ECHR ruling a victory for common sense and Cyprus
Greek Cypriots urged to set up parallel property commission to solve the Cyprus ...
The UN Secretary-General in his report to the Security Council (S/2004/437) stated that “If the Greek Cypriots are ready to share power and prosperity with the Turkish Cypriots in a federal structure based on political equality, this needs to be demonstrated, not just by word, but by action”. His disappointment was reflected in his Report on his Mission of Good Offices in Cyprus, dated 2 June 2004, where he stated “the rejection of such a plan by the Greek Cypriot electorate is a major setback. What was rejected was the solution itself rather than a mere blueprint.”
The overwhelming “no” vote of the Greek Cypriot people proved the Turkish Cypriot assertion beyond any doubt that the Greek Cypriot side is not ready to enter into a power-sharing arrangement with the Turkish Cypriots, but instead want a free-ride to enjoy the benefits of the title of the “Republic of Cyprus” which they had usurped through force of arms in December 1963 and political manipulation and propaganda ever since. As the Greek Cypriot leader publicly admitted, the Greek Cypriot side’s main focus was not to negotiate a solution, but rather to protect its advantageous position.
Since it was approved in the Turkish Cypriot referendum but not in the Greek Cypriot referendum, the Foundation Agreement did not enter into force and the Annan Plan became “null and void”.
The Turkish Cypriot leadership stated that the Turkish Cypriot people had their final word by saying “yes” to the Annan Plan. It is an undeniable reality that if the international community sincerely desires to see a comprehensive settlement in Cyprus, it has to re-diagnose the Cyprus question and adopt a fresh approach.
The UN Secretary General in his statement of 24 April 2004 applauded the Turkish Cypriot people who approved the Annan Plan, even though it would have entailed significant sacrifices on their part, and he regretted that “the Turkish Cypriots will not equally enjoy the benefits of EU membership as of 1 May 2004” but he hoped that “way will be found to ease the plight in which the people find themselves through no fault of their own.”
Besides the UN Secretary General, numerous international organizations and dignitaries applauded the Turkish Cypriot people’s affirmative vote and called for the immediate end to the isolation of the Turkish Cypriot side.
Within this spirit, the EU Council of Foreign Ministers on 26 April 2004 called upon the Commission to prepare a package of measures to alleviate the suffering of Turkish Cypriots. The Commission proposed the Green Line Regulation to facilitate direct trade and on 29 April 2004 the Council also adopted a Regulation (866/2004) that defined the terms under which the provisions of EU law will apply to North Cyprus. Despite the changes made to the Green Line Regulation in February 2005, it remains inadequate as it continues to leave the Turkish Cypriot people at the mercy of the Greek Cypriot administration who continue to advocate their isolation.
On 7 July 2004, the Commission proposed a package of aid and trade measures, which includes Council Regulation establishing an instrument of financial support for the economic development of the Turkish Cypriot people, Council Regulation on special conditions for trade with those areas of the Republic of Cyprus in which the Government of the Republic of Cyprus does not exercise effective control, Commission Decision on the authorisation of the Turkish Cypriot Chamber of Commerce according to Article 4 (5) of Council Regulation No 866/2004 and Commission regulation laying down specific rules concerning goods arriving from the areas not under effective control of the Government of Cyprus in areas in which the Government exercises effective control.
Unfortunately, at the request of the Greek Cypriot administration, these measures are already being diluted. If South Cyprus has its way, then they would control the flow of aid and trade for North Cyprus. It is not expected that any steps will be taken by the Council regarding the implementation of these regulations any time soon.
The lack of goodwill demonstrated by the Greek Cypriot side also extends to Turkey, whose EU aspirations continue to be threatened by South Cyprus’ veto. Their desire to become the dominant force in Cyprus would see Turkey depart from the island prior to a political settlement and be forced to recognise the Greek Cypriots as the sole Government of Cyprus (leaving the Turkish Cypriots at their mercy), or she would have her EU accession bid permanently blocked.
