EU 85: Letter to the Chairman of the Committee

from the High Commissioner for the Republic of Cyprus

 

I am writing to you with reference to the Third Report of Session 2008-2009 on the visit to Cyprus of the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee, published on 6 February 2009.

I am herewith enclosing the observations and comments of my Government on a number of inaccuracies contained therein; I kindly request you to bring them to the attention of the members of the Committee and other recipients of the report.

27 March 2009

 

The Government of the Republic of Cyprus is grateful for the interest traditionally exhibited on the Cyprus Question by both the UK Government and Parliament. The recent (6.2.2009) House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee Report, titled "Visit to Cyprus", was therefore received with great interest.

Having studied the report carefully, we believe it would be useful to bring to your attention certain inaccuracies contained therein:

· Paragraph 3 defines the Government of Cyprus as "the first communist government in an EU state". It is well known that the Cypriot government is a coalition of left wing, centrist and socialist parties and President Christofias was elected on a platform which certainly cannot be described as "communist".

· It is erroneously mentioned (paragraph 11) that the bi-communal, bi-zonal federation formula was agreed in 1997. This formula was, in fact, the result of two separate agreements between the leaders of the two communities, in 1977 and 1979.

· In the end of paragraph 15 is mentioned , that Greek Cypriots stress the issues of single citizenship and single sovereignty within the new confederation. As already pointed out above, the agreed formula is, in fact, for a federal and not a confederal system. This is a crucial distinction.

· Paragraph 17 erroneously states that the Turkish Cypriot view is that "political equality" is clarified by the relevant UN SC resolutions as "equality of effective participation" and not as numerical equality. In fact, this is the view of the Greek Cypriot side which, considering the fact that the population ratio is 82% Greek Cypriots and 18% Turkish Cypriots, has always maintained that political equality could not mean numerical equality, but, indeed, effective participation in state institutions, as described by the relevant SC resolutions.

· What in paragraph 18 is described a "as parliamentary system", is in fact a complex and dysfunctional novelty in constitutional law, not existing any part of the world and certainly not the parliamentary system of government we know in western democracies.

· Paragraph 20 mentions that most of the Cyprus National Guard commanders are from mainland Greece. Again, the information is not correct. Only the Chief of Staff, usually a retired Army General on contract and few senior officers, are Greek.

· The surface-to-air missiles, purchased in 1999 (par. 23), were not purchased by Greece, but by the Republic of Cyprus, in order to upgrade its air defences, following continuous Turkish military and other provocations, including by the Turkish Air Force. Due to the prevailing political situation at the time, the missiles were stored, and not deployed, in the island of Crete, where they remain to this date.

· The report presents an estimate of 21,000-24,000 turkish troops in Cyprus. The figure actually exceeds 40,000 troops.

· Paragraph 38 mentions that there was an "influx" of thousands of Turkish citizens in the occupied north, after 1974, since the properties of the Greek Cypriot refugees were too numerous for the Turkish Cypriots. The fact of the matter, as relevant Council of Europe reports revealed, in 1991 and 2003, is that "...the demographic composition of Cyprus is being radically altered as a result of the settlement of thousands of foreigners brought in from Turkey... there is a problem caused by 'naturalisation' of the settlers and the fact that it has been the deliberate policy of the Turkish Cypriot 'authorities' 'to give the Turkish nationals Cypriot nationality...". Following these reports, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe adopted a recommendation expressing its conviction "...that the presence of the settlers constitutes a process of hidden colonisation and an additional and important obstacle to a peaceful negotiated solution of the Cyprus problem...". Turkey is indisputably in violation of Article 49 of the 1949 Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War (Fourth Geneva Convention), which explicitly prohibits the transfer of the occupiers' population to occupied territory.

Beyond these points, we believe it would be useful to also point out the following:

· The use of terms such as "South", "North", "Turkish North" "government of the "TRNC", "Turkish Cypriot authorities" etc. is problematic, in that it may be construed that there are two distinct political entities in Cyprus, which of course is not the case. The only legal and recognized authority on the island is the Government of the Republic of Cyprus. What is referred to in the report as "South", is actually those areas that are under the effective control of the Government of the Republic of Cyprus. What is referred to in the report as "North", is those areas that are under the military occupation of Turkey. As to the so-called "government" of the "TRNC", it is recalled that Security Council Resolutions 541 (1983) and 550 (1984), which were strongly supported by the UK, deplored the declaration of the purported secession of part of the Republic of Cyprus, considered it legally invalid and called upon all states not to recognise any Cypriot state other than the Republic of Cyprus.

· While taking note of the positions of the two communities on the various issues of the Cyprus Question, the report gives occasionally the unfortunate impression that it shares a number of Turkish Cypriot positions, such as, for instance, on the issue of the alleged "isolation" of the Turkish Cypriots.

· The report also avoids even the slightest reference to the consequences of the Turkish invasion of 1974 and of the continuing occupation of territory of the Republic of Cyprus, which are at the origin of the present situation. Turkey, it ought to be recalled, was found responsible for these massive violations of human rights in Cyprus and repeatedly condemned by the European Court of Human Rights.

· The report gives the impression that the role of Greece is more or less of equal importance to that of Turkey in the effort to solve the Cyprus Question. This is inaccurate and potentially misleading. Turkey is responsible for and has been repeatedly condemned for its occupation of 37% of the territory of the Republic of Cyprus. Turkey, as the Turkish-Cypriot leader Mr Talat has recently admitted, takes a leading role in the bi-communal negotiations. Turkey, finally, is expected by the Council of the European Union to "...actively support the ongoing negotiations aimed at a fair, comprehensive and viable settlement of the Cyprus problem within the UN framework, in accordance with the relevant UN Security Council resolutions and in line with the principles on which the Union is founded, including concrete steps to help bring about a climate favourable to such a comprehensive settlement..." (2914th Council meeting conclusions, 8 December 2008). None of the above applies to Greece.

 

· The report insists, furthermore, on resurrecting the UN-sponsored plan (what came to be known as the "Annan Plan") which was overwhelmingly rejected in the April 2004 referendum, and is therefore, by its own design, null and void. The President of the Republic of Cyprus has advocated a settlement "by the Cypriots for the Cypriots" and this approach has been welcomed and accepted, not only by Mr Talat, but also by the UK Government, the European Union and the United Nations.

 

· In conclusion, it is deemed necessary to underline, once more, President Christofia's commitment to achieving the objective of a reunified homeland for all Cypriots, on the basis of a settlement that is consistent with international law and the relevant UN Security Council Resolutions and compatible with the European acquis and the principles and values on which the European Union is founded. A settlement that will establish a bi-zonal, bi-communal federation, that ensures a reunified Cyprus, with single sovereignty, single citizenship and single international personality, embodying political equality, as defined in relevant UN Security Council Resolutions. The realization of this objective will remain elusive for as long as Turkey insists on so-called "realities on the ground" and refuses to relinquish what it considers as its vital interests in Cyprus.

 

Letter to the High Commissioner for the Republic of Cyprus from the Chairman of the Committee

I am writing to let you know that the Foreign Affairs Committee has considered your letter to me of 27 March, and that I have reported to them on my subsequent meeting with you.

My colleagues and I discussed your Government's comments on the Report which we published in February dealing with our recent visit to Cyprus. We are grateful to receive your Government's clarification of its position on a variety of matters raised in the Annex to that Report. Please be assured that we will take these comments fully into account in our future consideration of issues relating to Cyprus.

With regard to a number of the specific comments, we think it would be helpful to observe that the Annex to our Report was intended as reportage of the wide range of views expressed to members of the visiting group by those whom it met, who included both Greek and Turkish Cypriots as well as representatives of the EU, UN and others. As we made clear in paragraph 7 of the Report, the Annex was not intended to express the Committee's own views but those of its interlocutors.

I much appreciated the opportunity to meet you on 21 April, and was grateful for your extremely helpful and clear analysis of the present political situation in Cyprus and the state of negotiations between the leaders of the two communities.

As you know, we wish both communities well in this endeavour and strongly hope that the talks will lead to a fruitful outcome.

 

15 May 2009