Jonathan Powell, chief of staff at the time of the Good Friday agreement on Northern Ireland, is often quoted as saying that “there is no conflict in the world, however long lasting, however bloody, however frozen that cannot be resolved”.
Yet, the Cyprus problem, despite countless attempts to resolve it, still continues to be so daunting as to seem almost insoluble.
My recent visit to Cyprus has coincided with the most sensitive period of the latest peace process. After a change of government in the North, there was the unsettling results of parliamentary elections in the Greek Cypriot south, to be followed by an unexpected cancellation of the latest round of negotiations on Monday.
Just as the prospects for a comprehensive peace settlement seemed stronger than ever, once again, a highly vitriolic political discourse has replaced the measured language of negotiation and cooperation.
The latest flare-up in otherwise productive talks to reach a peace deal by December 31 happened over a breach of protocol during the UN World Humanitarian Summit in Istanbul.
President of Cyprus, Nicos Anastasiades, who was in Turkey attending the summit, cut his visit short when he found out that the Turkish Cypriot leader Mustafa Akinci was invited to a dinner hosted by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.
The Cyprus government spokesman Nicos Christodoulides blamed the UN for its poor handling of the event, allowing the host country Turkey to “downgrade the Republic of Cyprus, or upgrade the internationally unrecognized Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus” during the summit.
Deputy UN spokesman Farhan Haq’s explanation that the UN had not organized the dinner, had not invited Akinci, and had not arranged the reported meeting between the Turkish Cypriot leader and Secretary-General Ban on the sidelines, did not satisfy Mr. Anastasiades.
As well as leaving the summit early, he cancelled his scheduled meetings with the UN special envoy for Cyprus Espen Barth-Eide on Thursday and with Mustafa Akinci on Friday.
Described as “sneaky tricks to create a precedent” by the Greek Cypriot spokesman, the move by Mr. Erdogan to send a plane to bring Mr. Akinci to Istanbul was dismissed as “a bit of Turkish mischievousness” by some, but it was enough to risk derailing the talks. Mr. Akinci strongly criticized the departure of Mr. Anastasiades for being “unmeasured”. Cyprus Mail commented that the decision to cancel meetings with Mr Eide and Mr Akinci was “unhelpful”, but almost all Greek Cypriot parties applauded President Anastasiades’ reaction.
Among Turkish Cypriot commentators and parties, the majority found Mr Anastasiades’ reaction rash and over-the-top, but there was some criticism of Mr. Akinci, too, for “knowingly endangering the peace process”.
Dr. Ioannis Grigoriadis of Bilkent University thinks that it was a “rather clumsy move by Mr. Akinci that could have seriously exposed Mr. Anastasiades on the domestic front.
In the last Sunday’s parliamentary elections, the ruling conservative DISY, the party of Mr Anastasiades, came out on top, followed by Communist AKEL, but an extremist right-wing party ELAM also managed to past the 3.6 percent electoral threshold and won two seats.
According to Professor Yiannis Papadakis, a social anthropologist at The University of Cyprus and the author of “Echoes From The Dead Zone”, the results of the election showed a general move of voters, away from the two most reconciliatory parties.
“There is clearly an element of a protest vote both against AKEL, a party whose leader, when he was President, through inaction and delaying, is considered to have brought about the current financial crisis; and the current President from DISY, Anastasiades, who is the one who negotiated the ‘haircut’ deal with the EU Troika. It is also a protest vote against the two largest parties who are considered to have been embroiled in corruption. While it is the President of the Republic that conducts the negotiations, clearly the general political climate will make it harder for him to achieve the compromise that can lead to a federal solution to the Cyprus Problem” said Professor Papadakis.
In the North, too, President Akinci, faces similar political pressures. As well as having to work with a coalition of two right-wing parties, not sympathetic to a federal solution, Mr. Akinci also has to walk a tight rope with Turkey.
Costas Apostolides, an economist and a commentator in Cyprus, believes that both Mr. Anastasiades and Mr Akinci are facing opposition from other parties and they have to be careful not to be accused of leniency or treachery from their own supporters.
“The difficult decisions may have a high political cost. Anastasiades has been facing opposition from four or five parties up to now, which has convinced many in the Republic that the negotiations are not going well. Events in Turkey have persuaded people that President Erdogan is an unguided missile. All the blame for lack of progress has been placed on Turkey and the more extreme opposition considers Mr. Akinci a puppet. I believe that is a mistake and partly due to the Greek Cypriot leaders shifting responsibility for their own difficulties” he says.
Dr. Ioannis Grigoriadis thinks that the talks are coming to a critical point where both leaders will have to make difficult decisions if they want to reach a breakthrough.
“I am still cautiously optimistic on this, although the pace of developments on the Turkish domestic front makes it very difficult to make any predictions about how Turkey would approach a possible comprehensive settlement plan in Cyprus,” he says.
Long years of Cyprus-watching has thought me what a mine-field these negotiations can be. Even if everyone gets the political vocabulary and diplomatic protocol right, showing persistence and skill, it may still not be possible to get all other elements to fall into place.
As yet, the gap between the aspirations of Cypriots, both Greek and Turkish, and the interests of other key players, especially of Turkey, seems far too wide, for the demons of history to be finally overcome.
This post is also available in: Turkish
Costas Apostolides says
A good balanced presentation of the situation as it is developing, but in general there is insufficient understanding how great the difficulties on the ground are, irrespective of the very difficult political environment. It has to be understood that both Anastasiades and Akinci are sincere in wanting a solution, have good chemistry and a proven track record. Anastasiades supported the yes vote in the 2004 referendum, Akinci achieved wonders in cooperation when he was mayor of northern Nicosia. The difficulties are objective and it is difficult to find solutions, and include the displacement of at least 50,000 Turkish Cypriots or Turkish citizens under territorial adjustment, and the resettlement of 80,000 Greek Cypriot displaced under such adjustment, plus thousands more of both communities under property arrangements. Without having worked out a programme of how this can be done, and how it can be financed, it is difficult to make progress. There is no plan.