Sir,
I was delighted to read the article (Sunday Mail, September 14) by Loucas G. Charalambous. It is rare to read or hear a Greek Cypriot confess that the Annan Plan in effect offers everything to the Greek Cypriots and nothing to the Turkish Cypriots. Nothing at any rate which they consider absolutely necessary for a solution. However, settling any dispute requires give and take from both sides. This deficiency can only be corrected if the Annan Plan is amended to give something to the Turkish Cypriots as well. Such as:
1. Recognition of their sovereign state in the north which will then share part of its sovereignty with the Greek Cypriot state in the south to create a United Confederal Cyprus.
2. Political equality as defined by the UN Secretary-general’s Report of March 8, 1990, S/21183 Annex 1 para. 11. Endorsed by UN Security Council Resolution 716 of October 11, 1991, para 4. This is completely ignored in the Annan Plan. An example of the UN acting against its own resolutions.
3. Bi-zonality — i.e. Turkish Cypriots will live in the north and Greek Cypriots in the south. Freedom of movement as at present, but not living intermixed as in the past. A reasonable number of Greeks may live in the north, their numbers to be determined by the Turkish Cypriot state and not imposed as it is by the Annan Plan. Yet another example of the UN acting against its own resolutions (eg. Resolution 1250).
4. An exchange of land and property and proper compensation for the rest of Greek Cypriot property in the north. Compensation also to the Turkish Cypriots for all their losses from 1963 to 1974. Again not even mentioned in the Annan Plan.
5. Turkey’s guarantee to remain as in the Treaty of Guarantee of 1960 without being watered down in any way.
Thus, the Greek Cypriots will receive compensation for all their losses since 1974 and the Turkish Cypriots will receive compensation for all their losses since 1963. The Turkish Cypriots will have their sovereign state in the north and the Greeks will have theirs in the south. They will both give part of their sovereignty to the Confederated/Federated State of a United Cyprus. The Turkish Cypriots will have the only security they can trust, i.e. Turkey’s effective guarantee, and the Greeks will have their own too, i.e. that of Greece. This is the only way to solve this problem: give and take by both sides.
The above are rejected by the Greek leadership not because they wish to remain in power , as suggested by Loucas Charalambous, but mainly because they want to achieve their dream of Enosis and Hellenisation of the island. The Annan Plan offers this to the Greeks in the long term, but they want it now. However, the Turkish Cypriots will not succumb to a plan which will ultimately lead to their extinction. That is why they will not accept anything less than the above conditions. This is irrespective of whether Rauf Denktash is in power or not. Mehmet Ali Talat and the other minority parties have no chance of winning the election next December despite all the improper and illegal political and financial support given to them from outside. It would be unwise for the Greeks, the Europeans and the Americans to invest all their hopes in Talat. Even if he and his other opposition partners manage to form a coalition, Talat will change when in power (as all politicians do) and will be making similar demands which will be unacceptable to the Greeks. The Greek leadership will ultimately have to make one big concession, and that is to abandon their dream of Hellenising the island. When this happens they will find it easy to accept the Turkish Cypriot demands because they will have nothing to lose by so doing.
Niyazi Eren,
London
