Beginning of the end of the talks

Makarios Droushiotis writing in Politis says that the UN is determined to clarify matters as far as the Cyprus problem is concerned and end of January is the deadline. He quotes a diplomatic source as saying that the New York meeting was the beginning of the end of the negotiating procedure and that it will either culminate in a solution or collapse. The January meeting will be the end of the line.

Depending on how things go, that meeting may possibly turn into a conference and it is no coincidence that Geneva was chosen as it is more suitable for hosting such a conference compared to New York.

He says the UN is fully satisfied with the way the meeting went and the fact that the leaders are as well gives the process a new impetus which, provided there are not setbacks, could very well lead to a positive outcome.

No attempt to negotiate any of the aspects of the Cyprus problem was made in New York or to put forward any gap-bridging proposals. The meeting concerned itself soley with procedure.

The UN S-G and his team told the leaders that the following:
- the problem can be solved. There are solutions that can satisfy the sensitivities of both sides. What is needed is the political will.

- He is not interested in acting as arbiter or imposing solutions. It is not the UN’s job to threaten to impose a solution that would not be acceptable to the people. It is their responsibility as leaders to prepare and persuade their people.

- The UN has experts who have worked and prepared useful material which they have put at the disposal of the leaders. It is up to them to make full use of it.

- The UN believes that the Cyprus problem cannot be discussed ad infinitum. All the issues have been discussed extensively. The deadlock cannot be broken by further discussions but by political decisions.

- Time is running out. The two communities are drifting further and further apart from a solution and any drawn out procedure will kill the prospects of agreement. If it is to be solved through negotiations, then it must be solved now. If not then there is no reason to carry this effort on.

-It is up to the leaders to find the way to make full use of the UN to bridge their differences and persuade their communities as to the benefits of a solution.

Both Christofias and Eroglu agreed with the UN S-G that the momentum has been lost, time is running out and this cannot continue without a result in the near future.

Christofias was better prepared according to the UN than Eroglu who relies a lot on his advisors and lacked the support that the physical presence of Turkey would have given him. Eroglu’s position was that the Cyprus problem should immediately be sent to a four party conference, whereas Christofias said his proposals should be accepted. The end result was a compromise between the two, whereby Christofias wish was satisfied that all open chapters would be discussed and Eroglu’s wish for a deadline was also satisfied albeit postponed by a month.

The most important outcome of the meeting was the fact that bothe leaders agreed with the UN to draw up a road map consisting of cross chapter negotiation of the areas still pending, namely territory, property, security and government. Most of this work will be carried out by the advisors with the help of the UN.

The UN believes that if the political support exists on the part of the leaders and they abandon the delaying tactics of the last six months then progress will be rapid.

The plan is that the endgame will come in January. Christofias and Eroglu have committed to following the UN road map, which describes the procedure from now until then. They made this commitment in public via Ban Ki-Moon’s statement in their presence.

Politis says that in the next few days the UN S-G will submit his report to the UN Security Council in which he will record what was agreed between Christofias and Talat in order not to allow chapters that have closed to be reopened again.

The report will also record the commitments that the two leaders have undertaken as described by Ban Ki-Moon. Provided that the report is an objective outline of facts and the road map is approved by the leaders, it is expected that the Security Council will approve it. Any attempt to block it will be seen as an attempt to renege from what has been agreed.

Alexander Downer will, in the next few weeks, Alexander Downer is expected to draw up the ‘practical action plan’ which will form the road map. If the leaders stick to what they agreed then the convergences that the UN S-G wants will be found in all the chapters and the Geneva meeting will justifiably be upgraded. If, however, any or both of the leaders start playing the blame game and are inflexible, then this will be recorded every step of the way. If the talks end in deadlock then the UN S-G will withdraw his good offices and will clearly state in his next report why his effort failed and each side will have to shoulder the responsibility it deserves.

The Sunday Mail’s satirical column, Coffeeshop says you had to laugh seeing the tv footage of the glum-looking mukhtars of the two communities standing either side of Ban Ki-moon, staring into the void, as he read his statement straight after the meeting at UN headquarters.
They looked like two naughty schoolboys being told off in front of the classroom by the benevolent headmaster whose patience was at breaking point, but was giving them one last chance to mend their ways.
He put them on probation until the end of January, but if their behaviour does not improve drastically by then he will expel both them and their problem from the UN for good. They will no longer be allowed to take the piss out of everyone as they have been given more than enough time to cut out the monkey business and get serious.
Will they heed this final warning and take some responsibility as their long-suffering headmaster urged them to do, or will they carry on misbehaving and insisting that the other boy is to blame for messing about in the classroom?
Both looked pretty miserable and dispirited while listening to the public reprimand, but I am certain that they will get over it once they are back in the sun and dust of their separate playgrounds in Kyproulla, where they can be as naughty as they like.

Despite the public bollocking, which must have been preceded by a much worse one at the private meeting, the comrade was in defiant mood. He called newsmen and showed off his talent for Stalinist propaganda, by informing them that he was “very satisfied with the outcome of the meeting”.
None of the scare stories circulating in Cyprus ahead of the meeting proved correct, he triumphantly announced, implying that our great leader had saved us. “There are no time-frames, there are no threats from anywhere and the Secretary-General has no intention whatsoever of applying pressure.”
Apart from forcing the two sides to stop the delaying tactics, stop the blame-game and intensify their contacts, there was indeed no pressure. And there was certainly no time-frame, apart from the end of January deadline for progress. And there were certainly no threats apart from Ban threatening to end his good offices mission if significant progress was not reported by the end of January - which was not a time-frame - when he arranged to meet the two leaders again.
Under the circumstances, we should congratulate the comrade for achieving all his objectives at the meeting and adding one he forgot to mention – no change to the procedure, apart from intensifying the meetings and Big Bad Al submitting convergence proposals.