|
At the outset, I would like to
congratulate the elected President of the 76th session of the
General Assembly, His Excellency Mr Abdulla Shahid, and the Secretary
General, Mr António Guterres, on his recent re-election to a second five-year
mandate and assure of my Government’s unwavering support to his mission.
This is the ninth consecutive
year that I am attending the deliberations of the United Nations General
Assembly.
Deliberations that every year
focus on important issues regarding developments and challenges which are
critical for humanity, with the aim, through collective action, to address
them effectively.
Taking stock of our
declarations and decisions over time, I must confess that I feel – like many
of you – a deep sense of disappointment.
A sense of disappointment
because I witness a widening gap between words and deeds, between the
auspicious declarations and commitments which are made and the results of the
measures that we promise to deliver.
In all honesty, how many times
have we spoken about the need to address regional disputes, invoking the UN
Charter, as well as the decisions and Resolutions of the General Assembly or
the Security Council?
To what extent the weakness or
the insufficient implementation of our decisions, perpetuates conflicts and
encourages violations, something which in turn proliferates humanitarian
crises?
How often have we spoken about
the dire need to tackle major global challenges, such as poverty, hunger,
child mortality, social and economic exclusion, lack of adequate health care,
shortage of educational opportunities?
How compliant are we in the
implementation of what we have agreed with regard to the Sustainable
Development Goals and the Paris Agreement on Climate Change?
I could expand into numerous
other problems the resolution of which could have been possible, had the
United Nations implemented its relevant decisions.
That is why our collective and
shared failure to decisively tackle the challenges I referred to, has led
down and disappointed many people across the world, whose fundamental human
rights and dignity are not adequately protected.
At the same time, it has also
led to the rise of worrying developments, such as religious fundamentalism,
violent extremism, sectarianism, destruction of cultural heritage, civil war
and ethnic conflict.
What is equally alarming is
that the combination of the above has led to the forcible displacement of
millions of people and created unprecedented waves of refugees and migratory
flows, which exert huge economic and social pressures on all countries and
regions affected.
Unfortunately – and we have to
be honest with ourselves – selfish interests hinder the founding principles
of the United Nations, in which humanity has vested its hopes for a
prosperous and peaceful future.
In order to achieve this
objective, there is only one answer:
Multilateralism, tangible
solidarity and stronger partnerships, based on a positive agenda.
It is for this reason that we
lend our unwavering support to the reform and revitalization priorities of
the Secretary General which aim to reinforce the effectiveness of the
Organization and further advance peace-keeping and peace-building,
humanitarian assistance and long-term development and growth.
What I have just referred to,
is by no means meant to belittle the numerous achievements of the work of the
United Nations.
My remarks and observations aim
to emphasize the need to transform, via reforms, an Organization that will
give real hope to those in need of international protection, to the quest for
collective security, peace and development.
In other words, to turn the
United Nations in a much more effective Organization.
My strong and honest words are
not unintentional.
I stand here before you
representing a country which, regrettably, still endures the consequences of
the blatant violation of the fundamental principles of the United Nations, as
a result of the 1974 illegal military invasion of Turkey and the ongoing
occupation.
Ever since, both the United
Nations General Assembly and the Security Council, have issued numerous
decisions and resolutions, calling on Turkey to end the illegal occupation
and withdraw its occupying troops, establishing at the same time the basis
for reaching a comprehensive solution to the Cyprus problem.
Decisions and resolutions which
– in the absence of resolve and the necessary means for the implementation
thereof – have led to the audacity of the invader who tries to be portrayed
as a victim, instead of the perpetrator it actually is.
It is not my intention to
engage on a blame game, but I cannot leave unnoticed the absurdity of
the Turkish rhetoric, which lies in their claim that the efforts for a
compromise have been exhausted and the focus should now be on reaching a
settlement based on the so-called “realities on the ground”.
Let me remind you what the true
realities on the ground are:
1. Is it not a fact that 37 per
cent of the territory of the Republic of Cyprus, an EU member-state, remains
under Turkish military occupation, with more than forty thousand troops still
on the ground?
2. Is it not a fact that after
the Turkish invasion of 1974, one third of the Greek Cypriots were forced to
leave their ancestral homes?
3. Is not a fact that, while
the Turkish Cypriots owned approximately 14 per cent of the privately
owned land, today they usurp 37 per cent of the island?
4. Is it not a fact that they
looted churches, destroyed archeological sites and thousands of years of
cultural heritage?
5. Is it not a fact that they
have killed thousands of people and embarked on all kind of atrocities and
still today almost one thousand persons are missing?
6. Is it not a fact that they
have implanted hundreds of thousands of Turkish nationals to the occupied
areas, thus altering the demographic character of the island - turning the
Turkish Cypriots into minority in the areas they occupy?
7. Is it not a fact that they
have never implemented the 1975 Agreement on the status of the enclaved
persons, then more than twenty – three thousand, while today they number only
three hundred and fifty?
8. Is it not a fact that all
the above crimes have been condemned by the European Court of Human Rights
and the Council of Europe in a plethora of decisions, with Turkey failing to
comply with even one ruling?
9. Is it not a fact that Turkey
has established an illegal entity in the occupied areas, which is under its
absolute political, economic, societal, cultural and religious control?
A control which is also
denounced by the majority of Turkish Cypriots?
An illegal entity described by
the European Court of Human Rights as
“a subordinate local administration” of Turkey?
10. Is it not a fact that
Turkey tries to equate the State, the internationally recognized Republic of
Cyprus – member of the United Nations and the European Union – with the
illegal secessionist entity?
11. Is it not a fact that the
above proclamation of the purported secession had been condemned by the
Security Council and considered legally invalid?
12. And is not a fact that the
Security Council called for its reversal and for all states and the
international community as a whole, not to accept it or in any way assist it?
13. Is not a fact that recently
with the presence of President Erdogan in Cyprus they are trying to change
the status of the fenced – city of Famagusta, contrary to the UN Council
Resolutions and the condemnation of the international community?
During his address at the
General Assembly on Tuesday, the President of Turkey, Mr Erdogan, stated, and
I quote:
“We hope that the problems
regarding maritime boundary delimitation will be resolved within the
framework of international law and good neighbourly relations”.
I wonder as to which
international law Mr Erdogan refers to.
Is it not a fact that
Turkey refuses to abide by the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of
the Sea, which codifies relevant customary international law?
How Mr Erdogan understands the
settlement of disputes concerning delimitations?
Is he referring to Turkey’s own
arbitrary interpretation of international law which reduces the Exclusive
Economic Zone of Cyprus by 44%, at the expense of both Greek Cypriots and
Turkish Cypriots?
President Erdogan also spoke of
the need of maintaining good neighbourly relations.
And I wonder, yet again:
Which country had invaded and
to date still occupies Cyprus?
Which country invaded Syria?
Which country violates the sovereignty
of Iraq?
Which country intervenes in the
internal affairs of Libya?
Which country violates the
sovereign rights of Greece?
Which country
interfered in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict?
The narrative also put forward
by the Turkish side, according to which all efforts to reaching a compromise
have failed and we should seek solutions outside the UN framework, reinforces
the valid arguments that Turkey’s end game is not to solve the Cyprus
Problem, but to turn Cyprus into its protectorate.
And I will elaborate.
In his report of 28 September
2017, about the outcome of the Conference on Cyprus at Crans Montana, in
paragraph 27 the UN Secretary General correctly assessed that all internal
elements included in his six - point framework were almost, or about to
be solved.
Thus, whilst the aim of the
Secretary General to reach a strategic agreement was within close reach, the
reason of the unsuccessful outcome was Turkey’s inflexible stance and
insistence on maintaining the anachronistic Treaty of Guarantee, the right of
intervention and a permanent presence of troops.
Furthermore, following the
Conference at Crans Montana, in line with our commitment to resume the peace
- process, both leaders – I, myself and the Turkish Cypriot leader – and the
UN Secretary General reached a Joint Understanding on November 25, 2019 as to
the principles which should guide the resumption of a new round of
negotiations, namely:
- The Joint
Declaration of 2014,
- Convergences reached so
far, and,
- The six-point framework
presented by the UN Secretary General at Crans Montana.
Following the above, one would
expect the next step to be the resumption of the negotiations.
Nevertheless, with Turkish
objectives being different, we witnessed blatant interventions of Turkey to
oust the leader of the Turkish Cypriot community, with whom the above Joint
Understanding was reached.
The evident goal was for him to
be replaced by a new leadership which reproduces and adopts Turkey’s position
for changing the agreed basis for a settlement, with the ultimate goal being
a two-state solution.
Thus, it is clear why a
compromise is not possible to reach when one side deviates from the UN
framework or annuls agreements reached and aspires to a different form of
settlement, contrary to the agreed basis and the good offices mandate of the
Secretary General.
Part of the Turkish agenda is
also the creation of new faits accomplis on the ground in
Famagusta, in full contravention and violation of the relevant UN
Security Council Resolutions, and in particular 550 and 789.
All such actions are clearly
intended to destroy the prospects of a settlement based on the agreed UN
framework.
A compromise becomes even more
difficult to reach when new ideas put forward by our side, as asked by the
Secretary General and in an effort to move the process forward, are blatantly
rejected.
I have proposed the
decentralization of the exercise of powers, which we deem as the appropriate
balance between the enhancement of the constituent states’ essential role and
the unhindered functioning of the state, including at international level.
I have also flagged our
willingness to consider the option of a parliamentary system with a
ceremonial head of state and rotating Prime Minister.
And more recently, I have even
extended an invitation to the Turkish Cypriots to rejoin the state
institutions established by the 1960 Constitution of the Republic of Cyprus,
thus, fully implementing, mutatis mutandis, its
relevant provisions.
It goes without saying that
such an invitation is not meant to be an alternative to the agreed basis of
the settlement.
It is meant to ease the Turkish
Cypriot community back into the State pending a final settlement, provided a
strategic agreement is reached, thus, fully participating in the evolution of
the Republic of Cyprus into a Federal State.
This proposal should also be
assessed in conjunction with the package of game changing, win – win,
Confidence Building Measures I proposed last December and which were
unfortunately rejected by the Turkish side. These Confidence Building
Measures are still on the table.
What I would like to assure you
about my determination to set the negotiation process back on track, on the
basis of the UN framework and the agreement reached ιn Berlin on
November 25, 2019.
For us, there is only one Plan:
To reach a settlement on the
basis of a bi-zonal, bi-communal federation with political equality, as
set out in relevant UN Security Council resolutions and in line with the
principles on which the EU is founded.
A settlement that will lead to
a functional and viable State, without the obsolete System of Guarantees, the
right of intervention, the presence of Turkish troops, or any kind of foreign
dependencies.
A settlement that will equally
benefit all Cypriots, Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots, fully respecting
their human rights and contributing to the peace and stability of the region.
My extensive reference to the
Cyprus problem, dear Friends, aims at highlighting the need to address the
realities and issues before us, on the basis of values and principles of
international law, and not on the basis of the law arbitrarily interpreted by
the powerful.
The chosen theme of this year’s
General Assembly “Building resilience through hope - to recover from
COVID-19, rebuild sustainability, respond to the needs of the planet, respect
the rights of people, and revitalize the United Nations” –is, of course, very
timely and relevant to the momentous challenges that we need to tackle.
As our actions are
interconnected and have an impact on one another, we, all the nations of the
World, made a collective pledge to the implementation of the Sustainable
Development Goals, so as to address universal challenges, on which I have
already alluded to, for the benefit of humankind.
At the same time, we must also
all realize that we are at a defining moment as regards climate change.
Taking into account the
alarming projections concerning the impact of climate change on our immediate
region, namely the Eastern Mediterranean and the greater Middle East, Cyprus
has undertaken a coordinating role for developing a Regional Action Plan,
consisting of two distinct components: a scientific and, subsequently, an
intergovernmental one.
It would be amiss if I don’t
refer to the recent developments in Afghanistan.
We share a collective
responsibility to uphold international humanitarian law, particularly as
regards the protection of women and minorities.
We also need to ensure
that Afghanistan does not become a safe haven for terrorism and extremism, or
a breeding ground for organized crime, weapons and drug trafficking and
renewed waves of illegal migration.
Another region which is also
considered synonymous with discord and strife is the Middle East and North
Africa.
In this regard, Cyprus, as a
strong proponent of the ideal that the Eastern Mediterranean and the greater
Middle East can become an area of stability, peace and cooperation, strives
to actively promote an enhanced network of regional cooperation.
In concluding, please allow me
to stress that in a fragmented and multipolar World, we have more than ever a
moral, ethical and political duty to promote the essence of human
civilization, unite our strength to maintain international peace and security
and establish conditions that can bring prosperity and welfare to all.
Thank you very much for your
attention.
(EK/IK)
|
