are piling up in front of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).

“There are over some 500-1,000 applications regarding Varosha,” said the source. “We had to do something. Paying compensation is not a solution. How many hundreds of properties are we going to pay compensation for? How many millions of euros are we going to pay for ruins? Who will benefit from this?”

The IPC was established in 2005 to offer an effective domestic remedy for Greek Cypriot properties in the northern part of Cyprus through restitution, compensation and exchange. However, in 2017 the ECHR ruled that proceedings at the IPC were “protracted and ineffective”.

Most recently, in a case concerning the ineffectiveness of the IPC by KV Mediterranean Tours, which owns property in Varosha, the ECHR has given the Turkish side until November 4 to submit its remarks.

It may not be a coincidence that last week, after a meeting with the head of the Turkish Cypriot coalition Ersin Tatar, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan talked about new plans for Varosha and rendering the IPC effective.

In a recent interview that may shed light on the reasoning behind the plans for Varosha, Daryal Batibay, Turkey’s former permanent representative to the Council of Europe, said: “The IPC may propose [to the Greek Cypriot applicants] the return of their properties in Varosha… By doing this, it would reinstitute individual property rights and be considered as an effective domestic remedy by the ECHR … Moreover, the Turkish Cypriot economy would benefit greatly from the reconstruction of Varosha.”

Regarding the loss of use, Batibay said: “There is no way we can pay compensation for the loss of use for hotels in Varosha since 1974. But alternative solutions may be found like providing them with free electricity and water for a certain period, offering tax exemptions or giving them permissions to operate casinos.”

Talking to journalists on Thursday, Ozersay chose his words carefully, saying that the former Greek Cypriot residents of Varosha are their interlocutors and stakeholders but also talking about the rights of Evkaf – the Turkish Cypriot religious foundation that claims to own the majority of properties in the abandoned city.

“If the Evkaf has a claim, it will take this to the IPC just like everyone else,” the source asserted. “The committee will evaluate the evidence and decide who will get the property back and who will be compensated.”

Although very few even among Turkish Cypriots seem to give credit to Evkaf claims over Varosha, appeasing it may turn out to be not as straightforward, as the Islamic foundation has recently been publishing full-page newspaper notices, producing clips, and campaigning and lobbying about Varosha.

Not everyone is convinced, however, that Ozersay and the ruling coalition are sincere about letting the Greek Cypriot residents of Varosha return.

“There are no clear answers,” says journalist Mutluyakali. “It seems that the main objective is to enable IPC to have jurisdiction over Varosha, to give the Greek Cypriot owners the chance to apply to have their property back. But will they ever be allowed to return? It’s not clear yet. This move seems more about looking like doing something but not doing anything, instead of not doing anything and leaving Varosha as it is.”

Whether this is an effort to evade legal repercussions, a publicity stunt, an election ploy or a genuine step to serve justice and return Varosha to its longing Greek Cypriot owners remains to be seen.

“When a town dies, many people die,” wrote Mutluyakali in his column in Yeniduzen on Friday. “That many dreams, that many memories die. When a town dies, a thousand dreams die. As I was returning from Varosha, I only could think of one word: Sadness…”

https://cyprus-mail.com/2019/09/01/clashing-claims-over-varosha/

Ankara’s doors are open for new Turkish Cypriot coalition

Turkey expected to turn back the money tap on

By Esra Aygin

9 June 2019

Amid a general conviction of Ankara’s role in the collapse of the former coalition and the formation of a new one, a high-level meeting among Turkish and Turkish Cypriot officials earlier this week raised expectations that the long-interrupted cash flow to the northern part of Cyprus will resume soon.

Ersin Tatar and Kudret Ozersay of the new right-wing National Unity Party (UBP)–People’s Party (HP) coalition discussed economic and financial issues during meetings with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Vice-President Fuat Oktay and Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu in Istanbul on Monday. Speaking to the Turkish Cypriot media on his return, Ozersay stated that they discussed formulas to resume the flow of funds that was interrupted “due to various reasons”.

“We believe that the flow of funds will begin soon,” he added. Turkish Cypriot media reported that an initial 288 million Turkish lira (about 45 million euros) would immediately be released.

In an unprecedented funding freeze that was widely seen as blackmail from Ankara to put political pressure on the Turkish Cypriot officials, the previous four-party coalition, which collapsed last month amid financial starvation and internal discord, did not receive any cash injections during its 15-month rule.

The coalition was made up of Republican Turkish Party (CTP), the Democratic Party (DP), the Communal Democracy Party (TDP) and Ozersay’s HP.

The Turkish Cypriot administration is financially dependent on Turkey. In a controversial move that led to the resignation of five senior members from his party, HP’s Ozersay formed a new coalition with the nationalist conservative UBP earlier this month.

“The money flow from Turkey is the system or the biggest wheel of the system,” wrote journalist Ali Baturay in Turkish Cypriot daily Kibris earlier this week. “When that fails, everything comes to a deadlock… The interruption of money from Turkey confines the ruling parties in Cyprus to the deathbed. It is like locking up a creature without food and water and watching it die. In that sense the four-party coalition was locked up and expected to die…”

The agreement between HP and UBP comes as no surprise to many who argue the collapse of the four-party coalition was orchestrated by Turkey in a bid to see in power parties aligned with her policies on the Cyprus problem and other issues.

Validating speculation Tatar, who is heading the new coalition, has repeatedly referred to “harmony” with Turkey on economic and financial issues and the Cyprus problem. Tatar also pledged resumption of flow of funds from Turkey and said he sought “confirmation about Turkey’s support” after it was revealed that he visited the Turkish embassy in northern Nicosia the night before he submitted the composition of the new coalition to Turkish Cypriot leader Mustafa Akinci.

Although the official explanation for the freeze was technical, Ozersay, shortly after the collapse, stated that the four-party coalition did not receive funds because it failed to reassure Ankara. In many statements that followed, Turkish Cypriot officials acknowledged discord between Ankara and the previous coalition.

For example, TDP head Cemal Ozyigit, who was responsible for education policies, confessed he was on bad terms with Turkish officials because he refused their request to transfer the control of the Hala Sultan theological school to Ankara. Far-right Rebirth Party (YDP) leader Erhan Arikli said on television that Ankara did not like the way the four-party coalition was acting, while Tatar, when asked about the process that led to the new coalition, said he took advantage of the discord on Cyprus problem between the coalition and Ankara.

“The system is built on maintaining good relations with Turkey and securing the money flow,” wrote journalist Baturay. “You have to behave, obey, do what you are asked to do and get the money. It is that simple. Now the UBP-HP coalition has taken over. The doors in Turkey, which were not open to the previous government, are now wide open for the new coalition.”

In fact, besides their emphasis on economic and financial relations with Turkey, UBP and HP, in their coalition manifesto, have introduced a bold policy on the Cyprus problem.

“The negotiation processes that have been going on for more than half a century have essentially shown that the federal partnership model, which is based on sharing power and wealth, has been exhausted and that under the current circumstances federation is not a realistic solution model,” reads the programme. “New and much more realistic and feasible ideas including two states within the EU, should come to the table.”

During a televised statement to mark Ramadan Bayram earlier this week, Turkish Cypriot leader Akinci also commented on the new coalition and its policies on Cyprus.

“In the previous days, a government was toppled and a new one was formed in front of our eyes,” stated Akinci. “I do not need to tell you why things happened as they did. I am sure that with your common sense, you can understand what is going on…  Saying ‘Federal solution has been exhausted and the day for two separate sovereign states within the EU has arrived’ and thinking that this is a realistic model, is unfortunately beyond fantasy. It is not being honest with the people… As long as I am in this in this office, I have no intention of allowing this.”

Analysts believe that Ozersay’s main objective is to challenge Akinci in the April 2020 elections and become the next Turkish Cypriot leader.

In response to media reports that during coalition negotiations the UBP promised support to Ozersay, Tatar told daily Kibris that the UBP would have its own candidate in the first round but would support Ozersay in the second round.

Regardless of whether the UBP supports him or not, Ozersay – who entered politics with promises of fighting corruption and promoting transparency – seems to currently be losing blood as he comes under fire from his own base for partnering up with UBP.

The UBP was founded in 1975 by the late Rauf Denktash and is often viewed as the creator and guardian of the corrupt system in the northern part of Cyprus.

In discussions on social media, HP members and supporters accuse Ozersay of betraying his own values and past for the sake of remaining in power.

https://cyprus-mail.com/2019/06/09/ankaras-doors-are-open-for-new-turkish-cypriot-coalition/

Coalition in north collapses over nepotism claims

By Esra Aygin

13 May 2019

Turkish Cypriots have found themselves in political turmoil once again this week, as the ruling coalition collapsed following 15 months of internal discord, economic crisis and financial starvation by Ankara.

Tufan Erhurman, who headed the Republican Turkish Party (CTP) – People’s Party (HP) – Democratic Party (DP) – Social Democracy Party (TDP) coalition, submitted his resignation to Turkish Cypriot leader Mustafa Akinci on Thursday. The coalition had collapsed the night before after Kudret Ozersay of HP announced his party’s withdrawal citing nepotism by DP’s Serdar Denktash as the last straw.

“We had two goals as we formed this coalition,” Ozersay said in an interview on Friday. “To execute and to address corruption… There is no reason to stay in power if we cannot do either.”

The four-party coalition was the 34th administration since the northern part of Cyprus made its unilateral declaration of independence almost 36 years ago. The coalition between right wing and left wing parties was already a challenging model and the parties rarely felt the need to hide discord among themselves especially on policy priorities and the Cyprus problem. The immense devaluation of the Turkish lira, increased costs and lack of funds from Ankara added to the coalition’s woes.

During its 15-month rule, the four-party coalition did not receive any funds from Ankara and relied on domestic borrowing and advances to pay salaries. The unprecedented funding freeze, which was widely seen as blackmail from Ankara to put political pressure on the ruling coalition, hindered infrastructure investments, projects, incentives and support for the private sector.

“This government could not execute anymore,” said Ozersay. “Governing should not only mean paying salaries. And we were holding hours-long meetings only on how to pay salaries.”

Ozersay stated that there was increasing pressure on him from his own party members, who questioned his reasons for staying in the coalition when he could not fulfill his promises. Recent polls also showed a fall in Ozersay’s popularity and a decrease in the support for his party.

The latest decision by DP’s Denktash to lease public land to his own son despite the objection of his partners seems to have dealt the final blow. In an apparent attempt to save the partnership, Denktash earlier on Wednesday resigned as head of the finance dossier but said his party would continue to support the coalition. He also called on the Turkish Cypriot assembly to lift his immunity and investigate his deeds. This move was not enough to convince the HP party assembly, which voted 55 against four to withdraw from the coalition.

There is widespread expectation that Ozersay will now form a coalition with the right-wing National Unity Party (UBP). In fact, speculation has been rife that Ankara cut the funds to crush the four-party coalition and have it replaced by an UBP-HP partnership. Adding to the speculation, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu recently met separately with UBP leader Ersin Tatar and Ozersay in Ankara, and had another meeting with Ozersay during an informal visit to the island last week. Some in the Turkish Cypriot media have been reporting for weeks now that the four-party coalition would be replaced by a UBP-HP coalition.

Statements made by the CTP, DP and TDP after the collapse have supported such speculation.

“If a government collapses despite the economic confidence and stability needed by the people, it is then a reality that there have been external interferences that are not in line with public will and that annihilate democratic processes,” said the TDP in a statement.

Denktash, in a press conference on Friday, referred to an “organised attack” and said a UBP-HP coalition has already been formed. CTP leader Erhurman also stated that a UBP-HP coalition was on the cards and urged Akinci to give the mandate to form the coalition to UBP’s Tatar, who has the majority in the Turkish Cypriot assembly.

Despite widespread expectation of a UBP-HP coalition, some analysts underline that Ozersay’s main objective is to become the next Turkish Cypriot leader and any decision he has and will be making is directly aimed at strengthening his position ahead of the April 2020 elections.

“Ozersay’s decision to withdraw from the coalition was aimed at preventing further damage,” said political analyst and senior research consultant Mete Hatay at PRIO Cyprus Centre.

“He was elected with grand promises of reform and fighting against corruption. He couldn’t do either. His popularity was dropping. He had two alternatives: withdrawing from the four-party coalition and forming another one, in which he could work on delivering his promises, or withdrawing from the four-party coalition and becoming stronger in opposition. In both cases, his real target is Turkish Cypriot presidency.”

But now the UBP-HP scenario has been far too exposed, it may hurt Ozersay even more, added Hatay. “So it is not a done deal.”

Akinci, who has the duty of giving the mandate to form the ruling coalition, will hold separate meetings with the leaders of all the parties in the Turkish Cypriot assembly early next week. He will then give the mandate to the party leader with the highest chances of forming a coalition. That person will have 15 days to form a coalition or return the mandate

None of the parties has so far ruled out any coalition combination.

UBP has 21 seats in the 50-seat assembly followed by CTP with 12 seats, HP with nine seats, TDP and DP with three seats and far-right Rebirth Party YDP with two seats.

https://cyprus-mail.com/2019/05/13/coalition-in-north-collapses-over-nepotism-claims/

Akinci increasingly isolated over federal solution

By Esra Aygin

The rift between Turkish Cypriot leader Mustafa Akinci and Ankara over the nature of a Cyprus settlement has escalated in recent weeks with the two sides exchanging increasingly barbed messages in the media.

In a recent interview with the Greek Cypriot daily Politis, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu laid bare his disagreement with Akinci.

Describing federation as the Turkish Cypriot leader’s “personal opinion” he stated that the Turkish Cypriot ruling coalition and Turkish Cypriot people should also have a say on the issue.

Speaking to several Turkish media outlets during the past week, Akinci, in a clear response to Cavusoglu, insisted that no realistic alternative to a federal solution in Cyprus exists.

“At the end of the day, I am accountable to my community,” said the Turkish Cypriot leader. “These people voted for me by 60 per cent to lead this process.”

Since the failure of the Cyprus conference in Crans-Montana in July 2017, there has been an evident divergence between Akinci, who is standing his ground for a federal Cyprus, and Cavusoglu, who has been arguing that other alternatives should also be discussed.

The relations between the two were badly damaged during Cavusoglu’s visit to northern Cyprus last April, when Akinci told him that he would rather resign than table any model of solution other than a federation. Akinci’s public call on Greek Cypriot leader Nicos Anastasiades to start negotiations within the framework outlined by UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, shortly after this confrontation with Cavusoglu, served as the death blow to their relations.

“Cavusoglu is clearly not happy with Akinci’s unfaltering insistence on federation,” said professor Niyazi Kizilyurek of the University of Cyprus. “But to downgrade the position of an elected leader to a ‘personal opinion’ is politically and diplomatically very inappropriate and extremely disrespectful. It is disrespectful of the leader and disrespectful of the community.”

During the last round of negotiations in 2017, Akinci took a number of bold steps despite Ankara’s objections, like increasing the percentage of areas that would be subject to territorial adjustments and giving maps before securing political equality, a source close to the issue said on condition of anonymity. His argument was “that this is the final push for a federation and we have to give it all we can.”

In fact, on the day talks collapsed in Crans-Montana, Akinci stated that this was the last effort by his generation and it had been unsuccessful.

“But then, he returned to Cyprus and continued to insist on a federation,” the source said. “Ankara feels deceived.”

One exchange in the Turkish media last week is particularly telling.

“Forgive me, but when I hear your name, I think of someone fighting windmills… You are raising eyebrows at the Turkish foreign ministry,” a reporter told the Turkish Cypriot leader.

Akinci responded: “Is there any other alternative to a federal solution? If there is, I should also know about it. I get the exact opposite message from the Greek Cypriot side… Wasting time by discussing the impossible only maintains the status quo, which is to the disadvantage of Turkish Cypriots.”

It has been revealed that Cavusoglu and Anastasiades have met a number of times – first in Crans-Montana during the Cyprus Conference – to discuss “a more relaxed federation and new ideas”, according to the Turkish foreign minister’s statements to Politis.

And as Ankara distances itself from Akinci an evident accord is growing between Turkish officials and Kudret Ozersay – the Turkish Cypriot official responsible for foreign affairs. While his contact with Akinci has been non-existent, Cavusoglu has met with Ozersay a number of times including on the sidelines of the UN Assembly in New York in September. Despite an understanding that the Turkish Cypriot ruling coalition would not express views about the Cyprus problem and restrict itself to supporting Akinci, Ozersay has been increasingly vocal on the issue.

“Unless the Greek Cypriot mentality that rejects power-sharing changes, insisting on negotiations based on a federation would only lead to the continuation of the status quo and further disappointments,” Ozersay told the Turkish Cypriot news agency last week.

In a clear snub to Akinci, Ozersay added: “Saying ‘they are not ready to share,’ and at the same time insisting on a federal solution that is based on sharing does not seem like a consistent behaviour to me.”

Cavusoglu’s recent outburst has also encouraged other Turkish Cypriot political parties and politicians, who are against a federal solution in Cyprus.

“The failure of the Crans-Montana summit was not only the collapse of a negotiation process but also the collapse of the concept of a Federal Cyprus,” Serdar Denktas, the head of another coalition partner Democratic Party DP, said during a TV programme last week.

“The five-party conference was the final stage of a 50-year process… And it’s over. What else are we going to discuss? The period of trying to do something jointly with the Greek Cypriots is over. We tried for 50 years and it wasn’t possible. We have to look for a new way out.”

Ersin Tatar, the newly elected head of the main opposition National Unity Party (UBP), joined in the discussion and told the media earlier this week that his party is not bound by Akinci, but the policies developed through consultations with Turkey.

“Mr Akinci may be the president. But the parliament should not be bypassed,” said Tatar. “It is obvious that there cannot be a power-sharing agreement in Cyprus. There has to be a new policy.”

Although there is a lot of talk about ‘alternatives’ there has been no clear explanation of what they exactly are.

“Let’s look at the options that would be acceptable to the world and the Greek Cypriot side,” Akinci said during one of his interviews with the Turkish media. “We don’t want a unitary state and the Greek Cypriots, who are not comfortable with political equality even in a federal solution, would never accept a two-state solution.

“Let’s leave aside the negotiation table. Is there any country that would accept us becoming a separate, sovereign state? Even Azerbaijan does not recognise us. I can’t travel to Azerbaijan. So we go rounds in circles and arrive at a federal solution again. I am saying that we need to have one more try within the limits of logic, reason and the UN framework.”

But according to Kizilyurek, the silence of the federalist parties – namely the Republican Turkish Party CTP and the Social Democracy Part TDP – have added to Akinci’s isolation.

“Parties that have traditionally supported a federal perspective, that have made federation their raison d’etre are not doing anything,” said Kizilyurek.  “They are not in any kind of action or engagement for a federal solution. The most they are doing is expressing hope.”

With Ankara and – apparently – Anastasiades placing themselves outside the federal framework, and the Turkish Cypriot left apparently passive, it remains to be seen whether Akinci will be able to follow through with one more try for a federal Cyprus.

http://cyprus-mail.com/2018/12/09/akinci-increasingly-isolated-over-federal-fixation/