The goal is the impasse for Tatar – They leave him unmolested to block any attempt to restart talks – The Government talks about weak positions, while he himself feels that he is in a position of strength
The history of the Cypriot repeats itself and the public debate circles around the milestones that are lost one after the other. Another month passes without progress or even mobility, since the occupier leader continues to put up insurmountable obstacles. He clearly aims for there to be no developments on the diplomatic front, so that he can promote undisturbed his vision of recognizing the pseudo-state.
This is the basic position and pursuit of Ersin Tatar, who refuses to enter into talks to resolve the Cyprus issue on the basis of the agreed framework. The only exception he says he can accept is to satisfy the condition of sovereign equality and then discuss the future relationship of the two states. A claim that is categorically rejected by both the Greek Cypriot side and the international community.
Despite his dissonant… solo interpretation, the occupying leader still believes that with stubbornness he will manage to impose the wishes indicated by Turkey. His tactics were exposed during Maria Angela Holguín's attempt to examine whether there is or can be a prospect for common ground. It was another crescendo of hypocrisy by Tatar, who gave (after a thousand struggles) his consent to the appointment and then did everything to thwart the effort.
The UN strong>he sees clearly who is seeking to maintain the present state of affairs. Who refuses to sit at the table of a tripartite meeting, to hear the thoughts of the Secretary General of the international organization on the future of Cyprus. Or discuss procedural issues. He is the occupying leader who is day by day cementing the impasse further by promoting the final partition.
The Greek Cypriot side often uses the argument that Tatar refuses to sit at the dialogue table because he feels weak for his positions. That's half the truth. He is indeed unable to support the two-state position with real arguments, yet he has managed to turn this weakness into a “strength” and feels that he is in a position of strength. Because very simply with his obsession he manages to become his own, without the UN preventing him.
Thus Holguin's effort was led to failure and every move made for a tripartite meeting in the last months collapsed. Nevertheless, the Secretary General has so far kept his distance from the real problem.
Whether he intends to handle the situation differently will be seen in the separate meetings he will have with the two leaders in the last ten days of September in New York. From the two appointments it will be seen if there can be ground for a tripartite convergence, from October onwards. Except that if something doesn't change, we'll be back to the starting point again.
