North Cyprus News

Introduction

The aim of this section of the website is to provide you the weekly news about Cyprus, and North Cyprus in particular. Only brief description of the most important news would be put here. We will do our best to make sure the news are credible and are not biased. So check this page frequently for updates.

Please let us know if you think a news must be here and its not.

This is article is from Hurriyet Newspaper. Turkey's English Daily.

Good news from Brussels on Cyprus

Tuesday, April 6, 2010

With the upcoming presidential elections in Cyprus on April 18, all attention from now on will probably focus on the repercussions of the results at the ballot box. What will happen when Prime Minister Dervis Eroglu, wins? He is known for his opposition to a federal solution that is championed by Mehmet Ali Talat, the incumbent president, the Greek Cypriots and, not unimportantly, by the Turkish government. Will Eroglu put an end, slowly but determinedly, to the ongoing negotiations between the two communities? And will Ankara try to stop him from doing so, realizing that a continuation of the status quo on the island presents an enormous road block on Turkey’s path to the European Union?

In the meantime, there is a very interesting development in Brussels that could directly impact this whole process. A few months ago, the Lisbon Treaty entered into force. It contains the new rules of the game inside the EU. One of the important changes compared to the previous norms, is that, from now on, all trade agreements will be decided together by the EU member states and the European Parliament, or EP. Until now EU countries could take these kind of decisions without the approval of the EP. Even more importantly, when the EU concluded trade agreements with third countries, all member states had to agree on it, meaning that each country had a veto. So what, you may wonder? How do these internal EU rules influence the situation on Cyprus?

Do you remember the promise made by the EU in 2004 to end the isolation of northern Cyprus by allowing direct trade between the Turkish part of the island and the member states of the EU? It was meant as a reward for the Yes-vote to the Annan-plan by the Turkish Cypriots. Unfortunately, the EU was not able to deliver on that promise because the Greek Cypriots used their presence at the EU table to block the adoption of the trade agreement. The proposal is still there, it was never withdrawn but politically it was dead because of the Cypriot determination to use their veto.

But that is no longer possible under the new rules of the Lisbon Treaty. Trade agreements have to receive the approval of the majority in the EP and of a so-called qualified majority (that means, roughly speaking, a two-third majority) among the EU member states. All pending trade agreements have automatically been transferred to this new decision mechanism. Including the free trade proposal with northern Cyprus.

Soon, the EP will have to give its opinion on the plan. In a parallel process, the EU member states will have to discuss the pros and cons. The Cypriot authorities have gone ballistic. They blame the new commissioner, Stephan Füle, for pushing this. He is clearly happy with this development but it is not something he initiated. It simply follows from the implementation of the new treaty. I am sure the Cypriot government and the Cypriot members of the EP will, again, do everything to stop this process. They realize that they cannot hide behind procedures any longer and that the time has come for the EP and the EU member states to make up their mind on the merits of the proposal.

When it comes to a vote, Cyprus, even with the support of countries like France and Austria, cannot prevent the adoption of this agreement that would allow northern Cypriot companies to export directly, without interference from the Greek Cypriots, to the rest of Europe. When adopted, the Turkish government, that always made the link, could open its harbors and ports to Cypriot planes and vessels. If that happens, the EU-Turkey negotiations, that run the risk of getting stuck soon, will get a new boost. Let’s see what happens on April 18. But let’s keep our eyes on Brussels as well.

The independent commentary on British political affairs.

Britain's duty if no deal in Cyprus

March 02 2010
By Michael Stephen

After the coming general election, what should the next government do about
Cyprus if the present reunification talks fail, and the island remains
divided as it has been for the past 46 years? The answer, in short, is
that it should deal with both of its two peoples fairly and reasonably. But
is the UK not doing that already? The answer is NO.

The Greek Cypriots are treated as though they were the government of all
Cyprus, and they occupy the Cyprus chair in all international organisations.
They are full members of the EU and have their officials in all the
institutions of the EU, they trade freely with Britain and the rest of the
world and they have received massive subsidies over the past 47 years.

By contrast, the Turkish Cypriots are frozen out of the UN and out of almost
all international organisations; their envoys are not recognised, they have
no say in the affairs of the EU; they are placed under severe restrictions
on their trade, travel, and inward investment, and even on their sporting
contacts with the world. They have received virtually no benefit from the
international subsidies given to Cyprus over the past forty years, and even
today when the EU is willing to make grants to Turkish Cypriots the grants
are obstructed by the Greek Cypriots.

So far as property is concerned, Turkish Cypriots living in the North have
no legal right to recover their property in the South until (if ever) a
comprehensive settlement is reached between North and South, However, on
14th January 2010, an out-of-court settlement was accepted by a Turkish
Cypriot, Nezire Sofi, before the ECHR, and she received an apology and
compensation from the Greek Cypriot government for deprivation of her
property since 1963.

Perhaps this settlement will begin to alleviate the hardship suffered by
Turkish Cypriots, but they still have no effective legal redress in the
South or in the EU or UK courts. By contrast Greek Cypriots can apply now
to a compensation commission in the North. They can even apply to the EU and
UK courts for compensation but those courts have no power to compel the
demolition of a house in Northern Cyprus nor the eviction of its occupiers.

Cyprus was a Turkish island until it was leased to the British in 1878, and
the Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots had lived there for hundreds of
years when Britain decolonised Cyprus in 1960. They are quite distinct from
each other; they have a different religion, a different language, and a
different culture. They each lived in their own villages or in separate
parts of the towns and larger villages.

On 19th December 1956 the Colonial Secretary pledged that Œit will be the
purpose of HM Government to ensure that any exercise of self determination
should be effected in such a manner that the Turkish Cypriot community, no
less than the Greek Cypriot community, shall in the special circumstances of
Cyprus be given freedom to decide for themselves their future status.¹

The UN Secretary-General made it clear in 1992 (UN doc. S/24472) that
sovereignty Œemanates equally from both communities. One community cannot
claim sovereignty over the other.¹

The independent Republic of Cyprus was therefore constituted in 1960 by a
solemn agreement between the two peoples of Cyprus, on the basis of
political equality, and guaranteed by Britain, Greece, and Turkey. It was
never a unitary state with a majority and minority. So why are the two
peoples of Cyprus treated today as though one were a government and the
other a mere Œcommunity?

Quite simple really: the Greek-Cypriots say that everything was fine until
1974 when Turkey ŒinvadedŒ and divided the island, and forced the Turkish
Cypriots to live in the North. However, nothing could be further from the
truth. The events of 1974 were in fact the culmination of eleven years of
oppression of Turkish Cypriots by Greek Cypriots.

On 28th December 1963 the Daily Express reported: ŒWe went tonight into the
Turkish Cypriot Quarter of Nicosia in which 200 to 300 people had been
slaughtered in the last five days. We were the first Western reporters
there and have seen sights too frightful to be described in print. Horror
so extreme that the people seemed stunned beyond tears.¹

On 1st January 1964 the Daily Herald reported: ŒWhen I came across the
Turkish Cypriot homes they were an appalling sight. Apart from the walls
they just did not exist. I doubt if a napalm attack could have created more
devastation. Under roofs which had caved in I found a twisted mass of bed
springs, children¹s cots, and grey ashes of what had once been tables,
chairs and wardrobes. In the neighbouring village of Ayios Vassilios I
counted 16 wrecked and burned out homes. They were all Turkish Cypriot. In
neither village did I find a scrap of damage to any Greek Cypriot house.¹

On 12th January 1964 the British High Commission in Nicosia wrote ŒThe
Greek (Cypriot) police are led by extremists who provoked the fighting and
deliberately engaged in atrocities. They have recruited into their ranks as
³special constables² gun-happy young thugs. ... Makarios assured us that
there will be no attack. His assurance is as worthless as previous
assurances have proved.¹

A further massacre of Turkish Cypriots, at Limassol, was reported by The
Observer on 16th February 1964, and there were many more. On 17th February
1964 the Washington Post reported that Greek Cypriot fanatics appear bent on
a policy of genocide.¹ Although the Turkish Cypriots fought back as best
they could, there were no massacres of Greek Cypriot civilians, and there is
no evidence that the Turkish Cypriots were themselves in any way responsible
for these appalling events.

In his memoirs, the US Under Secretary of State, George Ball, said that the
Greek Cypriot leader¹s Œcentral interest was to block off Turkish
intervention so that he and his Greek Cypriots could go on happily
massacring Turkish Cypriots. Obviously we would never permit that.¹ The
fact is however that neither the US, the UK, the UN, nor anyone, other than
Turkey eleven years later, took effective action to prevent it.

Ball himself told the Greek Cypriot leader, Makarios, that Œif he persisted
in his cruel and reckless conduct Turkey would inevitably invade, and
neither the US nor any other western power would raise a finger to stop
them.¹ In his book The Way the Wind Blows former British prime minister Lord
Home said ŒI was convinced that unless Makarios could bring himself to treat
the Turkish [Cypriots] as human beings he was inviting the invasion and
partition of the island.¹

The events in Cyprus of 1963/64 were a clear case of genocide, executed in
accordance with the notorious ŒAkritas¹ plan, but no Greek Cypriot leader
(some of whom are still alive) has ever faced an international criminal
court.

From that time forward the Greek Cypriots have behaved as though they alone
were the Government of Cyprus and neither the US nor any other western power
has raised a finger to stop them. Britain has had a major influence on
international policy toward Cyprus, so why has the treatment of the Turkish
Cypriots been inconsistent with all the principles ‹ fairness, justice,
respect for human rights and respect for constitutional obligations, for
which Britain has always stood firm in the world. Why? Probably because the
UK and US have allowed themselves, and still allow themselves, to be
intimidated by real or imagined Greek Cypriot threats to the operation of
their military facilities in the South of Cyprus.

The Turkish Cypriots lived in defended enclaves for eleven years until in
1974 a civil war broke out among the Greek Cypriots, and Turkey landed
troops to prevent any further massacres of Turkish Cypriots and the forcible
annexation of the island to Greece. Since then most of the Turkish
Cypriots have lived in the North under the protection of Turkish soldiers,
and most of the Greek Cypriots in the South. There are as many Greek and
Greek Cypriot troops in the South as Turkish and Turkish Cypriot troops in
the North.

The UN and others have tried time and time again to put the broken Republic
back together, but they have failed, and talks are still continuing. The
reason for their failure is that most of the Greek Cypriots, and especially
their religious leaders, have no interest in sharing Cyprus with the Turkish
Cypriots. They want the island for themselves, and some of them still wish
to annex it to Greece.

The Greek Cypriots rejected the UN plan for a settlement in 2004, which the
UN, the US, the EU, and the UK all regarded as a fair and reasonable basis
for settlement, and recent opinion polls are showing that a majority on both
sides, and especially among the young, are now in favour of two states in
the island. A settlement for the sake of a settlement would not work, and
tensions could rise to the point where violence could return to the island
after 46 years.

If the present settlement talks fail as most serious commentators expect
the next British government due in May should use its influence to promote
a two-state solution and resist further attempts to put the two peoples
under a single political roof. It is simply not reasonable to expect the
Turkish Cypriots to wait any longer, and immediate action should be taken by
the UK to relieve the Turkish Cypriots from the unjust restrictions from
which they suffer ‹ as they were promised when they accepted the UN Plan in
2004.

The UK must also give financial help to the Turkish Cypriots to bring their
economy up to the same level as the Greek Cypriots, and as some recompense
for the failure of the UK government over 47 years to discharge its
obligations to the Turkish Cypriots as a guarantor of the 1960 settlement.
This must be bilateral aid, because aid channelled through the EU or the UN
would be blocked by the Greek Cypriots.

Michael Stephen is a Barrister and was a Member of the UK parliament
1992-97. He is the author of ?The Cyprus Question".

Search Engine Optimization for this website is done by ali-seo.com