This time it's different

Makarios Droushiotis in Politis says the difference this time with all other times that negotiations were held on the Cyprus problem is that this time they're genuine. This, he says, was the conclusion the UN reached after the very first meeting between Talat and Christofias. According to a foreign diplomat the chemistry between the two men was evident from the start and it has since become clear that this time there exists the political will for a solution. He compares the situation today with that in 2004 where both Denktash and Papadopoulos went to talks with the intention of sabotaging them, the former openly the later underhandedly. The UN don't set much store on where they agreed or disagreed at the first face to face meeting, but on the fact that the two leaders convinced that they had every intention of working towards a solution in good faith and that they did not have any Plan B in mind. According to sources, the two leaders will be in charge of the talks but at a later stage the UN could join in but not through any form of binding arbitration, but in order to contribute ideas for give-and-take. The last word in the negotiations will be up to the leaders. The UN does not expect agreement to emerge from the first stage. They recognise that this is a difficult process, but believe that sufficient progress will have been achieved to result in a successful outcome at the bargaining stage, which will be a one way road for both sides. The writer goes on to say that Christofias has sent a letter to the President of the EU Commission, Manuel Barroso asking that the Cyprus problem be put under the wing of the Presidency rather than the Enlargement Commission as it has been to date. His argument is that now that Cyprus is a full EU member it no longer needs to be handled by the Enlargement commission, but in actual fact Nicosia, it seems, is suspicious of that committee as a result of its relation with Turkey which is the largest country applying for membership. Information from Brussels say that the EU is annoyed by this move because it seems they forget how much the Enlargement Commission under Mr Verheugen helped Cyprus to join with the Cyprus problem still unsolved. What's more the Enlargement Commission is the only one that can exert positive pressure on Turkey to cooperate in solving the Cyprus problem. What's more the UN itself would like to have some kind of coordinator with the EU and would also prefer this comes from Barroso's office rather than the Enlargement Commission. On their part the T/Cs do not want the EU to get involved past a technocratic level because Cyprus is a full member and may influence the decisions taken.


Politis says that the security issue and the issue of guarantees has taken on a much greater role in the new talks on the Cyprus problem than before. Previously it was easier as noone at the table questioned the continuation of the 1960 Treaty of Guarantee. Different scenarios are currently being discussed behind the scenes that could replace this treaty. For the moment the two sides seem at opposite ends with the G/Cs wanting a reevaluation of the guarantees but not the abolition of the 1960 Treaty as it would endanger the future transformation of the republic to a federation and the T/Cs and Turkey wanting it to continue as it is especially Turkey's right of intervention. The international community seems to have realised that the security issue needs to be examined. They are taking on board the G/C view that the new state cannot be a nanny state, but they also know how important security is for Turkey. The scenarios being discussed include an increased UN force, an EU force (ardently supported by Sweden and Holland), a NATO force and a special force.


Loucas Charalambous writing in the Mail and Politis attacks the rejectionists for criticising recent statements by the president that he did not object to 50,000 settlers from the Turkish mainland remaining after a solution. Their main argument being that by revealing this position just before the start of direct talks would bind him to accept this or a bigger number of settlers; if he started from the position that he would not accept any settler remaining, he would supposedly have the ability to negotiate the stay of a smaller number. This argument is based on the naïve assumption that every time a new procedure begins it does so with a clean slate. They pretend not to be aware of what had happened in Cyprus from 1963 to the present day. Everyone knows that a sizeable number of Turkish citizens would stay on in Cyprus after a settlement. Even the European acquis, which we are always referring to, safeguards this right for large numbers of settlers. It is a reality that neither Christofias nor anyone else has the power to change. Under the circumstances, his statement was far from harmful. On the contrary it could be turn to his advantage. By publicly accepting in advance of talks, something that he would have to accept anyway, he gives himself the opportunity to demand reciprocal shows of good intentions from the Turkish side. Besides, the rejectionists are partly responsible for the growing scale of the problem. Back in 2004, Talat had given a list containing only 41,000 names of settlers who would have stayed on the island. If this number has increased to 200,000 in the ensuing period, the people to blame are Papadopoulos and the other political pygmies who voted for partition back in 2004.


The Mail's satirical column Coffeeshop says that self-righteous hacks and politicians spent most of Friday having a go at Mehmet Ali Talat for breaking the embargo on statements about the talks. Talat had given an interview to a Turkish TV channel after Thursday’s first round of negotiations and said a few general things about what had been discussed at the meeting. This was a far cry from what the Denktator used to do during talks. As soon as he came out of the negotiating room he would make some inflammatory statements, designed to outrage the Greek Cypriots and poison the climate. Talat’s comments were nothing like that, but this did not stop our hacks from taking the moral high ground and making a big issue out of it. I was particularly impressed with the look of moral superiority on the face of CyBC’s prim and proper Paris Potamitis when he was presenting Friday’s lunch-time chat show on TV. He kept coming back to the violation of the embargo, constantly encouraging his guests to talk about it. This was the same TV hack who during the period before the referendum was only too happy to report bits of negatively spun information about the talks that were leaked to him by the Ethnarch’s poodles and were aimed at boosting opposition to the A-plan. The ethical Paris never protested, back then, that the news black-out on the talks was being systematically violated by his hero, Ethnarch Tassos.Phileleftheros’ Kostas Venizelos, another recipient of Ethnarchic leaks during the A-plan talks, was also angered by the two-faced Turk’s tactics. Yet in the very same article Venizelos also went on to reveal plenty of details about what had been discussed at Thursday’s meeting between the two comrades, listing the respective positions of both sides and the arguments they advanced, a lot more than Talat had said. And as Venizelos is too patriotic to get his information from the Turkish side we can only assume that the embargo was broken by a member of Christofias’ team.


Former President George Vasiliou in an interview in Politis says he believes the direct talks on Cyprus will last at the most a year but believes they cannot drag on for longer because of the elections on the north. He also said that the working groups made good work and their main achievement was for each sides to set out its positions so they can be clearly seen by the other side, allowing the leaders to proceed with the give and take.


Yiangos Mikellides in his regularly weekly column in Politis says he sometimes asks himself do i really want to live with the T/C. He says he does but still has a fear in him which he knows is unreasonable and which he tries to reason with. He says that even though he strongly supported the Annan plan because he does not believe in partition and is romantic and wants a Cyprus that is unitary, non-aligned, independent and democratic, he believes that the time has come when each and every one of us must ask ourselves what we really want. Partition or reunification. If we really want partition, he says, and he believes 70% do, it's stupid to be going back and forth with useless discussions.