|Thursday, 25 April 2019|
Cyprus PIO: Turkish Press and Other Media, 04-03-02
Cyprus Press and Information Office: Turkish Cypriot Press Review Directory - Previous Article - Next Article
From: The Republic of Cyprus Press and Information Office Server at <http://www.pio.gov.cy/>TURKISH PRESS AND OTHER MEDIA No. 41/04 02.03.04
[A] NEWS ITEMS
[B] COMMENTARIES, EDITORIALS AND ANALYSIS
[A] NEWS ITEMS
 Statements by the Turkish Cypriot leader after the end of the sixth day of talks. He speaks about the conquest of Cyprus by the Ottomans, 1963 when he started the struggle to partition Cyprus and 1974 when the Turkish troops imposed partitionIllegal Bayrak television (01/03/04) broadcast live the press conference given by the Turkish Cypriot leader Mr. Rauf Denktas, after the sixth meeting under U.N. auspices for a solution to the Cyprus problem.
"We submitted our document related to the amendments we envisage in the Annan plan to the Greek Cypriot side on 24 February. We received its response on 28 February. I believe that they submitted the document on the Greek Cypriots demands today. We have not yet been able to study it. They submitted a second paper today. They want us to transfer to the United Nations the territory we will withdraw from the day after we reach an agreement, regardless of the fact that the Annan plan says that the process should be realized within a period of three years. Naturally, that will create a disastrous situation. Our people will have to quickly move from those areas if that happens. No preparation has been made to that effect. No program has been drawn up for rehabilitation. And, no funds exist for that purpose. So, that cannot be done. Nevertheless, we got the document today. It concerns the question of territory and is made up of 20 pages. Therefore, I will not say anything more on the matter. Our colleagues will study it and we will inform you accordingly.
We quickly looked at what they gave to us today, which they described as a comprehensive document. Their approach is motivated by their conviction that the Greek Cypriot side is an EU member and, as such, time does not exist for a transitional period.
Why was a transitional period called for? It was called for to create an opportunity for the Turkish Cypriot side to prepare. It was called for to create an opportunity for everyone to settle. It was called for to create an opportunity for the officials to set up new establishments. However, the Greek Cypriots say that we should leave that aside because there is no time. That is their approach.
What we concluded from our quick look at the document is this: The Greek Cypriot side wants the guarantor powers to sign the agreement. In other words, it wants guarantees before a final document is drawn up. The Greek Cypriots insist on that.
They claimed that only those who were the citizens of Cyprus in 1963 and their children should be eligible to vote in the referendum. They claimed that some of our citizens, whom they described as settlers who do not have the right to live in Cyprus, cannot vote in any way. They said that those who can be allowed to live on the island are those who are married with Cypriots and their children. However, we received their document as we prepared to leave this morning. We will inform you accordingly after we study it.
Regarding our proposals, they responded by saying that all of them are unacceptable. They said that they are outside the Annan plan's framework. They insisted on saying that the population is made up of one people. So, nothing can be based on separation between the Turkish and Greek Cypriots. That would mean ethnic separation, which is unacceptable. That is what they say.
Agreeing to that would mean that equality between the two peoples is merely in words. We lived as Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots for 400 years in Cyprus. The 1960 Agreements were based on that reality. The Greek Cypriots appealed to the United Nations in 1954, saying that the Cypriot people, as one people, want to exercise their right to self-determination to achieve Enosis [union of Cyprus with Greece]. However, the Turkish Cypriot side quickly objected to that, saying that two peoples exist on the island and each one of them has the right to self-determination. The Greek Cypriots have informed the world since 1963 that only one people exist on the island and the Turkish Cypriots are a minority. They have ignored the resolution passed by the British parliament in 1956, which said that the two sides in Cyprus should be recognized the right to self-determination. They forget that it was in accordance with this right that the 1960 Agreements were drawn up. So, the problem is a basic issue. The problem is the complete rejection of the struggle we have waged to safeguard our equality and sovereignty rights.
Our political equality and the fact that we are not a minority in Cyprus have been stressed in the UN General Assembly and the UN Security Council many times. Their rejection of our equality, regardless of all that and the UN Secretary-General's statements that the Turkish Cypriots are not a minority, they will not become a minority, and their equality will be protected, is regrettable.
The Greek Cypriots claimed that equality exists between the founding states. However, 50,000-80,000 Greek Cypriots will settle in our state. We will have to recognize political rights to them. Well, a mixed group will represent us. That is unacceptable. The Annan plan says that one of the founding states will be established by the Turkish Cypriots and the other will be established by the Greek Cypriots. However, the conclusion they have drawn is that the Greek Cypriot state should be represented by Greek Cypriots and the Turkish Cypriot state should be represented by a mixed group. That is unacceptable. A distinction exists on language in Belgium. However, no one has accused that country of maintaining a racist policy.
Turkish Cypriot and Greek Cypriot people lived in Cyprus for 400 years. However, the Greek Cypriots recently passed a law to proudly claim that they are an inseparable part of Greece and Hellenism. Well, we proudly say that the Turkish Cypriots are an inseparable part of Turkey. In view of that, two national peoples exist on the island. So, we are now accused of maintaining a racist approach just because we underline that and say that we will reestablish the partnership we set in 1960 on that basis. That is seen as unacceptable. It is said that what we call for cannot be accepted by the EU. Naturally, we cannot agree to that.
The Greek Cypriots rejected our approach claiming that it conflicts with the EU norms. I am aware of why the Greek Cypriot side deliberately moved to join the EU. So, I urge the EU not to contribute towards the Greek Cypriot objectives. I urge the EU to agree to the existence of two peoples on the island, Turkish Cypriot and Greek Cypriot peoples, and inform the Greek Cypriot side accordingly. Otherwise, we will see that the Greek Cypriots will maintain their policy of placing Cyprus under their control, claiming that our approach conflicts with the EU norms.
They view our approach as an effort to deny human rights and legalize ethnic cleansing and usurpation of territory. Well, that is a little shameful because everyone would have been able to see what would cause ethnic cleansing, usurpation of territory, and denial of rights if Turkey failed to save us in Cyprus [in 1974]. In fact, the entire world witnessed that for 11 years. Considering that, they should avoid making such accusations.
They claimed that 'TRNC' [Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus] does not exist. They claimed that they do not recognize the 'TRNC'. They said that sovereignty belongs only to the Cyprus Republic, which continues to exist. We proposed that the founding agreement be signed by the two presidents on the island. However, they responded by saying that our proposal is unacceptable because they do not recognize the Turkish Cypriot 'president'.
The accession of Cyprus to the EU, regardless of our objection, created legal and political anomalies. We said in our proposals that they should be rectified. However, the Greek Cypriots objected to that as well. We have observed that the EU discriminates between the Cyprus Government and the Turkish Cypriot Community. In other words, we are viewed as a minority community in an administration that is represented entirely by the Greek Cypriots. That complies with the way the Greek Cypriots view Cyprus. It ignores equality. That state of affairs must be rectified. We emphatically urge the EU to rectify it. The EU should add our status and the agreement we will conclude with the Greek Cypriot side to the agreement it reached with what it recognizes as the Cyprus Government. Their agreement has to be changed. We emphatically demand that from the EU.
Mr. Papadopoulos said that the derogations we asked for cannot be accepted because they conflict with human rights. He said that they will obstruct the cooperation between Cyprus and the EU. That is his approach, as if Cyprus is a unitary Greek Cypriot state, incidents never took place in the past, the partnership on the island has not been undermined, and the former partners are not trying to establish a new partnership. They expect us to accept their approach.
We asked for a number of other derogations that should remain in effect until Turkey joins the EU. However, Mr. Papadopoulos said that they are unacceptable because the time when Turkey will become a member of the organization is unknown.
Regarding security, we disagreed with the status to be given to the UN units to act as a super force. The Greek Cypriots insisted on that. So, a disagreement exists between us on that point as well.
The Greek Cypriots view the formula to reunite the island as one that will not separate the Turkish and Greek Cypriots. Well, what are we to reunite? Are we to reunite the territory of Cyprus or are we working to facilitate the establishment of a partnership state by the two former partners. Mr. Papadopoulos claimed that one of the tasks of the UN force will be to remove the separation between the Turkish and Greek Cypriots. According to him, the United Nations will remove the separation between the Turkish and Greek Cypriots. We found that to be a very strange viewpoint.
The Greek Cypriots objected to our proposal that the number of Greek Cypriots who will return to the north be reduced. They rejected our call for a separate majority during the voting in the Assembly in order to safeguard the rights of the Turkish Cypriots. Furthermore, they objected to the formula we put forward to settle the ownership and property problem in accordance with global principles related to exchange of property and compensation.
In short, they found every proposal we made for amendments in the Annan plan to be unacceptable. They even objected to the provision in the Annan plan that says that the sides jointly own the island. They objected to it because it confirms that Cyprus belongs to the two peoples. It will be recalled that the UN resolutions and the presentations made by the UN Secretary-General in the past described Cyprus as the common homeland of the two sides. The claim that sovereignty belongs to the Cyprus Republic showed the spirit behind the Greek Cypriot side's response. In other words, the Greek Cypriots do not agree to the existence of two peoples in Cyprus. Nor do they agree that sovereignty is and will be based on the two peoples who have the right to self-determination.
As I said earlier, we will study the documents they submitted to us today and inform you on them tomorrow.
Question: Can you comment on the UN approach?
Answer: The UN officials merely listen to what we say. They intervene from time to time. I want to say that it will be a pity if the UN officials believe that we will be unable to reach an agreement and that they will have to take the necessary action after hearing out what the two sides have to say. A referendum will be held and everything will depend on how lucky the sides will be. I hope I am wrong to say that. The UN officials must help us more because they have created an opportunity to the Greek Cypriots. They included many points that conflict with the realities in their plans. Naturally, the Greek Cypriots opposed our initiatives to have them changed. That has created a difficult situation. Nevertheless, we will maintain the talks with calm approach.
A few committees have been established. A decision has been made for the establishment of a committee on constitutional issues. The Greek Cypriots have asked for the establishment of a lower court. A committee has been established for that purpose. Mr. Soysal will participate in it. We have been unable to understand why they have asked for a lower court. I believe that they have found a formula to obstruct Greek Cypriot appeals to our state courts. The work on all that will be maintained. I hope that progress will be achieved, even though it might be very slow and on a very small scale. You must remain clam.
Question: A map on territory.
Answer: No, a map does not exist.
Question: Have you submitted a map?
Answer: No, we have not reached the stage that will require us to submit a map.
Question: Reports said that you would respond today to the two separate documents the Greek Cypriot side submitted last week on the relations with the EU and the representation of the island in the organization.
Answer: Yes, we responded to them in writing. We proposed a way that would remove the need for the changes they called for. I think the UN officials believe that we adopted an appropriate approach. Yes, that is all."
 Rauf Denktas postponed his visit to Ankara for Thursday-Mehmet Ali Talat and Serdar Denktas went to Ankara today for meetings with the Turkish governmentTurkish Cypriot daily ORTAM newspaper (02.03.04) under the title "Again to Ankara" writes that the Turkish Cypriots leader Rauf Denktas who was scheduled to visit Ankara on Wednesday (3rd of March) in order to participate in a symposium, postponed his visit for Thursday (4th of March). In addition the so-called Prime Minister Mehmet Ali Talat and the so-called deputy Prime Minister Serdar Denktas will visit Ankara today in order to have contacts with the Turkish Government.
As the paper writes, Mr Denktas postponed his visit to Turkey because of the USA special coordinator for the Cyprus Problem, Mr Thomas Weston's visit to Ankara tomorrow. Denktas will participate in the international symposium "Turkey-EU Relations and Cyprus Issue", which is organised by the Ankara Chamber of Trade (ACT). According to ACT's statement, Denktas' visit was postponed to March 4 "due to busy negotiation traffic on the island".
In addition, illegal BAYRAK television station(02.03.04) broadcast that Mehmet Ali Talat and Serdar Denktas left for Turkey today, to hold talks in Ankara on the negotiations process.
Speaking to the reporters at the occupied Lefkoniko Airport, Mr Talat said that they will meet with Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul and Foreign ministry officials to discuss the present stage in the talks. He noted that in Ankara they will exchange views and assess the situation.
Mehmet Ali Talat and Serdar Denktas will return to the occupied areas tonight.
Moreover, as ORTAM (02.03.04) writes the so-called parliament "Committee for preparing a draft Constitution of the Turkish Cypriot Component State", will also go to Turkey today. The Committee's members are Mr Ferdi Sabit Soyer, the General Secretary of the Republican Turkish party, Mr Irsen Kucuk, so-called deputy of the National Unity Party, Mr Mustafa Arabacioglu, so-called deputy of the Democratic Party and Mr Izzet Izcan, so-called deputy of the Peace and Democracy Movement.
[B] COMMENTARIES, EDITORIALS AND ANALYSIS
 Columnist in Cumhuriyet supports that the pressure exerted by the United States for a solution in Cyprus as soon as possible is due to the Greater Middle East projectCumhuriyet newspaper (01/03/04) publishes the following commentary by Mustafa Balbay under the title: "From the US to the Middle East: The GME Initiative"
"The United States, which is having a hard time in shaping Iraq, is preparing to step on the gas for the Greater Middle East (GME) Initiative. The fact that US Under Secretary of State Marc Grossman will be in Ankara in the middle of his 29 February -- 5 March trip that will include Jordan, Egypt, Morocco, Bahrain, and Brussels, indicates that the developments that I have worked for some time to draw attention to are speeding up.
In Grossman's briefcase is a comprehensively drawn up plan which contains within it serious goals. The plan consists of various phases. Let me share the portions to which I have been able to gain access...
It is planned, at the NATO summit that will take place in June in Istanbul, for a sub-project with the following heading to be announced within the scope of the GME Initiative:
The scope of this plan, which as indicated by its name has a certain geographic depth, will also take in Syria and Lebanon. And later, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Kuwait will be included as part of the Mediterranean basin... The countries on the southern shore of the Mediterranean are thus going into the United States' GME project.
And when one looks at the eastern shore of the Mediterranean, an island, resembling a pan with a long handle, strikes the eye:
This is one of the reasons underlying why, after Europe, the United States as well has put the pressure on for a settlement of the Cyprus dispute as soon as possible. There are rumors that the United States worked things out with the Greek Cypriot Administration of Southern Cyprus some time ago. And let us also provide here a reminder that the facilities at Akrotiri in Southern Cyprus were also contained in the maps to the Pentagon's plans to transport European forces in the Iraq war...
If the fact that, on the same date as Grossman, the US State Department's Special Cyprus Coordinator, Tom Weston, departed for the same region, is a coincidence, it is not a bad coincidence!
Subtitle: Prizes for Participation in GME Initiative...
The name of another sub-project that the United States has prepared for the GME Initiative is as follows:
Middle East Partnership Initiative...
The United States knows that the characteristics of the various countries within the geographical Middle East are very different from one another. And it is also aware that it will not be able to make the region uniform in a short time. Consequently, countries of the region which come close to Western values will be "rewarded". The main rewards that will be given to those countries that agree to make reforms wanted by the United States are as follows:
1- They will be brought into the World Trade Organization [WTO].
2- Free trade agreements will be signed between them and the United States.
3- They will be made members of a finance center to be established for the Middle East.
There are certainly other rewards as well, but these will emerge, or be announced, in time.
As for the United States' main targets in the reform process, they are as follows:
- Liberation of women.
- Carrying out judicial reform.
- Restructuring of the media.
- Increasing the functions of parliaments.
- Promotion of civil society organizations.
The United States aims, in the initial phase, at the total transformation of the structure of the media in Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, Egypt, Bahrain, Lebanon, and Saudi Arabia. And pilot programs for female education have already begun in three countries:
Egypt, Morocco, and Yemen.
US President [George W.] Bush, in the meeting he held in the Oval Office with German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder on 28 February, also touched upon the GME project. In the portion of the meeting that was open to the press, Bush said the following:
"I call upon the nations of the Middle East to make democratic reforms as soon as possible. We are going to develop the concepts of freedom, democracy, the rule of law, economic opportunity and security in the greater Middle East."
It is also important that Bush said these things in a period in which the Arab leaders have come out against the GME Initiative, and with Schroeder at his side...
What is Europe planning in response to this?"
 Columnist says the Turkish Cypriot leader Denktas not want a solution and should not be given permission even to pass by the road where the negotiations are conductedUnder the title "Where is Denktas heading?" Hasan Hasturer criticizes, in Turkish Cypriot daily KIBRIS newspaper (02.03.04), the attitude of the Turkish Cypriot leader, Rauf Denktas accusing him of not wanting a solution to the Cyprus problem.
Mr Hasturer refers also to the decision regarding the participation of Mumtaz Soysal in a subcommittee where each side will have one representative for the discussions on the establishment of a court of the first instance. Mr Hasturer supports that Mr Soysal, who is known for his intransigent views on the Cyprus problem, should not be given permission even to pass by the road where the talks are conducted.
The Turkish Cypriot columnist says that the western diplomats are right to worry about the outcome of the talks and adds, inter alia, the following:
".In the centre of these worries is Rauf Denktas. At the negotiating table is the Turkish Cypriot side, but Rauf Denktas found a way and does again whatever he knows. .
Mumtaz Soysal should not be given permission even to pass from the road where the negotiations are conducted. The reason is obvious. Soysal is against reaching a solution to the Cyprus problem. .Let's say that Denktas said: 'This is my advisor, what do you care?' However, I am finding difficulties to understand how Mehmet Ali Talat and the Justice and the Development Party government in Ankara accepted Mumtaz Soysal to represent the Turkish Cypriot side in a committee, which will be formed by only one person from each side.
And I continue to look at the important points of the news, which said: 'The Turkish side demands reduction of the number of the Greek Cypriots who will return to the north upon an agreement, demands separate majorities during the voting in the parliament so that the Turkish rights are protected, global exchange of properties and derogations. It is noted that the Turkish side has not yet submitted proposals regarding the territorial issue'.
First, I remained stuck on the issue of the global exchange of properties. The application of this might be practical, but the Turkish Cypriots did not forget how those who are in power for years restored their properties and the properties of their relatives. The self-respecting people of this country are against the global exchange of properties, if the aim with it is the continuation of the results formed by the land mafia in the north and to leave the thousand of square metre-immovable property, which is worth millions of dollars, in the hands of those who have unjustly grabbed it.
If we are going to live in Cyprus without problems having this land as our common country, we have to support and strengthen the Cyprus identity, without denying our ethnic roots.
Where is Rauf Denktas heading? The answer to this is very obvious. Rauf Denktas, as he did in the past, is again playing the non-solution game. He always heads towards this direction. He wants to find a way to tear the road map for a solution within the framework of the Annan Plan. He says that he is informing the people every day about the negotiations. He conducts everyday a campaign for no. This is what he does.
Mr Denktas will be going to Ankara in order to participate in a campaign organized by a small minority in Turkey, which is against a solution in Cyprus. After doing this, the most distinctive attitude for Denktas' personality is abandoning the negotiating table and joining the 'supporters of the non-solution' in their campaign. .
The UN Secretary-General Annan does not expect any result from the talks, in which Denktas participates. And therefore, Annan intensified the preparations for the negotiation process where Greece and Turkey will be participating. Measures are taken for possible tricks by Denktas during the signing stage. .".