President Christofias, addressing the UN General Assembly in New York on Friday, called on the Turkish leadership to meet him, parallel to the negotiating process, “so that I can share with them my vision for a solution of the Cyprus problem which would serve the interests of the Cypriots, of Turkey, of Greece as well as of peace and security in the region”.
“The people of Cyprus have suffered enough”, he said. “It is time to overcome the problems, to achieve reconciliation between the two communities and to reunite our country and our people for the sake of peace and of the future generations”.
Referring to Archbishop Makarios’ acceptance in 1977 of the evolution of the unitary state into a bicommunal bizonal federation, he said that historic compromise constituted a brave concession by the Greek Cypriot community towards their Turkish Cypriot compatriots.
He referred to his set of proposals expressing the belief that they would benefit all sides and could create the necessary political climate to push the entire process forward, but added that unfortunately, the Turkish Cypriot leadership have rejected them. He also again proposed that the National Guard and the Turkish Army cancel their annual military exercises this autumn.
“Turkey’s leadership has been assuring the international community that it wants a solution of the problem by the end of 2010. We are still waiting for their words to be transformed into deeds”, he concluded.
An editorial in the Sunday Mail says that when President Christofias goes to New York to attend the UN General Assembly, we hear all kinds of boasts. This week we were informed that, during a meeting at UN headquarters, the president told the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon that Turkey was not ready to solve the Cyprus problem. He also accused Turkish Cypriot leader Dervis Eroglu of engaging in a blame game and of being used in Ankara’s communications game.
After exposing Turkey’s ‘unacceptable’ behaviour, he asked Ban to urge the Turkish leadership to translate words into deeds and the Secretary-General, reportedly, agreed to do so.
But there was no evidence to suggest that Ban made such a request at his subsequent meeting with President Abdullah Gul. On the contrary, according to a UN spokesman, Ban encouraged Gul and Turkey to carry on helping maintain the momentum of the Cyprus talks while Gul said that Turkey would carry on co-operating with the UN in the negotiations.
Not everything said in these meetings is made public, but it is doubtful that Ban would have reprimanded Gul for not translating words into deeds, as Christofias had claimed. A few days earlier, at his meeting the Greek PM George Papandreou, Ban had reportedly asked for the talks to be intensified and would have made the same plea to Christofias, even if this was not reported by the latter.
The problem, however, is that every time the UN has proposed the intensification of the talks, it is the Cyprus president who is resistant and not the Turkish side. In this way Christofias is assisting Ankara’s communications game, because he is allowing Turkey to appear more committed to a settlement than the Greek Cypriot side. While this is not necessarily true, it is the main impression created among third parties, no matter what Christofias says about communications games and Turkey’s unwillingness to solve the Cyprus problem.
He should know that words count for nothing, as the DISY leader Nicos Anastassiades pointed out on Thursday when he called on Christofias to stop deluding himself about what was actually happening. Unless Turkey was tested at the negotiating table, we would never establish whether she was playing a communications game or was sincerely interested in a settlement. This was something that Christofias has failed to do and was the reason why everyone outside Cyprus is praising Turkey’s allegedly constructive approach to the talks.
The president is deluding himself if he genuinely thinks that by reporting Turkey to the UN Secretary-General, of playing a communications game and not being ready to solve the Cyprus problem, he is winning diplomatic victories. He also needs to translate words into deeds if he is to expose the games that Ankara has been playing so successfully in the last few years and have earned kudos from everyone.
Loucas Charalambous writing in the Mail refers to an interview in last week’s Sunday Mail, in which Dervis Eroglu said: “No-one in Cyprus is any longer a refugee. On both sides people have established new lives, so what we need is a solution that does not bring about social upheaval. I am not saying some Greek Cypriots cannot come and live among us, but it has to be limited. If 160,000 Greek Cypriots returned to the north, where are we supposed to go?” Needless to say, he adds it caused the usual knee-jerk reaction.
He says that clearly the Turkish Cypriot leader meant that close to 40 years after the movement of populations, the people on both sides have settled in their new places of residence. They have created new lives and the truth is that almost none of them would be prepared to leave his current home to go back and start from the beginning again. This is a simple truth, a reality that no political slogan or piece of rhetoric could ignore. It might not suit the demagogues who dominate our political life, it might not suit the pseudo-patriots of the mass media but this is the truth.
Interestingly, the view expressed by Eroglu is shared by the vast majority of the Greek Cypriot refugees. It is no coincidence that the majority of them voted against the settlement in 2004.
Most of the refugees who were over 40 years of age in 1974 have now passed away. Those who were under 20 are now middle aged, with their own families, living and working throughout the free areas. None of them would want to settle in the north. What would they do there? As for those who were between 21 and 40 in 1974, the majority of them are now pensioners with grandchildren.
So who are the refugees whom the demagogues are claiming want to return to the north under Turkish Cypriot administration? And if some of them would want to return, where is the problem? Even Eroglu’s proposals on the property issue say that 15 per cent of the population in the north could be Greek Cypriot.
Kyrenia currently has a population of 50,000 which would mean that 7,500 thousand Greek Cypriots could return if they wanted to. But in 1974, only 3,000 Greek Cypriots were living in Kyrenia and about half of them have died since then. So there would be no problem for all remaining 1,500 refugees were to return to Kyrenia if they wanted to do so.
I mention this only to highlight the stupidity and superficiality behind the slogans and vacuous rhetoric about the “return of all refugees”. If Eroglu were smarter, he would have proposed that any refugee who wanted to could return to Kyrenia. He would have made complete fools of us when a hundred refugees, at most, decided to return. Yet all this demagoguery is official policy. And then we wonder why nobody outside Cyprus takes us seriously.
The Mail’s satirical column Coffeeshop congratulates Christofias for his eloquent sound-bite that “we are waiting for Turkey to translate words into deeds.” We would just like to add that the Turks should take their time because we are against suffocating time frames.
Sunday, 26 September 2010
Sunday, 19 September 2010
Solution will bring economic benefits
Makarios Droushiotis writing in Politis says that the ultimate aim of the discussions on property that are currently underway is to make the solution of the Cyprus problem a huge opportunity for the economy to grow rather than put it in danger of collapsing.
The backbone of the overall approach to the issue is the proposal to set up an Organisation of Property Development which will undertake the responsibility of developing T/C property in the south, rebuilding Varosha and develop other land in the north that will benefit from a solution.
According to reliable sources the original idea came from UN experts who have carried out detailed surveys, visited all the areas to be developed, looked at examples elsewhere in the world and adapted the plan for urban development to the specific needs of the Cyprus problem.
They took into account that the fear (real or exaggerated) that the economy would collapse was one of the factors that led to the rejection of the plan in 2004. Tangible possibilities for the economy to grow will lead people to think maturely and creatively. Furthermore, a strong economy will help overcome the problems that will arise in implementing the solution.
The experts discussed their ideas with both sides. The Turkish side adopted them, worked on them further and announced that it is open to amendments and improvements. Their proposal, moreover, enjoys the approval of the UN and other mediators.
“Despite any weaknesses and obvious reservations towards certain aspects of the proposals that the G/C side may have, the document is not open to rejection”, an EU diplomatic source told the paper.
The proposals are seen as an opportunity for massive development all over the island, something that will make the solution very appealing because it will offer something significantly better than that which exists today or that which would exist if the talks were to fail.
Specifically, the value of T/C land in the south will increase and thereby strengthen the compensation fund.
The size and quality of the properties concerned (500,000 skales, many right on the sea) in an environment without political problems and within the EU would attract billions of foreign investments. The solution will not be an issue that will affect just a few romantic ideologist and the refugees who will receive compensation for their property, but the rest of the population, especially the inhabitants of Larnaca, Limassol and Pafos, who will benefit from the growth in jobs, services, trade, etc.
The writer says that this growth will be gradual and controlled, will last many years and will serve the needs of the solution. The experts have noted that more than 30 T/C villages have been completely deserted and that separate development plans could be created for each one of them.
Moreover, there are large expanses of land along the Kyrenia coast that are currently military areas. This land has not been given to anyone and could be returned. One idea is for this land to also be given over to the Organisation of Property Development. Owners could get Turkish Cypriot land of equal value in Limassol or Larnaca. What’s more, in Kyrenia, once the necessary infrastructure has been created, a couple of hundred houses could be built and given to Greek Cypriots who had property in Kyrenia which cannot be returned, either as a permanent home or as a holiday home.
These are just some of the possibilities that the experts have considered. Perhaps for some they may seem utopian, yet there have been many examples of similar land development done successfully in other countries.
The key to its success is proper management and stability. The Organisation of Property Development, would come under the Property Commission which would be a central government body. Both Greek and Turkish Cypriots would participate, as would foreigners, with management knowledge and experience.
If stability is achieved interest from foreign investors is expected to be huge thanks to Cyprus’ geographical position, its membership of the EU, its services sector and infrastructure. What’s more Turkey, which today is a hostile mass that overshadows the island, would become a financial partner. With the 15th largest economy in the world, and a 10% growth rate, it could offer great opportunities and financial activities. One of Cyprus’ largest economic partners today is Russia. Russia’s largest partner is Turkey. A thawing of relations would turn Cyprus into a services centre that could cover a large geographical area from the Mediterranean to the Baltic Sea.
The fact that Turkey has embraced these arrangements on the property issue, is, according to the various mediators, a groundbreaking event. If despite this there is no solution, then the Cyprus problem will be considered truly unsolvable.
One of the thorny issues in the discussions on property is that of bizonality and how that affects the right to property. The T/Cs do not want to see their society disturned and do not believe it would benefit a solution if the present balances are upset.
The G/C side in its document puts the emphasis on the right of the owner, but also recognises the problems that would be created by forcing the user to move and offers solutions such as long term leases.
In essence both sides agree that that it is doubtful if a huge number of Greek Cypriots will want to return under Turkish Cypriot rule. However, the Turkish side does not want to leave this to chance, fearing there may be a campaign by those who are against a solution and may want to make things difficult. Also they want to ensure they have majority ownership of the land, so that they will have the power to withstand the pressures of free market forces.
What is needed is a formula that would recognise the rights of owners and would not put a ceiling to the number of properties that would be returned, but which in practice would also protect the user as well as safeguard the majority of land ownership.
Once the majority ownership of land in the T/C state is establised, either with a ceiling or through exceptions, then the market will open and everyone will be free to buy and sell wherever he wants.
The Greek Cypriot side wants that any restrictions to land ownership expire in ten years time. The Annan plan provided for the return of a third of one’s land and there was a derivation from the acquis of 15 years or when the GNP of the T/Cs reached 85% of that of the G/Cs, whichever came first. But the EU could propose to the T/C state that it abandon either wholly or in part any restriction if it believed that the political, economic or social conditions in Cyprus allowed it.
In view of the fact that the EU does not accept any permanent derivations, it is believed a similar arrangement will be included in the new plan. However, an economy that is based on land development cannot survive without European buyers. Thus the market itself will remove all derivations from the very first day.
The Greek Cypriot negotiating team is failing to take seriously proposals tabled by the Turkish Cypriot side and sometimes even treats them “with contempt”, the Turkish Cypriot leader Dervis Eroglu has said.
In a rare interview, Eroglu told the Sunday Mail that the talks with President Christofias are “going slowly”, repeating his view that the latest effort is “the last chance” for a solution.
“Everything that needs to be discussed has been discussed ... but Christofias seems to be seeking more time by blaming me and calling me intransigent,” he said.
He complained that his team’s proposals in the talks are “not taken seriously” and are even sometimes treated “with contempt” by the Greek Cypriot team, despite the UN considering them “reasonable”.
The Turkish Cypriot leader hinted that his vision for the island’s future rested on a model very close to the situation prevailing today.
“No one on Cyprus is any longer a refugee,” said Eroglu, adding: “On both sides people have established new lives, so what we need is a solution that does not bring about social upheaval.”In effect, Eroglu sees ethnic separation as the key to a solution, hence the focus in the leaked Turkish Cypriot property proposals on finding innovative ways to finance compensation and relocation for Greek Cypriot refugees with a “limited” return.
He called on Christofias to lead his people by telling them “the facts” about the “pain” of a solution which both sides will have to share.
The backbone of the overall approach to the issue is the proposal to set up an Organisation of Property Development which will undertake the responsibility of developing T/C property in the south, rebuilding Varosha and develop other land in the north that will benefit from a solution.
According to reliable sources the original idea came from UN experts who have carried out detailed surveys, visited all the areas to be developed, looked at examples elsewhere in the world and adapted the plan for urban development to the specific needs of the Cyprus problem.
They took into account that the fear (real or exaggerated) that the economy would collapse was one of the factors that led to the rejection of the plan in 2004. Tangible possibilities for the economy to grow will lead people to think maturely and creatively. Furthermore, a strong economy will help overcome the problems that will arise in implementing the solution.
The experts discussed their ideas with both sides. The Turkish side adopted them, worked on them further and announced that it is open to amendments and improvements. Their proposal, moreover, enjoys the approval of the UN and other mediators.
“Despite any weaknesses and obvious reservations towards certain aspects of the proposals that the G/C side may have, the document is not open to rejection”, an EU diplomatic source told the paper.
The proposals are seen as an opportunity for massive development all over the island, something that will make the solution very appealing because it will offer something significantly better than that which exists today or that which would exist if the talks were to fail.
Specifically, the value of T/C land in the south will increase and thereby strengthen the compensation fund.
The size and quality of the properties concerned (500,000 skales, many right on the sea) in an environment without political problems and within the EU would attract billions of foreign investments. The solution will not be an issue that will affect just a few romantic ideologist and the refugees who will receive compensation for their property, but the rest of the population, especially the inhabitants of Larnaca, Limassol and Pafos, who will benefit from the growth in jobs, services, trade, etc.
The writer says that this growth will be gradual and controlled, will last many years and will serve the needs of the solution. The experts have noted that more than 30 T/C villages have been completely deserted and that separate development plans could be created for each one of them.
Moreover, there are large expanses of land along the Kyrenia coast that are currently military areas. This land has not been given to anyone and could be returned. One idea is for this land to also be given over to the Organisation of Property Development. Owners could get Turkish Cypriot land of equal value in Limassol or Larnaca. What’s more, in Kyrenia, once the necessary infrastructure has been created, a couple of hundred houses could be built and given to Greek Cypriots who had property in Kyrenia which cannot be returned, either as a permanent home or as a holiday home.
These are just some of the possibilities that the experts have considered. Perhaps for some they may seem utopian, yet there have been many examples of similar land development done successfully in other countries.
The key to its success is proper management and stability. The Organisation of Property Development, would come under the Property Commission which would be a central government body. Both Greek and Turkish Cypriots would participate, as would foreigners, with management knowledge and experience.
If stability is achieved interest from foreign investors is expected to be huge thanks to Cyprus’ geographical position, its membership of the EU, its services sector and infrastructure. What’s more Turkey, which today is a hostile mass that overshadows the island, would become a financial partner. With the 15th largest economy in the world, and a 10% growth rate, it could offer great opportunities and financial activities. One of Cyprus’ largest economic partners today is Russia. Russia’s largest partner is Turkey. A thawing of relations would turn Cyprus into a services centre that could cover a large geographical area from the Mediterranean to the Baltic Sea.
The fact that Turkey has embraced these arrangements on the property issue, is, according to the various mediators, a groundbreaking event. If despite this there is no solution, then the Cyprus problem will be considered truly unsolvable.
One of the thorny issues in the discussions on property is that of bizonality and how that affects the right to property. The T/Cs do not want to see their society disturned and do not believe it would benefit a solution if the present balances are upset.
The G/C side in its document puts the emphasis on the right of the owner, but also recognises the problems that would be created by forcing the user to move and offers solutions such as long term leases.
In essence both sides agree that that it is doubtful if a huge number of Greek Cypriots will want to return under Turkish Cypriot rule. However, the Turkish side does not want to leave this to chance, fearing there may be a campaign by those who are against a solution and may want to make things difficult. Also they want to ensure they have majority ownership of the land, so that they will have the power to withstand the pressures of free market forces.
What is needed is a formula that would recognise the rights of owners and would not put a ceiling to the number of properties that would be returned, but which in practice would also protect the user as well as safeguard the majority of land ownership.
Once the majority ownership of land in the T/C state is establised, either with a ceiling or through exceptions, then the market will open and everyone will be free to buy and sell wherever he wants.
The Greek Cypriot side wants that any restrictions to land ownership expire in ten years time. The Annan plan provided for the return of a third of one’s land and there was a derivation from the acquis of 15 years or when the GNP of the T/Cs reached 85% of that of the G/Cs, whichever came first. But the EU could propose to the T/C state that it abandon either wholly or in part any restriction if it believed that the political, economic or social conditions in Cyprus allowed it.
In view of the fact that the EU does not accept any permanent derivations, it is believed a similar arrangement will be included in the new plan. However, an economy that is based on land development cannot survive without European buyers. Thus the market itself will remove all derivations from the very first day.
The Greek Cypriot negotiating team is failing to take seriously proposals tabled by the Turkish Cypriot side and sometimes even treats them “with contempt”, the Turkish Cypriot leader Dervis Eroglu has said.
In a rare interview, Eroglu told the Sunday Mail that the talks with President Christofias are “going slowly”, repeating his view that the latest effort is “the last chance” for a solution.
“Everything that needs to be discussed has been discussed ... but Christofias seems to be seeking more time by blaming me and calling me intransigent,” he said.
He complained that his team’s proposals in the talks are “not taken seriously” and are even sometimes treated “with contempt” by the Greek Cypriot team, despite the UN considering them “reasonable”.
The Turkish Cypriot leader hinted that his vision for the island’s future rested on a model very close to the situation prevailing today.
“No one on Cyprus is any longer a refugee,” said Eroglu, adding: “On both sides people have established new lives, so what we need is a solution that does not bring about social upheaval.”In effect, Eroglu sees ethnic separation as the key to a solution, hence the focus in the leaked Turkish Cypriot property proposals on finding innovative ways to finance compensation and relocation for Greek Cypriot refugees with a “limited” return.
He called on Christofias to lead his people by telling them “the facts” about the “pain” of a solution which both sides will have to share.
Saturday, 18 September 2010
Golden formula on property
Turkish daily Hurriyet yesterday published a front page a report saying that the proposal on the property issue submitted by the Turkish Cypriot side was discussed and finalized during a summit in Turkey on June 18 attended by Turkish President Abdullah Gul, Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu and Turkish Deputy Prime Minister Cemil Cicek.
The paper says describes the proposals as a “golden formula” to solve the property issue and says this opening package shocked both the Greek Cypriots and the United Nations.
It says that President Gul congratulated those involved in the preparation of the package, which is based on mutual gain with Cyprus becoming one massive construction site, representing the largest urban development in the world, while creating the funds necessary to support a solution.
The formula replies to the Greek Cypriot question of who will pay for the difference in property values if they agree to an exchange of properties between Greek Cypriot-owned land in the north and Turkish Cypriot properties in the south, with the answer being to allow for mass development on large plots of land administered by a property commission, staffed by Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots.
Large plots of Turkish Cypriot land, such as in Limassol, Larnaca and Paphos, and would gain value after their “urban development”, and potentially raise enough funds for compensation to be provided to the displaced Greek Cypriots.
Theoretically, this is feasible as the Turkish Cypriot side claims to be in possession of nearly all Turkish Cypriot title deeds south of the buffer zone after a policy whereby they exchanged them for the property of Greek Cypriots left behind in the north.
This proposal would work on the assumption that Turkish Cypriots will not seek to return to their homes in villages and towns in Limassol, Larnaca and Paphos.
Another controversial component of the formula is that the title deeds of Varosha will also be included in the mix.
Hurriyet also reported that Greek Cypriots will be allowed to return to empty properties in the north immediately. Those that do not accept will be offered plots of public land or land owned by the church or Muslim charitable foundation Evkaf. The Turkish proposal reportedly stipulates that Greek Cypriots returning to their properties “will not exceed 15 per cent of the Turkish population there”.
The Cyprus Mail quotes a source close to the negotiations as saying that Turkish Cypriot-owned property in the government-controlled areas has a “trapped value” which has potential to rise. Rather than seeking permission from 20 land owners, for example, to develop on their properties, this proposal entails putting the land under one authority, the Property Development Corporation (PDC), which can then administer it accordingly, facilitating a programme of redevelopment and rehabilitation.
The proposal, for which the Turkish side cannot take full credit, given the impetus of UN experts in the talks, creates a situation whereby Turkish Cypriot-owned land in the south can be developed relatively easily and with much greater prospects for increasing its value exponentially. Any development should be based on environmental criteria to be agreed.
The PDC will have a range of options before it, including the power and funds to compensate, reinstate or relocate refugees. A feasible exchange of properties deals at least with one third of the property issue. Then there is the question of the level of restitution as well as the debate over the levels of compensation.
According to the source, one idea is to make Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots invest in property across the island, along with Greece and Turkey, thereby, making all parties invest in the federation. If successful, this would translate into real progress on the property chapter while making a solution more economically attractive.
According to Bayrak television, Kudret Ozersay, Eroglu’s Special Representative, has said that the Christofias’ statements concerning the Turkish side’s proposals on property did not reflect the Greek Cypriot side’s true stance at the negotiating table.
He described Christofias’ latest statement as a pessimistic stance and said that the Turkish side was not very happy with the Greek Cypriot proposals either and that it was not possible for the two sides to place all their demands on the negotiating table.
Explaining that the Turkish side’s proposals had been carefully prepared with a certain degree of flexibility, Ozersay said that either domestic political concerns or Christofias’ upcoming address at the UN General Assembly were the reason for his statement.
“We don’t find this right. Both sides need to be flexible and show good will in order to achieve progress on the proposals tabled at the meetings” he said.
He also said that despite the Greek Cypriot side’s negative statements on the proposals, the Turkish side’s perception was different.
“Looking at the questions asked by Christofias at the last meeting, it is possible to say that the Greek Cypriot side is ready to discuss the proposals and to enter a give and take process. It seems he was interested. In any case if he wasn’t, he would have just criticized the proposals”, he said.
Ozersay was also quoted as saying the Limnitis crossing would be officially opened on October 14, with EU Enlargement Commissioner Stefan Fule in attendance.
US President Barack Obama yesterday commended the courage with which President Demetris Christofias has been trying to reach a solution, noting that division of the island has lasted a very long time.
During a special ceremony at the White House where new Cypriot Ambassador to the US Pavlos Anastassiades gave his credentials, Obama expressed the wish that Cyprus will be reunited soon.
The US president described Cyprus as an important ally for the US and noted the two countries’ cooperation in various fields including security, financial relations, economy and culture.
President Christofias leaves for New York today, where he will meet UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on Tuesday and address the UN General Assembly on Friday.
He will also give a speech at the New York University, attend a reception hosted by US President Barack Obama and have lunch with the leadership of the American Jewish Committee.
On September 28, Christofias will fly to Washington to inaugurate the exhibition ‘Cyprus: Crossroads of Civilizations’ at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the independence of the Republic of Cyprus.
Turksish daily Bakis reports that the former Turkish Cypriot leader, Rauf Denktash, has said that a new plan on the Cyprus problem might come to surface by the end of the year and warned that the Turkish Cypriots might “come face to face with new pressures”. He says that this plan will most probably be amended in favour of the Greek Cypriots and claimed that the “sovereignty of the Turkish Cypriot people” and the treaty of guarantees will not be included in this plan.
“Pressure will be exerted again on us. I do not know whether the Greek Cypriots will accept it or not, but the TRNC, our sovereignty, the guarantees are not included in the plan”.
He said that the moment the Turkish Cypriots are united with the Greek Cypriots and enter into the EU before Turkey does, the basis of the 1960 Treaty of Guarantees will cease to exist.
It is important for Turkey to stand solidly before the “dangers” and the Turkish Cypriots to defend their “state”. Denktash said that a “document of principles” might be tabled this time, instead of a 9000-paged agreement text. The paper also reports that the Turkish Cypriot leader, Dervis Eroglu was due to have lunch today with both Rauf Denktash and Mehmet Ali Talat.
The paper says describes the proposals as a “golden formula” to solve the property issue and says this opening package shocked both the Greek Cypriots and the United Nations.
It says that President Gul congratulated those involved in the preparation of the package, which is based on mutual gain with Cyprus becoming one massive construction site, representing the largest urban development in the world, while creating the funds necessary to support a solution.
The formula replies to the Greek Cypriot question of who will pay for the difference in property values if they agree to an exchange of properties between Greek Cypriot-owned land in the north and Turkish Cypriot properties in the south, with the answer being to allow for mass development on large plots of land administered by a property commission, staffed by Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots.
Large plots of Turkish Cypriot land, such as in Limassol, Larnaca and Paphos, and would gain value after their “urban development”, and potentially raise enough funds for compensation to be provided to the displaced Greek Cypriots.
Theoretically, this is feasible as the Turkish Cypriot side claims to be in possession of nearly all Turkish Cypriot title deeds south of the buffer zone after a policy whereby they exchanged them for the property of Greek Cypriots left behind in the north.
This proposal would work on the assumption that Turkish Cypriots will not seek to return to their homes in villages and towns in Limassol, Larnaca and Paphos.
Another controversial component of the formula is that the title deeds of Varosha will also be included in the mix.
Hurriyet also reported that Greek Cypriots will be allowed to return to empty properties in the north immediately. Those that do not accept will be offered plots of public land or land owned by the church or Muslim charitable foundation Evkaf. The Turkish proposal reportedly stipulates that Greek Cypriots returning to their properties “will not exceed 15 per cent of the Turkish population there”.
The Cyprus Mail quotes a source close to the negotiations as saying that Turkish Cypriot-owned property in the government-controlled areas has a “trapped value” which has potential to rise. Rather than seeking permission from 20 land owners, for example, to develop on their properties, this proposal entails putting the land under one authority, the Property Development Corporation (PDC), which can then administer it accordingly, facilitating a programme of redevelopment and rehabilitation.
The proposal, for which the Turkish side cannot take full credit, given the impetus of UN experts in the talks, creates a situation whereby Turkish Cypriot-owned land in the south can be developed relatively easily and with much greater prospects for increasing its value exponentially. Any development should be based on environmental criteria to be agreed.
The PDC will have a range of options before it, including the power and funds to compensate, reinstate or relocate refugees. A feasible exchange of properties deals at least with one third of the property issue. Then there is the question of the level of restitution as well as the debate over the levels of compensation.
According to the source, one idea is to make Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots invest in property across the island, along with Greece and Turkey, thereby, making all parties invest in the federation. If successful, this would translate into real progress on the property chapter while making a solution more economically attractive.
According to Bayrak television, Kudret Ozersay, Eroglu’s Special Representative, has said that the Christofias’ statements concerning the Turkish side’s proposals on property did not reflect the Greek Cypriot side’s true stance at the negotiating table.
He described Christofias’ latest statement as a pessimistic stance and said that the Turkish side was not very happy with the Greek Cypriot proposals either and that it was not possible for the two sides to place all their demands on the negotiating table.
Explaining that the Turkish side’s proposals had been carefully prepared with a certain degree of flexibility, Ozersay said that either domestic political concerns or Christofias’ upcoming address at the UN General Assembly were the reason for his statement.
“We don’t find this right. Both sides need to be flexible and show good will in order to achieve progress on the proposals tabled at the meetings” he said.
He also said that despite the Greek Cypriot side’s negative statements on the proposals, the Turkish side’s perception was different.
“Looking at the questions asked by Christofias at the last meeting, it is possible to say that the Greek Cypriot side is ready to discuss the proposals and to enter a give and take process. It seems he was interested. In any case if he wasn’t, he would have just criticized the proposals”, he said.
Ozersay was also quoted as saying the Limnitis crossing would be officially opened on October 14, with EU Enlargement Commissioner Stefan Fule in attendance.
US President Barack Obama yesterday commended the courage with which President Demetris Christofias has been trying to reach a solution, noting that division of the island has lasted a very long time.
During a special ceremony at the White House where new Cypriot Ambassador to the US Pavlos Anastassiades gave his credentials, Obama expressed the wish that Cyprus will be reunited soon.
The US president described Cyprus as an important ally for the US and noted the two countries’ cooperation in various fields including security, financial relations, economy and culture.
President Christofias leaves for New York today, where he will meet UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on Tuesday and address the UN General Assembly on Friday.
He will also give a speech at the New York University, attend a reception hosted by US President Barack Obama and have lunch with the leadership of the American Jewish Committee.
On September 28, Christofias will fly to Washington to inaugurate the exhibition ‘Cyprus: Crossroads of Civilizations’ at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the independence of the Republic of Cyprus.
Turksish daily Bakis reports that the former Turkish Cypriot leader, Rauf Denktash, has said that a new plan on the Cyprus problem might come to surface by the end of the year and warned that the Turkish Cypriots might “come face to face with new pressures”. He says that this plan will most probably be amended in favour of the Greek Cypriots and claimed that the “sovereignty of the Turkish Cypriot people” and the treaty of guarantees will not be included in this plan.
“Pressure will be exerted again on us. I do not know whether the Greek Cypriots will accept it or not, but the TRNC, our sovereignty, the guarantees are not included in the plan”.
He said that the moment the Turkish Cypriots are united with the Greek Cypriots and enter into the EU before Turkey does, the basis of the 1960 Treaty of Guarantees will cease to exist.
It is important for Turkey to stand solidly before the “dangers” and the Turkish Cypriots to defend their “state”. Denktash said that a “document of principles” might be tabled this time, instead of a 9000-paged agreement text. The paper also reports that the Turkish Cypriot leader, Dervis Eroglu was due to have lunch today with both Rauf Denktash and Mehmet Ali Talat.
Wednesday, 15 September 2010
National Council discusses property
President Christofias yesterday briefed the National Council members on the negotiations on property, after both Greek and Turkish Cypriots submitted proposals on the issue.
Government Spokesman Stefanos Stefanou said that initial comments on the proposals were made by some political parties and it was agreed that the discussion would be continued at a subcommittee on property and subsequently concluded at another meeting of the National Council.
“The effort is to have consensus; that is why there will be a very specific discussion in the property sub-committee,” Stefanou said. “Each party will submit its own proposals, thoughts, assessments, comments on the proposals in a bid to find a common element.”
He also revealed that the government had taken certain steps to stop future leaks from taking place. Reports in the press said that Christofias had marked the documents containing the proposals he had given to each party and was able to prove that the leak came from the Green party and Mr Perdikis. Mr Perdikis himself denied such a thing, saying he had been abroad at the time.
Government Spokesman Stefanos Stefanou said that initial comments on the proposals were made by some political parties and it was agreed that the discussion would be continued at a subcommittee on property and subsequently concluded at another meeting of the National Council.
“The effort is to have consensus; that is why there will be a very specific discussion in the property sub-committee,” Stefanou said. “Each party will submit its own proposals, thoughts, assessments, comments on the proposals in a bid to find a common element.”
He also revealed that the government had taken certain steps to stop future leaks from taking place. Reports in the press said that Christofias had marked the documents containing the proposals he had given to each party and was able to prove that the leak came from the Green party and Mr Perdikis. Mr Perdikis himself denied such a thing, saying he had been abroad at the time.
Sunday, 12 September 2010
Property proposals published in full
Politis today publishes in full the texts of both the Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot proposals on the property issue, so that those directly concerned can decide for themselves.
“The issue concerns many people, is delicate and technical, society cannot be left to make up its mind through being influenced by the distorting lenses of the TV channels and the press”, the paper says.
Moreover, analysing the Turkish proposals Makarios Droushiotis says that it is an extremely interesting document, which despite having been demonised by the media, also contains positive elements the likes of which have never appeared before in any negotiation of the Cyprus problem, and what’s more they are starting points.
These positive points are:
- recognition of the right of property ownership as it existed before 1974
- the financial responsibility to give compensation will be undertaken by the Turkish Cypriot constituent state.
- compensation will be guaranteed by the Turkish state
- the creative idea of development of Turkish Cypriot property in the south and its exchange.
Negative elements constitute their insistence of strict bizonality that limits restitution or the acquisition of property by Greek Cypriots in the northern part of the island
Droushiotis says that clearly this is not a final document, it is up for negotiation, and it certainly isn’t monstrous as the media and certain politicians would have us think.
Specifically, the T/C side proposes the setting up of three committees on property – the Property Commission that will have the overall responsibility and two sub-committees, one in each constituent state, which will be charged with settling the property issues within their jurisdiction.
The three well-known options are put forward – restitution, exchange or compensation. While restitution remains an option, it is subject to many limitations. Exchange will come under a broader plan of mass development. The greatest emphasis is laid on compensation, but it clearly ensures that the claimant will be compensated, his money will be guaranteed, he will get the money quickly and will be calculated at today’s prices.
The right of restitution will be given to displaced people willing to live under Turkish Cypriot rule. But there will be agreed quotas, both on the total population numbers as well as by community or municipality. The ceiling is negotiable and will be part of the overall agreement. If, for example, the quota is 10% in Kyrenia which has a population today of 50,000 Turkish Cypriots, then 5000 people will be able to return. Whoever chooses to return will be allowed his/her property back provided it was a home and was used before 1974; he/she has full ownership; if it cannot be returned then he will be given land and compensation to build a house of similar value in the same municipality or community. Similar arrangements are proposed for property housing small businesses. As for a person’s remaining property, a part of it will be returned except if it is essential for the survival of the present day user, in which case alternative property of equal value in the same community or municipality will be offered in return.
The document contains a new element entitled “alternative property” for displaced people whose property cannot be returned. This alternative property will come from either from another displaced person who prefers compensation, from government land, church or Evkaf land, or from unclaimed property.
Priorities for restitution will be given to those who choose to move back into their property, displaced people whose permanent home was in the same region, displaced owners who were heads of families; the elderly, people born in the property and who lived in them an x amount of time.
The document proposes the exchange of T/C property in the south with G/C property in the north which cannot be returned. However, it also proposes that such T/C property be developed in order to increase their value. It proposes that Varosha be developed along these lines. It describes this as a “huge solution that can bring vast financial and social benefits”, and gives examples where this has been done elsewhere in the world such as in the Lebanon, Turkey, Brazil, etc. Specifically it propses setting up a Property Development Organisation that will function under the auspices of the Property Commission. It would be responsible for buildings and infrastructure in the regions under development. The organisation will obtain most of the property left by the Turkish Cypriots in the south and who were given property in the north. About 98-99 % of Turkish Cypriots exchanged their property.
Property owners who will not be able to return may apply for compensation. Property which cannot be restituted or exchanged will be eligible for compensation. If the property has been developed it will be compensated with the value of the property minus the development. Church or Evkaf property will be compensated and transferred to the property sub-committees in order to be given to displaced people. As regards houses, current owners will have priority and the owner will be compensated. Property that has been used for public benefit will be compensated. The Church and Evkaf will be allowed full restitution without exception of all the property that was used before 1963 and 1974 as places of worship. If they so wish, they can apply for compensation. Property where the present user has a “lawful interest”, a term that the Turkish side is willing to discuss, will be compensated.
Guaranteed Bonds will be issued in exchange for the title deeds of a property. These bonds will be bought by the constituent state and will be guaranteed. Until these bonds are cashed in, the owner will have ownership of his property. These bonds will be able to be bought and sold or transferred. In order to buy these bonds, each constituent state will set up a fund and will impose a special tax. Part of the profits of the Organisation of Urban Development will end up in this fund. The owner of a bond will be paid from the proceeds of the sale of the property. Any shortfalls will be guaranteed by the Turkish Cypriot constituent state or if necessary by Turkey. The property up for sale can only be bought by citizens of the T/C constituent state. Compensation will be according to today’s prices. Provision is also made for appeals in the event that owners are not satisfied.
The positions submitted by Turkish Cypriot leader Dervis Eroglu in the negotiations to resolve the Cyprus problem are not bringing the two sides closer, President Demetris Christofias said yesterday, according to the Cyprus Mail.
“When I tell Mr. Eroglu that we have to reunite to celebrate Bayram and Easter together, he agrees,” Christofias said. “But I am sorry to say, the positions he tables do not bring us close at present.”
Christofias said Turkey did not seem ready at this point to solve the Cyprus problem.
“Due to her own domestic and regional problems, which she has created, it appears that Turkey, at least at this point, is not ready to solve the Cyprus problem,” the president said.
He added that Turkey knows that without a fair and viable solution of the Cyprus problem it cannot join the European Union.
“Today we are fighting a tough battle under difficult circumstances to get rid of the occupation and partition,” Christofias said. “Rejection of partition is the fixed parameter of our policy, because partition means catastrophe.”
The continuation of the occupation and the island’s de facto division serves all those forces who aim at partitioning Cyprus, the president said.
“That is why they invest in a fruitless passage of time, stagnation, and deadlock to bolster the faits accompli.
“Partition will be the beginning of new suffering for our country and our people – Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots,” he said. “My promise is fixed and final: we will not yield from our commitment for a bizonal, bicommunal federation, because it is the only way to reunite the country, the people and our economy … to come together again, Greek and Turkish Cypriots, in conditions of peace, cooperation and joint participation in our federal state.”
The period before the referendum was briefly back on our screens on Tuesday night, as all the TV stations went into misinformation mode, says the Cyprus Mail’s satirical column Coffeeshop. They took the bits of the Turkish proposals on the property issue that they knew would terrify people and then tried to generate mass hysteria.
The news shows were celebrations of abject negativity, last witnessed in 2004, when the TV stations were competing in the misinformation stakes for the worthy cause of defeating the satanic A-plan and saving the Republic from extinction.
The bash-patriotic politicians proved reliable allies. On Wednesday Edek chief Yiannakis Omirou described the Turkish proposals as “infuriatingly provocative and intransigent.” He said the proposals were unacceptable and “they were not worthy of comment or discussion, least of all at the negotiating table.”
On Thursday morning, after repeating all his funky stuff on a radio show, Omirou was asked if he had read the document containing the Turkish proposals on property and said ‘no’.
Listening to the AKEL chief Andros Kyprianou talking on the radio yesterday morning I concluded that he must be Omirou’s next-door neighbour on cloud cuckoo land. While divulging his banal views about the talks, Andros said he felt obliged to issue a warning. He said that the “climate of euphoria” that had been created as a result of the two days of intensive talks was not justified. Where had Andros identified a climate of euphoria? On TV, on the streets or in the Akelite coffeeshops? The only climate is the familiar one of fear, loathing, negativity, disgust, hostility, anger, pessimism, some humidity and sweltering heat, but euphoria?The climate of euphoria will set in when the talks collapse and the danger of an unfair settlement is seen off; not while the Turks are submitting infuriatingly provocative proposals.
“The issue concerns many people, is delicate and technical, society cannot be left to make up its mind through being influenced by the distorting lenses of the TV channels and the press”, the paper says.
Moreover, analysing the Turkish proposals Makarios Droushiotis says that it is an extremely interesting document, which despite having been demonised by the media, also contains positive elements the likes of which have never appeared before in any negotiation of the Cyprus problem, and what’s more they are starting points.
These positive points are:
- recognition of the right of property ownership as it existed before 1974
- the financial responsibility to give compensation will be undertaken by the Turkish Cypriot constituent state.
- compensation will be guaranteed by the Turkish state
- the creative idea of development of Turkish Cypriot property in the south and its exchange.
Negative elements constitute their insistence of strict bizonality that limits restitution or the acquisition of property by Greek Cypriots in the northern part of the island
Droushiotis says that clearly this is not a final document, it is up for negotiation, and it certainly isn’t monstrous as the media and certain politicians would have us think.
Specifically, the T/C side proposes the setting up of three committees on property – the Property Commission that will have the overall responsibility and two sub-committees, one in each constituent state, which will be charged with settling the property issues within their jurisdiction.
The three well-known options are put forward – restitution, exchange or compensation. While restitution remains an option, it is subject to many limitations. Exchange will come under a broader plan of mass development. The greatest emphasis is laid on compensation, but it clearly ensures that the claimant will be compensated, his money will be guaranteed, he will get the money quickly and will be calculated at today’s prices.
The right of restitution will be given to displaced people willing to live under Turkish Cypriot rule. But there will be agreed quotas, both on the total population numbers as well as by community or municipality. The ceiling is negotiable and will be part of the overall agreement. If, for example, the quota is 10% in Kyrenia which has a population today of 50,000 Turkish Cypriots, then 5000 people will be able to return. Whoever chooses to return will be allowed his/her property back provided it was a home and was used before 1974; he/she has full ownership; if it cannot be returned then he will be given land and compensation to build a house of similar value in the same municipality or community. Similar arrangements are proposed for property housing small businesses. As for a person’s remaining property, a part of it will be returned except if it is essential for the survival of the present day user, in which case alternative property of equal value in the same community or municipality will be offered in return.
The document contains a new element entitled “alternative property” for displaced people whose property cannot be returned. This alternative property will come from either from another displaced person who prefers compensation, from government land, church or Evkaf land, or from unclaimed property.
Priorities for restitution will be given to those who choose to move back into their property, displaced people whose permanent home was in the same region, displaced owners who were heads of families; the elderly, people born in the property and who lived in them an x amount of time.
The document proposes the exchange of T/C property in the south with G/C property in the north which cannot be returned. However, it also proposes that such T/C property be developed in order to increase their value. It proposes that Varosha be developed along these lines. It describes this as a “huge solution that can bring vast financial and social benefits”, and gives examples where this has been done elsewhere in the world such as in the Lebanon, Turkey, Brazil, etc. Specifically it propses setting up a Property Development Organisation that will function under the auspices of the Property Commission. It would be responsible for buildings and infrastructure in the regions under development. The organisation will obtain most of the property left by the Turkish Cypriots in the south and who were given property in the north. About 98-99 % of Turkish Cypriots exchanged their property.
Property owners who will not be able to return may apply for compensation. Property which cannot be restituted or exchanged will be eligible for compensation. If the property has been developed it will be compensated with the value of the property minus the development. Church or Evkaf property will be compensated and transferred to the property sub-committees in order to be given to displaced people. As regards houses, current owners will have priority and the owner will be compensated. Property that has been used for public benefit will be compensated. The Church and Evkaf will be allowed full restitution without exception of all the property that was used before 1963 and 1974 as places of worship. If they so wish, they can apply for compensation. Property where the present user has a “lawful interest”, a term that the Turkish side is willing to discuss, will be compensated.
Guaranteed Bonds will be issued in exchange for the title deeds of a property. These bonds will be bought by the constituent state and will be guaranteed. Until these bonds are cashed in, the owner will have ownership of his property. These bonds will be able to be bought and sold or transferred. In order to buy these bonds, each constituent state will set up a fund and will impose a special tax. Part of the profits of the Organisation of Urban Development will end up in this fund. The owner of a bond will be paid from the proceeds of the sale of the property. Any shortfalls will be guaranteed by the Turkish Cypriot constituent state or if necessary by Turkey. The property up for sale can only be bought by citizens of the T/C constituent state. Compensation will be according to today’s prices. Provision is also made for appeals in the event that owners are not satisfied.
The positions submitted by Turkish Cypriot leader Dervis Eroglu in the negotiations to resolve the Cyprus problem are not bringing the two sides closer, President Demetris Christofias said yesterday, according to the Cyprus Mail.
“When I tell Mr. Eroglu that we have to reunite to celebrate Bayram and Easter together, he agrees,” Christofias said. “But I am sorry to say, the positions he tables do not bring us close at present.”
Christofias said Turkey did not seem ready at this point to solve the Cyprus problem.
“Due to her own domestic and regional problems, which she has created, it appears that Turkey, at least at this point, is not ready to solve the Cyprus problem,” the president said.
He added that Turkey knows that without a fair and viable solution of the Cyprus problem it cannot join the European Union.
“Today we are fighting a tough battle under difficult circumstances to get rid of the occupation and partition,” Christofias said. “Rejection of partition is the fixed parameter of our policy, because partition means catastrophe.”
The continuation of the occupation and the island’s de facto division serves all those forces who aim at partitioning Cyprus, the president said.
“That is why they invest in a fruitless passage of time, stagnation, and deadlock to bolster the faits accompli.
“Partition will be the beginning of new suffering for our country and our people – Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots,” he said. “My promise is fixed and final: we will not yield from our commitment for a bizonal, bicommunal federation, because it is the only way to reunite the country, the people and our economy … to come together again, Greek and Turkish Cypriots, in conditions of peace, cooperation and joint participation in our federal state.”
The period before the referendum was briefly back on our screens on Tuesday night, as all the TV stations went into misinformation mode, says the Cyprus Mail’s satirical column Coffeeshop. They took the bits of the Turkish proposals on the property issue that they knew would terrify people and then tried to generate mass hysteria.
The news shows were celebrations of abject negativity, last witnessed in 2004, when the TV stations were competing in the misinformation stakes for the worthy cause of defeating the satanic A-plan and saving the Republic from extinction.
The bash-patriotic politicians proved reliable allies. On Wednesday Edek chief Yiannakis Omirou described the Turkish proposals as “infuriatingly provocative and intransigent.” He said the proposals were unacceptable and “they were not worthy of comment or discussion, least of all at the negotiating table.”
On Thursday morning, after repeating all his funky stuff on a radio show, Omirou was asked if he had read the document containing the Turkish proposals on property and said ‘no’.
Listening to the AKEL chief Andros Kyprianou talking on the radio yesterday morning I concluded that he must be Omirou’s next-door neighbour on cloud cuckoo land. While divulging his banal views about the talks, Andros said he felt obliged to issue a warning. He said that the “climate of euphoria” that had been created as a result of the two days of intensive talks was not justified. Where had Andros identified a climate of euphoria? On TV, on the streets or in the Akelite coffeeshops? The only climate is the familiar one of fear, loathing, negativity, disgust, hostility, anger, pessimism, some humidity and sweltering heat, but euphoria?The climate of euphoria will set in when the talks collapse and the danger of an unfair settlement is seen off; not while the Turks are submitting infuriatingly provocative proposals.
Saturday, 11 September 2010
Property talks end early
The Cyprus Mail reports that the UN was upbeat yesterday that the two all-day talks on property completed between the two sides were “very useful” despite the fact that they ended early.
The two leaders called it a day after lunch yesterday, authorising their respective aides to pick up where they left off next week as both prepare for trips to Brussels and New York.
The Australian diplomat said there was nothing to read into the fact that the talks ended earlier yesterday than they did on Tuesday, saying the leaders simply decided “this was the best way of handling it”, a view shared by the UN. “There is no point in the meeting going on just for the sake of going on,” he added.
The UN team in Cyprus placed a lot of weight on the all-day talks showing some signs of progress on the property talks, which until now had got stuck on both sides simply repeating their positions of principle.
As a result of the all-day talks, the two sides had to submit lengthy documents containing their proposals on how to overcome the property obstacle.
According to one diplomatic source, momentum has been maintained and the two sides have reached a stage where they are ready to take it to a technical level between the two representatives.
The two aides will be able to work in greater detail and in franker tone, to put some flesh on the bones of a number of proposals raised during the all-day sessions, including the Turkish Cypriot proposal on “urban development”. This reportedly involves developing Turkish Cypriot land in the government-controlled areas to raise compensation funds for those displaced Greek Cypriots who will not return to their properties.
“They are definitely inching closer,” said the source, despite the rather negative spin put on alleged leaks of the proposals in the press. He warned however that it was still early days as a lot of work had yet to be done. On the plus side, the potential was there as neither side put up any red flags.
Asked whether he thought the two leaders could actually make progress, Downer said: “We will tell you at the United Nations when we, from our perspective, are unhappy with the way the process is going and we will tell you when we are satisfied with the way the process is going. And my answer to that question today is that we are satisfied with the way the process is going.”
Probed further, the UN diplomat said he did not wish to expand on this because “it starts the hares running”.
On his return from the talks, Christofias said it was “the right decision” to authorise their respective aides to discuss the proposals in greater detail so that they may reach some convergence which they will present to the leaders who will meet again in October.
For his part, Eroglu said that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. He noted that property was the most important chapter in the negotiations but that the other five would also be discussed.
According to one source, the dinner diplomacy at the homes of Christofias and Eroglu in recent months paid off in the sense that it contributed to creating a more familiar relationship between the two leaders who decided yesterday to stop talking in general terms and let their aides get into the nitty gritty.
Politis says that the reason Christofias cut short the discussion on the property issue yesterday and push it onto their two advisors was in order to avoid any tension arising from the difference of opinion as regards the percentage of G/Cs who would be given restitution and allowed to live in the north as well as the degree of development that will be allowed on T/C property in the south with the aim of raising cash to compensate G/C property owners who will not be returning. Thus Iacovou and Ozersai will have intensive meetings next week with the task of producing results before the UN S-G meets with Christofias and Eroglu in New York. The ultimate aim is to have a common framework ready for discussion in October when the two leaders resume.
The paper says that at the meeting Eroglu again raised the issue of bizonality stressing that each community should have a majority and majority land ownership in each federated state, while Christofias said that that the G/C side sees bizonality as a geographical term which should not prevent members from either community from settling in either federated state. This is a UN idea, which Christofias views favourably. He is also willing to discuss the T/C proposal of “guaranteed compensation” for G/Cs who will not return to their property, especially if such compensation amounts approach today’s values.
The biggest stumbling block, the paper says is the issue of bizonality. T/Cs wish to drastically limit the number of G/Cs settlling in their state, something the G/C side is dead against.
The two leaders called it a day after lunch yesterday, authorising their respective aides to pick up where they left off next week as both prepare for trips to Brussels and New York.
The Australian diplomat said there was nothing to read into the fact that the talks ended earlier yesterday than they did on Tuesday, saying the leaders simply decided “this was the best way of handling it”, a view shared by the UN. “There is no point in the meeting going on just for the sake of going on,” he added.
The UN team in Cyprus placed a lot of weight on the all-day talks showing some signs of progress on the property talks, which until now had got stuck on both sides simply repeating their positions of principle.
As a result of the all-day talks, the two sides had to submit lengthy documents containing their proposals on how to overcome the property obstacle.
According to one diplomatic source, momentum has been maintained and the two sides have reached a stage where they are ready to take it to a technical level between the two representatives.
The two aides will be able to work in greater detail and in franker tone, to put some flesh on the bones of a number of proposals raised during the all-day sessions, including the Turkish Cypriot proposal on “urban development”. This reportedly involves developing Turkish Cypriot land in the government-controlled areas to raise compensation funds for those displaced Greek Cypriots who will not return to their properties.
“They are definitely inching closer,” said the source, despite the rather negative spin put on alleged leaks of the proposals in the press. He warned however that it was still early days as a lot of work had yet to be done. On the plus side, the potential was there as neither side put up any red flags.
Asked whether he thought the two leaders could actually make progress, Downer said: “We will tell you at the United Nations when we, from our perspective, are unhappy with the way the process is going and we will tell you when we are satisfied with the way the process is going. And my answer to that question today is that we are satisfied with the way the process is going.”
Probed further, the UN diplomat said he did not wish to expand on this because “it starts the hares running”.
On his return from the talks, Christofias said it was “the right decision” to authorise their respective aides to discuss the proposals in greater detail so that they may reach some convergence which they will present to the leaders who will meet again in October.
For his part, Eroglu said that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. He noted that property was the most important chapter in the negotiations but that the other five would also be discussed.
According to one source, the dinner diplomacy at the homes of Christofias and Eroglu in recent months paid off in the sense that it contributed to creating a more familiar relationship between the two leaders who decided yesterday to stop talking in general terms and let their aides get into the nitty gritty.
Politis says that the reason Christofias cut short the discussion on the property issue yesterday and push it onto their two advisors was in order to avoid any tension arising from the difference of opinion as regards the percentage of G/Cs who would be given restitution and allowed to live in the north as well as the degree of development that will be allowed on T/C property in the south with the aim of raising cash to compensate G/C property owners who will not be returning. Thus Iacovou and Ozersai will have intensive meetings next week with the task of producing results before the UN S-G meets with Christofias and Eroglu in New York. The ultimate aim is to have a common framework ready for discussion in October when the two leaders resume.
The paper says that at the meeting Eroglu again raised the issue of bizonality stressing that each community should have a majority and majority land ownership in each federated state, while Christofias said that that the G/C side sees bizonality as a geographical term which should not prevent members from either community from settling in either federated state. This is a UN idea, which Christofias views favourably. He is also willing to discuss the T/C proposal of “guaranteed compensation” for G/Cs who will not return to their property, especially if such compensation amounts approach today’s values.
The biggest stumbling block, the paper says is the issue of bizonality. T/Cs wish to drastically limit the number of G/Cs settlling in their state, something the G/C side is dead against.
Friday, 10 September 2010
Intensive talks on propery
UN Special Adviser Alexander Downer said the leaders of the two communities met for six and half hours on Wednesday with a break for lunch.
“Naturally enough, the day was devoted to discussing the proposals that have been put forward on the property issue,” he said, noting that they were discussed “at great length”.
He highlighted that the UN would not pass judgement on either side’s proposals, submitted on paper last Monday. It is up to the leaders “to explain their proposals, to make sure that both sides understand their own proposals, and look for ways of trying to reconcile the two positions”.
He added that the two all-day talks were “important”, noting that the last time there were intensive talks in March 2010, “very good work” was done on governance and power sharing.
This time Christofias has to work with recently-elected Turkish Cypriot leader Eroglu on “this very challenging chapter”, property along with “other associated issues”.
“It’s our hope that the two leaders and their teams will be able to draw closer through this period. That’s of course the point of the talks,” said the Australian diplomat.
The leaders’ second all-day meeting was held today, and on Tuesday Christofias will be briefing the National Council on the outcome of the intensive talks.
Meanwhile, President Christofias said yesterday, “I will not be the last President before partition”, adding that nor can he accept the faits accomplis.
Speaking after all-day meeting with Turkish Cypriot leader Dervis Eroglu during which they discussed property, he said it was a difficult and very complex issue but “there is no other way to find a solution other than to continue the discussion, no matter how difficult and exhausting it may be. There is no other option”.
He stressed that he wants a solution to be found, one “which will respect the human rights of all Cypriots, Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots, that will take into account the difficulties that have been created by the continuous 36 year old Turkish occupation and put an end to this unacceptable situation for all Cypriots, Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots."
Moreover, speaking at a function later that evening, Christofias made an impassioned plea for unity on the domestic front, adding that time was against the Greek Cypriots and that the fait accompli on the island could soon become “a road of no return”.
Referring to today’s Bayram celebrations, he said he had reminded Eroglu at the talks that “a few decades back, Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots celebrated Bayram and Easter together and predicted a time when “we will celebrate Bayram and Easter together again in a reunited Cyprus”.
According to Turkish Cypriot press, speaking from the north on his return from the talks, Turkish Cypriot leader Dervis Eroglu said the two sides had a good meeting, and an “honest” exchange of views on the property issue. Asked if any progress had been made, he replied that progress could not be expected in a day.
The Cyprus Mail reports that the majority of the opposition parties yesterday were negative over perceived Turkish Cypriot proposals on the property aspect of reunification talks, and President Christofias was accused of ‘deviating’ from long-held Greek Cypriot positions because he wanted to close a deal at all costs.
Media reports on Wednesday gave a glimpse of the Turkish Cypriot proposals, which included a minimal return of displaced Greek Cypriots to their properties, with a cap on the number that can settle in villages and municipalities.
There were also reports that refugees from Varosha, the fenced off part of Famagusta, would share some of their properties with those who would not return to their homes under a comprehensive agreement.
But citing sources close to the talks, daily Alithia said yesterday that Eroglu came across as more malleable than thought during the first all-day meeting with Christofias. One-on-one, the Turkish Cypriot leader was not as ‘disappointing’ as his written proposals might lead one to think, the source told the paper.
However, EDEK, the European Party and the Greens left no doubt as to where, in their opinion, the negotiations are headed.
EDEK spokesman Demetris Papadakis dismissed the President’s call for urgency as a ‘false dilemma,’ which he said was being put to the people to mask what was really being discussed behind closed doors.
“No one can ignore the rights of thousands of refugees and no one can negotiate these rights in default,” Papadakis said in a statement.
“Mr. Eroglu’s proposals are totally unacceptable and cannot be the subject of negotiation,” he said.
European Party chairman Demetris Syllouris said the President’s ‘obsession’ with blaming all his predecessors for his own faults was becoming ‘annoying’.
“We hope he will not become the last President before the dissolution of the Cyprus Republic. If he cannot handle the responsibility for his actions, perhaps he should open the way for collective action through the National Council.”
DIKO meanwhile warned that the perceived Turkish Cypriot proposals on property “blatantly reveal their intransigent and provocative views for a confederation and a two-state solution,” something which left no room for optimism on progress in the talks.
“We insist on the need to safeguard the right of legitimate owners [of properties in the occupied north], and we would like to believe that the President will remain on course,” DIKO spokesman Fotis Fotiou said.
The paper also says that Christofias will be meeting with DISY leader Nicos Anastassiades on Monday, the day before the National Council convenes and speculation abounds that the real purpose of the tete-a-tete is for the AKEL government and DISY to mend fences and seek some common ground on the Cyprus issue.
“Naturally enough, the day was devoted to discussing the proposals that have been put forward on the property issue,” he said, noting that they were discussed “at great length”.
He highlighted that the UN would not pass judgement on either side’s proposals, submitted on paper last Monday. It is up to the leaders “to explain their proposals, to make sure that both sides understand their own proposals, and look for ways of trying to reconcile the two positions”.
He added that the two all-day talks were “important”, noting that the last time there were intensive talks in March 2010, “very good work” was done on governance and power sharing.
This time Christofias has to work with recently-elected Turkish Cypriot leader Eroglu on “this very challenging chapter”, property along with “other associated issues”.
“It’s our hope that the two leaders and their teams will be able to draw closer through this period. That’s of course the point of the talks,” said the Australian diplomat.
The leaders’ second all-day meeting was held today, and on Tuesday Christofias will be briefing the National Council on the outcome of the intensive talks.
Meanwhile, President Christofias said yesterday, “I will not be the last President before partition”, adding that nor can he accept the faits accomplis.
Speaking after all-day meeting with Turkish Cypriot leader Dervis Eroglu during which they discussed property, he said it was a difficult and very complex issue but “there is no other way to find a solution other than to continue the discussion, no matter how difficult and exhausting it may be. There is no other option”.
He stressed that he wants a solution to be found, one “which will respect the human rights of all Cypriots, Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots, that will take into account the difficulties that have been created by the continuous 36 year old Turkish occupation and put an end to this unacceptable situation for all Cypriots, Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots."
Moreover, speaking at a function later that evening, Christofias made an impassioned plea for unity on the domestic front, adding that time was against the Greek Cypriots and that the fait accompli on the island could soon become “a road of no return”.
Referring to today’s Bayram celebrations, he said he had reminded Eroglu at the talks that “a few decades back, Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots celebrated Bayram and Easter together and predicted a time when “we will celebrate Bayram and Easter together again in a reunited Cyprus”.
According to Turkish Cypriot press, speaking from the north on his return from the talks, Turkish Cypriot leader Dervis Eroglu said the two sides had a good meeting, and an “honest” exchange of views on the property issue. Asked if any progress had been made, he replied that progress could not be expected in a day.
The Cyprus Mail reports that the majority of the opposition parties yesterday were negative over perceived Turkish Cypriot proposals on the property aspect of reunification talks, and President Christofias was accused of ‘deviating’ from long-held Greek Cypriot positions because he wanted to close a deal at all costs.
Media reports on Wednesday gave a glimpse of the Turkish Cypriot proposals, which included a minimal return of displaced Greek Cypriots to their properties, with a cap on the number that can settle in villages and municipalities.
There were also reports that refugees from Varosha, the fenced off part of Famagusta, would share some of their properties with those who would not return to their homes under a comprehensive agreement.
But citing sources close to the talks, daily Alithia said yesterday that Eroglu came across as more malleable than thought during the first all-day meeting with Christofias. One-on-one, the Turkish Cypriot leader was not as ‘disappointing’ as his written proposals might lead one to think, the source told the paper.
However, EDEK, the European Party and the Greens left no doubt as to where, in their opinion, the negotiations are headed.
EDEK spokesman Demetris Papadakis dismissed the President’s call for urgency as a ‘false dilemma,’ which he said was being put to the people to mask what was really being discussed behind closed doors.
“No one can ignore the rights of thousands of refugees and no one can negotiate these rights in default,” Papadakis said in a statement.
“Mr. Eroglu’s proposals are totally unacceptable and cannot be the subject of negotiation,” he said.
European Party chairman Demetris Syllouris said the President’s ‘obsession’ with blaming all his predecessors for his own faults was becoming ‘annoying’.
“We hope he will not become the last President before the dissolution of the Cyprus Republic. If he cannot handle the responsibility for his actions, perhaps he should open the way for collective action through the National Council.”
DIKO meanwhile warned that the perceived Turkish Cypriot proposals on property “blatantly reveal their intransigent and provocative views for a confederation and a two-state solution,” something which left no room for optimism on progress in the talks.
“We insist on the need to safeguard the right of legitimate owners [of properties in the occupied north], and we would like to believe that the President will remain on course,” DIKO spokesman Fotis Fotiou said.
The paper also says that Christofias will be meeting with DISY leader Nicos Anastassiades on Monday, the day before the National Council convenes and speculation abounds that the real purpose of the tete-a-tete is for the AKEL government and DISY to mend fences and seek some common ground on the Cyprus issue.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)