SIMON BAHCELI sits down with the Turkish Cypriot leader on the way ahead
‘PRIME Minister’ Ferdi Sabit Soyer’s Republican Turkish Party (CTP) came to power out of a widespread belief among Turkish Cypriots that no good would come to their part of the island without an end to decades of economic and political isolation. After almost four decades, Turkish Cypriots, particularly the young, were desperate to join a rapidly globablising world.
The CTP’s success stemmed from the apparent bankruptcy of then-leader Rauf Denktash’s quest for a sovereign and independent north Cyprus, and his refusal to accept that most Turkish Cypriots would rather unite with the EU than Turkey; and that likewise, Turkey preferred to unite with the EU than merge with the mini-state it had created in the north.
The CTP’s recent rise to power was also largely linked to Turkey’s change of government in November 2002, which, significantly, was within weeks followed by mass demonstrations in north Cyprus calling for Denktash’s resignation to allow for a reunification of the island.
The CTP and its supporters played more than a major role in these demonstrations. And it was the CTP, which by 2004 held sway in the government’ that led the ‘yes’ campaign in the Annan plan referendum.
With Mehmet Ali Talat in the ‘presidential palace’ and Soyer as ‘PM’, the CTP now hold full control over the breakaway state – unless of course, one believes the north’s ‘government’ is merely a puppet of Ankara.
Since taking “full control” Talat and Soyer have walked a thin line between trying to advance their case for the Annan plan’s proposed Turkish Cypriot State, while at the same time trying to convince the world, and the Greek Cypriots in particular, that their aims are not separatist.
Many in the south of the island are suspicious. After all, if getting rid of Denktash was all that was needed for a solution, why is the island still divided?
Of course, Soyer’s answer is simple: It was the Greek Cypriots who voted ‘no’ to Annan’s peace plan. But that cuts little ice with Greek Cypriots, who believe the plan gave far too much away to the Turks, both in Cyprus and Turkey.
But Soyer’s argument is not (as many would like to see it) simply that the Greek Cypriots had the chance, and blew it. He still wants a solution, and he says Turkish Cypriots still want one much more than most Greek Cypriots.
“The Turkish Cypriots have managed to change their leaders; Denktash is gone,” Soyer tells the Sunday Mail in his office in north Nicosia. “Whereas the Greek Cypriot side is still controlled by those who led the onslaught against the Turkish Cypriot community in 1963 and those who organised the military coup in 1974”.
He believes that under such leadership the Greek Cypriots have had little exposure to ideas for a solution, and have debated them even less.
“I think there is problem on the Greek side. The reason is that while Turkish Cypriots have for a long time deeply believed in a bizonal, bicommunal, federal solution to the Cyprus problem. All alternatives for a solution, such as those that foresee partition and separate states have been discussed and rejected. Furthermore, they have come to terms with the ideas of giving up land, the return of Greek Cypriots to the north, and demilitarisation. But the Greek Cypriot side, including the so-called left-wing leadership, see a federal solution as a heavy concession, and this makes me think they do not really believe in a federal solution”.
Soyer asks how the Cypriot government can, on one hand, say it believes in federation, while at the same time inferring that when a solution comes Cyprus will go back to being as it was before 1974 – a unitary state dominated by Greek Cypriots.
“They choose not to explain to their people the realities of a federation, or the fact that not all refugees will be able to return to their homes,” he says.
“In this way they have created animosity towards the Turkish Cypriots, and enmity towards Turkey. This policy has resulted in a nationalist tendency among the youth”.
This is what Soyer believes is causing the continued division of the island, and not a desire among Turkish Cypriots to have a separate state.
“Of course, I am not saying all Greek Cypriots are nationalistic. There are a significant number of those with sense and respect. My criticism is not born of enmity either. We can live together by understanding and respecting the other community, and I am not criticising Greek Cypriots per se. I am criticising chauvinistic behaviour”.
“I have always criticised Turkish nationalism here in the north,” Soyer says. “I have opposed those who told us ‘you are not Turkish Cypriots, you are simply Turks’ and the idea that north Cyprus should accede to Turkey. I have always argued against Turkish nationalists by telling them that the Turkish Cypriots have their own identity and that they exist as a distinct community”.
Now Soyer says he faces the same arguments in the south with those who do not see the Turkish Cypriots as a community. He says most in the government prefer to see them as “ordinary citizens” within the greater scheme of the Cyprus Republic.
Naturally, Soyer faces criticism in the south from those who say he would rather preserve his position in the north rather than let the north merge back into the Republic. His response is to refer to agreements between the leaders of the Greek and Turkish Cypriots dating back to 1977 that have all foreseen bizonality and power shared along federal lines. The Annan plan, he says, is merely an updated version of a well-established principle.
“The Greek Cypriots should ask themselves whether they have given up on bizonality. We have not”.
And it seems, if Soyer is to be believed, that Turkish Cypriots will never accept the status of a minority “within a Hellenic state”. Those who attempt to do that, he says, are “courting conflict”.
In line with this, he is critical of recent proposals by two fellow left-wing politicians (most notably Mustafa Akinci) in the north suggesting Turkish Cypriots retake the 24 seats in the Cypriot parliament as a first step to rebuilding the bicommunal 1960 government.
“Those who wish to turn back the clock and make us forget what we and the international community agreed on will find me opposing them,” he says, adding that any of the proposals so far put forward on returning to the Republic are “so full of unanswered questions” he would find the idea virtually impossible to put to his people as a tangible choice.
“We had three ministries: the health ministry, the defence ministry, and agriculture. Is the Turkish Cypriot minister of defence going to be in charge of both the National Guard and the Turkish Cypriot Security Forces?
“Are the decisions of the bi-communal parliament then supposed to be applied in both the north and south? Will a third of Greek Cypriot civil servants be sacked to make way for Turkish Cypriots? And what about the property dispute?”
Soyer concludes that to propose such a thing without answering a host of other questions is to propose something completely unworkable.
Much of Soyer’s opposition to Akinci and co.’s proposal is that it is too far a- ry from his and Talat’s line that there is no turning back from the Annan plan.
But perhaps his strongest argument against a return to the Republic is that the Republic no longer resembles the set-up that existed prior to the Turkish Cypriot walkout in 1963.
“This is not the 1960 republic,” he says referring to changes it set-up since the partnership between Greek and Turkish Cypriot broke down in 1963.
“And this is the only country in the EU that has its constitution on ho
ld, and has replaced it with a ‘doctrine of necessity’”. The doctrine, he said, effectively turned the Republic into a Greek state unsuitable for Turkish Cypriots.
Soyer is aware that he, his government and Talat are yet to fulfil the promises that brought them to office, and they are painfully aware it will not be easy.
“Once Denktash had been replaced, and those seeking a solution took power, we began to see the real face of the Cypriot government, the state and all the secret and public forces at play there. We realised then that they did not want to share anything with the Turkish Cypriots”.
