By Loucas Charalambous
A WEEK AGO, responding to a journalist’s comment that the “UN have put us in tight spot,” President Anastasiades said he did not feel he had been cornered.
“What I insist on is that conditions need to be created for a substantive, well-prepared dialogue that would create the prospects for a settlement that would be acceptable to both communities,” he said.
In reference to the notorious joint communiqué, he also mentioned the “statement that would make clear certain issues of principles”. For two months now, Anastasiades has been saying on a daily basis that there will be no talks before a joint communiqué is issued.
It would appear that he has not been in communication with his foreign minister Ioannis Kasoulides who last Tuesday revealed that “the talks begun two months ago” and since then the joint communiqué for the start of the negotiations has been discussed. I have the impression that with this tactic of changing his suit after his election, Anastasiades runs the risk in the end of being left with no suit on at all.
For two months the president has been conducting a curious war over the notorious communiqué, but has been coming up against the refusal of the Turkish side to accept that this would include the provision that the federal state would have single sovereignty and a international personality.
But how serious is this policy? In article 2 of the Annan Plan, paragraph 1(a) states clearly that “Cyprus is a member of the United Nations and has a single international legal personality and sovereignty.”
In the document of convergences prepared by the UN (Convergences 2008-2012), on page 14 it states: “In accordance with the agreed principle of a single international legal personality of the united Cyprus, external relations, including the conclusion of international treaties, shall be the competence of the Federal Government.”
As is well-known, the Annan Plan was approved by Turkey and the Turkish Cypriot community in the most official, the most legitimate way available to democratic societies – a referendum. It is therefore clear that the Turkish side had already agreed that the federal state of Cyprus would have a single international legal personality and sovereignty. We are the one who did not agree to this, as we rejected the plan.
The big question now raised, which Anastasiades is obliged to answer, is the following: As Turkey and the Turkish Cypriots had given their answer in the most emphatic way possible, why is he creating an issue out of it now? There are other questions. Why has he created such a big issue without a real reason? What purpose is this mindless tactic serving? What is he trying to hide behind this so-called wiliness?
The last thing on Anastasiades’ mind is the settlement of the Cyprus problem. All he cares about now is pandering to Marios Garoyian and the other opponents of a settlement.
A naïve person might ask: as the Turks have already agreed to single sovereignty, why do they have a problem with including a reference to it in the joint communiqué? The answer is pretty straightforward. They have cottoned on to Anastasiades’ games and are trying to exploit his political stupidity. With the president insisting that the Turkish side did not accept single sovereignty, it is now trying to re-sell it to him also seeking something in exchange.
Anastasiades has been divorced from common sense ever since he married Garoyian and became a different man, in a new suit.
