Filenews 9 May 2021
In the new Geneva, which is expected to be convened in the next two or three months, the British formula will reportedly be promoted as a 'compromise'. Confirming in this way that, which UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres mentioned, for "squaring the circle".
This was also the aim at the informal Five-Party Conference, held on 27-29 April, which was shown through the initial interventions of the United Nations Secretary-General. However, this was not achieved as in the first meetings it did not find suitable ground, either on the Greek side or on the Turkish side, for different reasons. Mr Guterres then changed his tactics, but not on the merits. His change also had to do with interventions made by third parties.
In that regard, it should be recalled that Antonio Guterres, in the first separate meetings with Anastasiades and Tatar on 27 April, opened up the issue of the debate on sovereignty, with the aim of finding the 'middle way'. In logic, repeated many times, as a methodology for the distribution of sovereignty: "From the base (two communities) to the top (refers to confederation)". In other words, the logic is that the state will have sovereignty, which will come from each community separately. This is a "evolution" of the Anastasiades-Eroglu Joint Declaration of 11 February 2014(paragraph 3), which calls for sovereignty arising from Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots. The difference, therefore, of the new approach is that sovereignty will come from communities.
What do the British say in their formula? That "community sovereign states will establish the Republic of Cyprus". So do the Turks, who basically want the two communities, entities, to create the new state of affairs. They believe that the occupying regime has sovereignty and that it should be recognised.
The next steps
Relevant information indicates that the United Nations, on the next steps in Cyprus, is considering the possibility that the formula will be presented as a "bridge proposal" by the G.G. of the International Organization. It should therefore be noted that prior to the informal Five-Party Conference in Geneva on 27-29 April, there was systematic UN cooperation with Foran Ofis focusing on the British proposal. Therefore, the United Nations Group and the G.G. itself have a full picture of all the details of the British proposal and apparently decided to promote it.
How will this method be done on the part of the UN and behind the scenes by the British? With pressure and indirect blackmail to account. One fact that exists is that the Greek Cypriot side came to the informal Pentamer by accepting the UN framework while the Turkish side drafted the two states. And while it is clear which side has prevented progress, the International Organisation is keeping an equal distance. This is because Mr Guterres and Mrs Lutt seem to be standing by the fact that both sides rejected the Secretary-General's attempt at a 'compromise' proposal on the issue of sovereignty. So the picture they want to present is that both sides are to blame. It should be noted in this regard that the Turks rejected the 'compromise' proposal as the line was to insist to the end on the two states, which would cooperate with each other, apparently leaving the confederation for continuity.
From what is said behind the scenes, the United Nations seems to be enlisting the tool of accountability even towards the Greek side, which moved within the framework of the International Organization, but not the formula presented by Mr Guterres. It is recalled that the Secretary-General in separate meetings with President Anastasiades and the occupying leader, Ersin Tatar, on the first day, had warned that he would file the mandate with the Security Council if it did not work.
It is clear, therefore, that at the new informal gathering, the United Nations will attempt, through bridge proposals, to promote a proposal of British origin aimed at over overcome differences in the issue of sovereignty. A "compromise", according to what they have said to Forin Ofis, which can fit in the Bi-Social Federation. After all, it is obvious that the nomenclature will not matter. What seems to be being promoted, regardless of what is to be called, is a model of confederation that can operate within the European Union.
All this, however, will depend on Nicosia's attitude. Only if it accepts the bridging proposals will a form of confederation be agreed.
BRITISH PRESSING TO THE US FOR CYPRUS
Behind the scenes, the hyperactive Foran Ofis attempts to support his proposals with alliances. London is trying to convince Washington, which so far remains in its well-known timeless and repetitive positions on the Cyprus issue. As confirmed by the step towards the Turkish Ambassador, which took place in the middle of the Five-Party Conference in Geneva. London argues, among other things, to the Americans that they should keep Turkey close, to show understanding of its concerns, so as not to push it, completely, into Moscow's arms.
The irritable Mevlut and the denktasic Tatar
The discussions in Geneva, in the context of the plenary meetings convened by the Secretary-General of the United Nations, also had moments of tension. And the climate in general wasn't good. According to reports, at one of the plenary meetings, the Turkish Foreign Minister, Mevlut Tsavousoglu, reportedly stood up from his post and in a strong tone, addressing President Anastasiades, began shouting saying that "we do not trust you" and that "you were saying more before and more now". In fact, he referred to a document submitted on 3 July 2017 by the Greek side in Cran Medan. A document of this date had not been submitted and this was indicated by Mr Anastasiades, which led the Turkish Foreign Minister to look in the direction of his associates.
However, in relation to the tactics followed by the Turkish side, it was clear that the positions - the proposal for the two states - were formulated by the occupying leader, Ersin Tatar, and Mevlut Tsavousoglu followed by saying that he agreed and that Turkey supported this policy. Tatar, however, in addition to the document he distributed and presented, spoke like the former occupying leader, Rauf Denktash. He talked a lot about the past, about the 1960s and developed the well-known tale about the events at the time and how "the Turkish Cypriots suffered from the Greeks". His lengthy reference to the past led the Secretary-General to call for everyone to focus on the future as "you don't seem to agree with the past."
