The United Nations was expected to announce the date of the informal 5 + 1 meeting on Thursday night. It seemed that everything had been agreed and the United Nations asked the parties not to reveal anything until they announced it themselves. However, in his briefing, the representative of the General Secretary referred to an announcement that “will be issued later”. This shows that the United Nations is not burning for talks on the Cyprus issue. Probably because they are afraid that, with the data that exist today, it will be difficult even to agree on the procedures.
Stefan Duzarik was asked by Apostolos Zoupaniotis about the 5 + 1 meeting and he replied that the UN Secretary General intends to convene an informal meeting on the Cyprus issue very soon. The information is that the meeting will take place in the second half of April. The representative of the UN Secretary General also stated that “an official announcement will follow. The purpose of the meeting will be to determine whether there is common ground for the parties to negotiate a sustainable, lasting solution to the Cyprus problem within a predictable horizon. “
We note that this was the request from last fall with the aim of meeting at the end of 2020 and we will now go to a meeting in mid-spring. About a year after the original goal and with completely different data. Because when at the beginning of 2020 it was mentioned that the next developments in the Cyprus issue should be expected after the “elections” in the occupied territories, within the Greek Cypriot side there were those who claimed that they were excuses. That is, they were pretexts of the Greek Cypriot leadership in order to save time because it was not in a hurry for talks.
SEE ALSO:
Averoff asks Garber for US support for Cyprus Second thoughts from UN Secretary General on Pentagon Two factors for dangerous cocktail in Cyprus
However, as it turned out, this was the timetable imposed by Ankara and has been faithfully followed by the United Nations ever since.
It is proving today, in the way the United Nations is behaving, that the Greek Cypriot side could not do more than it did. To closely monitor developments and wait for Ankara to convene the informal five-party meeting by the UN Secretary-General.
In recent weeks, this has become much clearer, that is, that the process in Cyprus is moving on the basis of Turkish intentions and mainly on the logic of parallel exploitation with European Union issues. Nicosia initially tried to persuade that there was no question of satisfaction with Turkish actions and, above all, to go to the negotiation process after the March European Council. From the result it is obvious that even this was not accepted.
Turkish designs
So if the Greek Cypriot side, while everyone agrees that they will go to a 5 + 1 meeting and while the United Nations wanted the five-party summit in March, can not succeed in holding the informal conference before the European Council, how could it achieve anything before a year or six months ago? Whether some people like it or not, the reality is that the process so far is moving according to Turkish plans.
To save time in order to avoid negative effects on the forthcoming European Council and if they manage to advance the positive agenda in Euro-Turkish. In the two previous European Councils, Turkey managed to pass unscathed and without substantial consequences or punishments. She showed through her maneuvers that she could block the Europeans' attempt to punish her.
It was expected that she would try something similar at the next European Council in March, when her own behavior would be on the agenda again. Nicosia and Athens were saying after the last summit (apparently to make up for the failure to take action) that March would be crucial and that then Turkey 's European future would be decided. Ankara then simply decided to do what it had before, to use some of the weapons at its disposal. And instead of moving ships and drilling rigs, he decided to use the process in the Cyprus issue, as he did.
Knowing in advance that the Greek Cypriots (by extension Athens) had no choice but to follow in her own footsteps and dance to her own rhythms.
The United Nations also danced
In the rhythms of Turkish designs it is obvious that the United Nations also danced and dances. They failed to impose their own timetable and through consultations let things go where Ankara wanted them to go. They have shown that they are not in a hurry to go through a process that is not sure that it will work out as expected. The purpose of the meeting will be to determine whether there is common ground for the parties to negotiate a viable, lasting solution to the Cyprus problem within a predictable horizon.
At the moment, and according to all the data that a third party, such as the United Nations, has before it, it shows that it is difficult to have a common ground for the parties to enter into a negotiation that can achieve a solution to the Cyprus problem within a predictable time. That is why they followed in the footsteps of Ankara, which offered the opportunity to save more time for preparation. Which, of course, never happened. Because only preparation can the informal give, we have not seen a result so far. All consultations were about when and where the informal five-party meeting will take place.
Fill in the blanks
This gap in the process is being filled by the British through the now infamous ideas they have thrown into the debate since last autumn, right after the “elections” in the occupied territories. The ideas of the British aim to “help” the process and to find a compromise formula between the bi-zonal bi-communal federation and the solution of two states with sovereign equality demanded by the Turkish side.
The intervention of the British, in addition to touching on the essence of the Cyprus problem, also concerns the process itself. It puts an end to the infamous “Cypriot property” process that has been applied, to some extent, in the past and opens the door for the British to move in a way that only benefits themselves and one side. Creating suspicions again and paving the way for new discussions around their own proposals.
DECISION FOR SETTLEMENT
The decision for the settlement in the occupied part of Cyprus was announced last Wednesday by the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Fatou Bensouda. The whole discussion about whether the settlement in the northern occupied part of Cyprus had been left aside and no one in the ICC had dealt with it. According to an article in the Israeli Jerusalem Post, the data has been overturned and the issue has returned to the forefront in the context of the debate over the Israeli settlements and whether they can be considered a war crime.
Until now, the mass and forced relocation of populations from one region to another was not considered a “classic” war crime, such as genocide. That is why the decision on the issue of settlement in Cyprus to have wider international implications and is something that concerns neighboring Israel in particular. The case was registered with the ICC in July 2014, earlier than that of the Palestinians. However, Benstuta moved on the issue of Israeli settlements and left behind the issue of Cyprus.
The very dangerous British formula
What the British are trying to promote and which in one way or another has started to be discussed is a very dangerous formula and removes one of the main weapons of the Greek Cypriot side at the negotiating table. Nicosia insists that the new state (as is logical) should be able to make decisions and not cause problems within the EU, nor should the decisions of the whole of Europe depend on whether or not the two communities in Cyprus. This strengthened the position of the Greek Cypriot side, which the British side is trying to erase.
A recent Hurriyet article lists some of the British ideas:
– Create two “Communal States” within a confederation which will be a single state in the EU and will have an international personality.
– The two “Community states” will be able to conclude bilateral agreements on economy, security, foreign policy, participate in international sports, education and make arrangements in the field of health.
– It has not been clarified which powers and responsibilities will belong to the central government, however, if one takes into account those that the “Community states” will have, some contradictions may arise.
– In the case of international affairs or EU affairs, where no consensus can be reached between the “Community states” and the Central Government, the Cypriot state will abstain or avoid signing or taking responsibility for that state.
With this proposal, in essence, the power that a state has in decision-making will be erased from within. For example, in matters concerning Turkey, if there is no agreement between the two sides on the island – that is, if Ankara is not satisfied – then Cyprus will not take a position in the EU meetings!
The Cypriot government in its discussions with EU officials indicated that if the solution is accepted as the Turkish side wants, then Ankara using its veto in Cyprus could block the decisions of the European Union. And so the British thought of proposing that Cyprus remove its own rights.
