CYPRUS ISSUE

HISTORICAL AND ACTUAL FACTS

CYPRUS THROUGHOUT
HISTORY
Rulers of the Island:
Assyrians, Egyptians, Persians, Romans,
Arabs, Crusaders, Venetians

Ottoman Empire, from 1571 until 1878.

British rule under Ottoman sovereignty in

1878
 AFTER 1878
 Formal annexation of Cyprus by Britain in 1914
(not recognised by the Ottoman Empire)
 high tide of Greek nationalistic ambitions.

 1923 – Lausanne Treaty

 transfer of sovereignty by Turkey to the UK,
 British colony
CYPRIOTS
 Never a single “Cypriot Nation”
 Two ethnic peoples with distinct national, religious
and cultural characteristics who speak different
languages.
 Lived together for centuries but no inter-marriages
and no single commercial partnership was set up.
ENOSIS/Annexation of Cyprus by Greece

 Greek and Greek Cypriot agitation for “Enosis”

beginning from 1931 in order to Hellenize the entire
population of the Island and realize union with
Greece.

 Referandum for Enosis on 15 January 1950, held by

the Greek Cypriot Orthodox Church (98% in favour)
 Terrorist organization EOKA was formed by the
Greek Colonel Grivas, under the guidance of
Archbishop Makarios.

 Violent campaign in 1955. EOKA murdered everyone

in their way, the British the Turkish Cypriots and even
some of their kinsman
British decolonisation of the Island
 Greece decided to take the issue to the UN / demand for self-determination –
1954

 Turkey as being sovereign until the Lausanne Treaty demanded either the return
of the Island to Turkey or division of the Island between Greece and Turkey

 Turkish Cypriots demanded their rightful share of Cyprus and resisted to Greek
Cypriot ambitions

 19 December 1956 the Colonial Secretary, Alan Lennox-Boyd,

"it will be the purpose of Her Majesty's Government to ensure that any exercise of self-
determination should be effected in such a manner that the Turkish Cypriot community,
no less than the Greek Cypriot community, shall in the special circumstances of Cyprus
be given freedom to decide for themselves their future status."

 Another alternative emerged as the establishment of two separate states

NEGOTIATIONS FOR A
PARTNERSHIP IN CYPRUS
Zurich Agreement 11 February 1959
London Agreement 19 February 1959
(signed by the Foreign Ministers of Turkey, Greece and Britian and the leaders
of the two communities Dr. Fazıl Kutchuk (Küçük ) and Archbishop
Makarios)
NEW PARTNERSHIP STATE
 Agreed by way of compromise between all five
participants; Britain, Greece, Turkey, the Turkish
Cypriots, and the Greek Cypriots that;
(Turkey, as being the transferor country according to the Lausanne
Treaty became a party of the Agreements)

“new state would be a bi-communal partnership

State with a single international identity, but a
unique Constitution which embodied an agreed
political partnership between Greek and Turkish
Cypriots, and which prohibited the political or
economic union of Cyprus with any other state.
 THE 1960 REPUBLIC OF CYPRUS
16 August 1960

Treaty of Establishment Treaty of Guarantee Treaty of Alliance

 "sui generis" settlement.

 Bi-communal partnership state
 Political equality (co-founders) of the two sides
 Joint presence of Turkish and Greek Cypriots in
all organs of the State
 Balance between Turkey and Greece
 Sovereignty of Cyprus limited by the guarantor
rights given to Turkey, Greece and the UK.
1960 Republic of Cyprus
 Not a unitary state / Bi-national state

 Majority and minority did not effect the

political equality of the two communities
each existing as a political entity.
The 1960 Republic
 Agreed terms of cooperation and partnership,

 Shared the legislative, executive, judicial and other functions.

 The President was to be a Greek Cypriot while the Vice-President a Turkish Cypriot
 Legislative authority shall be vested in a House of Representatives elected by universal
suffrage of each community separately in the proportion of 70 % for the Greek community
and 30 % for the Turkish community

 Matters which the two peoples had managed on a Communal basis

over the centuries - like education, religion, family law, etc.- were left to
the autonomy of the Communal administrations with legislative,
executive, and judicial authority.

 A "functional federative system“

 The right to intervene was given to Turkey, Greece and Britian for the
restoration of the status of Cyprus in case of any change or
disturbance. (Treaty of Guarantee)
Short History Of The Republic
 Greek Cypriots did not intend to abide by the Constitution

Archbishop Makarios,
President of the Republic
of Cyprus in 1960

“The agreements do not form the goal -they are the present and not the
future. The Greek Cypriot people will continue their national cause and
shape their future in accordance with their will.” (28th July 1960)

"Until this Turkish community forming part of the Turkish race which
has been the terrible enemy of Hellenism is expelled, the duty of the
heroes of EOKA can never be considered terminated.”
(4th September 1962)
 The 1960 Constitution provided that separate municipalities be
established for Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots. The Greek
Cypriots refused to obey this mandatory provision.

 The Turkish Cypriots took the matter to the Supreme Constitutional

Court of Cyprus. The court comprised one Greek Cypriot judge, one
Turkish Cypriot judge, and a neutral President.

 On 25th April 1963 the Court did rule against the Greek Cypriots,
however it was ignored.

 Even Greece was embarrassed by this Greek Cypriot behaviour.

Greek Foreign Minister Averoff had written to Makarios on 19th April
1963 that
"It is not permissible for Greece in any circumstances to accept the
creation of a precedent by which one of the contracting parties can
unilaterally abrogate or ignore provisions that are irksome to it in
international acts which this same party has undertaken to respect."
The Cyprus Question
 November 1963, Greek Cypriots demanded the
abolition of 13 of the basic articles of the 1960
Constitution which protected the equal status of the
Turkish Cypriots,

 The aim was to reduce the Turkish Cypriot people to

a mere minority, subject to the control of the Greek
Cypriots, pending their ultimate destruction or
expulsion from the island.

 Turkish Cypriots and Turkey as guarantor rejected.

CIVILIAN MASSACRES 1963 -
1974
Akritas Plan
 When the Turkish Cypriots objected to the
amendment of the constitution Makarios put his plan
into effect, and the Greek Cypriot attack began in
December 1963.
 Civilian massacres took place under the notorious
"Akritas" plan, which was the blueprint for the
annihilation of the Turkish Cypriots and the
annexation of the island to Greece.
 Thereafter Turkish Cypriot members of Parliament,
judges, and other officials were intimidated or
prevented by force from carrying out their duties.
Christmas 1963

 Greek Cypriot militia attacked Turkish Cypriots

across the Island; many men, women, and children
killed. 270 of the mosques, shrines and other places
of worship desecrated. 103 T/C villages destroyed.
Civilian Massacres

"We went tonight into the sealed-off Turkish

Cypriot Quarter of Nicosia in which 200 to
300 people had been slaughtered in the last
five days. We were the first Western reporters
there and we have seen sights too frightful to
be described in print. Horror so extreme that
the people seemed stunned beyond tears."
(28th December 1963 the Daily Express
report from Cyprus)
Green Line - 30 December 1963
Nicosia Divided
 Following the division of Nicosia other cities
were also divided.
 Two separate administrations on the Island
was de facto established
Events of 1963-1964
 Consequence of the events of 1963-1964 was the emergence of
parallel administrative, judicial and legislative organs for each of the
two peoples.

 The Turkish Cypriots were ousted by force from all organs of the
Government

 Turkish Cypriots were forced to withdraw into enclaves, and it was in

1964, not in 1974, that Cyprus was divided. The Turkish Cypriots had
to establish an elected authority to govern themselves whilst being
confined in their enclaves.
Events of 1963-1964
 14th January 1964 the Daily Telegraph reported “the
exhumation of the Turkish Cypriot inhabitants of
Ayios Vassilious who had been massacred on 26th
December 1963 from a mass grave in the presence
of the Red Cross.
Events of 1963-1964

On 17th February 1964 the Washington Post

reported that Greek Cypriot fanatics appear
bent on ethnic cleansing
Events of 1963-1964
 The persecution of the Turkish Cypriots was an act of
policy on the part of the Greek Cypriot political and
religious leadership, which has to this day made no
serious attempt to bring the murderers to justice.
 UN peace-keeping force was stationed on the Island
in March 1964: to protect the Turkish Cypriots yet
could not manage to prevent these massacres
Events of 1963-1964
The UN Secretary-General reported to the Security
Council (UN doc.S/8286):

"When the disturbances broke out in December 1963

and continued during the first part of 1964 thousands
of Turkish-Cypriots fled their homes, taking with them
only what they could drive or carry, and sought
refuge in safer villages and areas."
The Cyprus Question
 Turkish-Cypriots had become refugees in their own
land.  In camps and enclaves (3% of Cyprus in
total)

 UN Secretary-General`s report (10 September 1964)

“The economic restrictions being imposed against the

Turkish Cypriot communities, which in some
instances has been so severe as to amount to
veritable siege, indicated that the Government of
Cyprus seeks to force a potential solution by
economic pressure." (UN doc. S/5950).
The Cyprus Question
 Political power was usurped by the Greek Cypriots

 The United Nations failed to condemn the usurpation of

the legal order in Cyprus by the Greek Cypriots,

 In fact the Security Council Res. 186 of 1964 has been

used for the illegitimate Greek Cypriot claims to be the
“Government of Cyprus”. This has continued to the
present day.
 In July 1965, when the Turkish Cypriot members of
the House of Representatives sought to resume their
seats: they were told that they could do so only if they
accepted the legislative changes to the operation of
the Constitution enacted in their absence
(ie. if they agreed to fundamental constitutional
changes to the great disadvantage of their
community, imposed upon them by force of arms).
 In 1971 General Grivas returned to Cyprus to form
EOKA-B, which was again committed to making
Cyprus a wholly Greek island and annexing it to
Greece. In a speech to the Greek Cypriot armed
forces (Quoted in "New Cyprus" May 1987),
Grivas said.

"The Greek forces from Greece have come to Cyprus

in order to impose the will of the Greeks of Cyprus
upon the Turks. We want ENOSIS but the Turks are
against it. We shall impose our will. We are strong
and we shall do so."
 By 15th July 1974 a powerful force of mainland Greek troops had assembled in
Cyprus and with their backing the Greek Cypriot National Guard, in a coup
d’etat, overthrew Makarios and installed Nicos Sampson, the leader of the
EOKA-B terrorist organisation as "President."

 Even Greek Cypriots sought Turkey's help. Many killed on the Greek side were
killed by Greek Cypriots in fighting between supporters of Makarios and
Sampson.

 In her memoirs, Greek Cypriot Member of Parliament Rina Katselli, says: "18th
July 1974: My God!... Everyone is frozen with fear..the old man who asked for
the body of his son was shot on the spot..The tortures and executions at the
central prison... everyone is frozen with horror. Nothing is sacred to these
people, and they call themselves Greeks!... we must not keep that name any
longer."

 On 19th July 1974, before the Turkish army landed, Archbishop Makarios told
the UN Security Council:
"I do not yet know the details of the Cyprus crisis caused by the Greek military
regime. I am afraid that the number of losses is great... I considered the danger
from Turkey lesser than the danger from Greek army officers."
Turkish Intervention

 After consultations with Britain which did not want to take joint
action under the Treaty of Guarantee, Turkey intervened as a
Guarantor Power on 20 July 1974 in conformity with its rights
and obligations deriving from the Treaty of Guarantee.

 Intervention by Turkey blocked the way to annexation of the

Island by Greece and brought security and hope, after eleven
years, to the Turkish Cypriots and brought democracy to Greece
 Nicos Sampson on 26th February 1981
"Had Turkey not intervened I would not only have proclaimed
ENOSIS - I would have annihilated the Turks in Cyprus.“

 Father Papatsestos:
"In is a rather hard thing to say, but it is true that the Turkish
intervention saved us from a merciless internecine war. The
Sampson regime had prepared a list of all Makarios supporters,
and they would have slaughtered them all." Many of the people
saved by Turkey are members of the present Greek Cypriot
leadership.
 International conference held at Geneva between
Turkey, Greece and Britain.

 It was agreed that Greek and Greek Cypriot forces

would leave all the Turkish Cypriot enclaves.

 But showing their customary disregard for

international agreements the GC proceeded instead
to murder almost the entire civilian population of six
Turkish Cypriot enclaves in both the north and south
of the island, and despite the presence of UN troops.
 In the village of Tokhni on 14th August 1974 all the
Turkish Cypriot men between the ages of 13 and 74,
except for eighteen who managed to escape, were
taken away and shot. (Times, Guardian, 21st August
1974)
 1975 Vienna Agreements
 voluntary population exchange
 Bi-zonality, Bi-communality

 No joint government since 1963

 Parallel organs
 Turkish Cypriot Federated State in 1975
 TRNC since 15 November 1983
 TRNC

DİKELYA

GCA

AKROTİRİ
 For over four decades the Turkish Cypriots awaited a just
and viable solution which would put an end to their unjust
isolation and inhuman embargoes on their economic,
social, cultural and political life and looked forward to the
day their ex-partners would finally realize that the island of
Cyprus was the common home of the Turkish and Greek
Cypriots alike who should share and have an equal say
over its destiny.

 Turkish Cypriots never lost their will or determination for a

durable solution which would ensure that history would not
repeat itself and has always supported the efforts carried
out under the good offices mission of the United Nations
Secretary-General towards finding a just and viable
settlement to the Cyprus issue.
MISSED OPPORTUNITIES
Comprehensive Negotiations
 1968-1974 Inter-communal talks
 1977 & 1979 High Level Agreements
(Bi-zonal, bi-communal federation)
 1980-1983 UN peace talks (a settlement could not be reached
because the GC demanded that the TC joined the GC)
 In order to maintain equal status the TC declared the TRNC in
1983
 1984 UNSG’s Vienna Working Points
MISSED OPPORTUNITIES FOR A SETTLEMENT
The Greek Cypriot side rejected
 1986 Draft Framework Agreement (Perez de Cueller)
 1992 Set of Ideas & 1994 CBM Package (Butros Ghali)
 2004 UN Comprehensive Settlement Plan in April 2004. (Kofi
Annan)
THE ANNAN PLAN
 The direct talks which began in January 2002 between the
TRNC President Denktaş and the Greek Cypriot leader Clerides
resulted with the presentation of the first draft settlement Plan by
the UN Secretary General Annan in November 2002.

 The international community as well as the EU rendered their

support for a settlement in Cyprus.

 President Denktaş and the Greek Cypriot leader Clerides

agreed to start direct negotiations on 15 January 2003.

 UNSG Annan, presented the 3rd version of the Plan on 26

February 2003 and invited the leaders to Hague.

 After the meeting in Hague the negotiations were cut off.

THE ANNAN PLAN
 Turkey and the TRNC took another initiative to restart the
negotiations for a just and lasting settlement to the issue.

 In this framework the UNSG Annan invited the leaders as well

as Turkey and Greece to New York. With the positive attitude of
the Turkish Cypriot side during the meetings in New York held
between 10-13 November 2004, direct negotiations began.

 Under the agreement reached in New York, President Denktaş

and the Greek Cypriot leader Papadopoulos were to negotiate
the Annan Plan until a certain period of time, and in the points
where the two sides were not able to reach an agreement the
negotiations would continue with the participation of Turkey and
Greece. At the end, in the points where agreement has not been
reached the UNSG would fill in the blanks and present the final
text to the leaders to be put to separate simultaneous referenda.
THE ANNAN PLAN
 In the talks held in the Island between 19 February and 22 March 2004,
the two sides were not able to reach an agreement at the political level
although some progress was achieved at technical level.

 The final phase of the talks began on 24 March 2004 in Switzerland

with the participation of the two motherlands and Guarantor powers
Greece and Turkey.

 On 31 March, the UN Secretary-General submitted the final text of the

plan to the parties. The UN Secretary-General finalized the Plan with
the contribution of all parties.

 The EU Commission was also present at the final stage of the

negotiations in Switzerland and the EU commitments with regard to the
comprehensive settlement were agreed upon between the parties and
the EU Commission.
THE ANNAN PLAN
 The Plan foresaw a partnership between the Greek Cypriot
State and the Turkish Cypriot State. As the UN Secretary-
General Mr. Annan said in his speech of 31 March 2004, “a new
state of affairs would emerge, far better designed than the
one of 1960.”

 The Foundation Agreement envisaged the establishment of a

United Cyprus, based on

 new bi-zonal partnership, based on political equality

 Neither side may claim authority or jurisdiction over the

other

 federal government and two Constituent States, namely

“the Greek Cypriot State” and “the Turkish Cypriot State”.
THE ANNAN PLAN
 The Main Articles of the Foundation Agreement envisaged
that

“The Constituent States are of equal status, each of them

exercises its authority within its territorial boundaries”
and that “the identity, territorial integrity, security and
constitutional order of the Constituent States shall be
safeguarded and respected by all.”

“The Greek Cypriots and the Turkish Cypriots affirmed

that Cyprus is their common home and acknowledged
each other’s distinct identity and integrity and that their
relationship is not one of majority and minority but of
political equality, where neither side may claim
authority or jurisdiction over the other.”
THE ANNAN PLAN
 Although the Plan did not satisfy the Turkish side,
Turkey and the Turkish Cypriots supported it for the
sake of a compromise.

 According to the Plan;

 1/3 population of Northern Cyprus was expected to be
displaced.(Third major displacement in 40 years)

 1960 Guarantee Agreements would continue but the

number of Greek and Turkish troops on the Island would
be reduced to the level of the 1960 Agreements (950 and
650 respectively)

 Considerable T/C territorial concessions - serious social and

economic consequences
THE ANNAN PLAN
 At the closing of the Cyprus talks in Bürgenstock on 31 March
2004, the UN Secretary-General submitted the final version of
the Annan Plan to the approval of the two parties with these
remarks:

“The choice is not between a settlement plan and some other

magical or mythical solution. In reality, at this stage, the choice
is between this settlement and no settlement. There have been
too many missed opportunities in the past. For the sake of all of
you and your people, I urge you not to make the same mistake
again.”

Similar calls directed at both peoples and their leaderships in

the Island were also made by several countries and international
organizations before the referenda were held.
THE AFTERMATH

 The Greek Cypriot people were directed to a “NO”

vote by their leaders.
 Referanda on 24 April 2004
 T/Cs accepted by 65 %
 G/Cs rejected by 76%
 The Greek Cypriot side became an EU
Member
 Isolations on Turkish Cypriots continue
THE AFTERMATH
 The rejectionist approach by the Greek Cypriot leadership caused
wide-spread reaction from the international community, including the
UN Secretary-General and EU officials.

 The UN Secretary-General underlined in his report of 28 May 2004 to

the Security Council (S/2004/437)

“If the Greek Cypriots are ready to share power and prosperity with the
Turkish Cypriots in a federal structure based on political equality, this
needs to be demonstrated, not just by word, but by action” (para.86)

 UNSG Report on his Mission of Good Offices in Cyprus, dated 3 June

2004,

“The rejection of such a plan by the Greek Cypriot electorate is a major

setback. What was rejected was the solution itself rather than a
mere blueprint.”
THE AFTERMATH

 Applauding the Turkish Cypriots who approved the

plan, notwithstanding the significant sacrifices that it
entailed for many of them, the Secretary-General
regretted that

“the Turkish Cypriots will not equally enjoy the

benefits of EU membership as of 1 May 2004” but he
hoped that “way will be found to ease the plight in
which the people find themselves through no fault of
their own.”
WHAT HAS BEEN SAID & WHAT HAS
BEEN DONE AFTER THE REFERENDA?

 Report of the UN Secretary-General (28 May 2004)

The Turkish Cypriot vote has undone any rationale for pressuring and
isolating them. I would hope that the members of the Council can give a
strong lead to all States to cooperate both bilaterally and in international
bodies, to eliminate unnecessary restrictions and barriers that have the
effect of isolating the Turkish Cypriots and impeding their development
— not for the purposes of affording recognition or assisting secession,
but as a positive contribution to the goal of reunification.

 Decision of the European Council on 26 April 2004

put an end to the isolation of the T/Cs
 Direct Trade Regulation blocked by the G/Cs
 Green Line Regulation not functioning properly
 Financial Aid Regulation projects obstructed by the G/Cs
RESTRICTIONS IMPOSED
ON THE TURKISH CYPRIOTS
 Restrictive measures are being applied by the Greek Cypriot side against the Turkish
Cypriots since December 1963.

 There is no Security Council Resolution enforcing such restrictions on the Turkish Cypriots.

 In order to justify their inhuman restrictions to Turkish Cypriots, Greek Cypriots from 1983
onwards always referred to UN Security Council resolutions 541(1983) and 550(1984)
regarding to the declaration of the TRNC.

 The international community, intentionally or unintentionally, went along with the distorted
Greek Cypriot interpretation of the afore-mentioned UN resolutions and avoided any contact,
be it even cultural with the Turkish Cypriots.

 In fact, The UN Secretary-General Ban underlined, in his report to the Security Council on
the activities carried out by the UN Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus (S/2007/699) that;
“Recognition, or assisting secession, would be contrary to the resolutions of the Security
Council. Rather, the objective should be to engender greater economic and social parity
between the sides by further promoting the development of the Turkish Cypriot community,
so that the reunification of the island may occur in as seamless a manner as possible. The
maintenance of economic, social, cultural, sporting or similar ties or contacts does not
amount to recognition.”
RESTRICTIONS IMPOSED
ON THE TURKISH CYPRIOTS
 Turkish Cypriots cannot have unhindered trade with other
countries.

 The intra-Island trade is also extremely limited.

 The Greek Cypriot Administration unilaterally claimed that the

sea ports in North Cyprus are closed for international traffic of
goods and persons.

 No direct flights to North Cyprus, except flights to and from

Turkey

 International banking services are restricted for North Cyprus.

RESTRICTIONS IMPOSED
ON THE TURKISH CYPRIOTS
 Turkish Cypriots cannot travel freely. Their travel documents are
only accepted by a limited number of countries.

 They cannot participate in international sports, cultural and

social activities, including fairs and exhibitions.

 Turkish Cypriots cannot have phone and postal services with

the outside world.

 Foreign dignitaries are prevented by the Greek Cypriot

Administration from visiting Turkish Cypriot officials since 2005.
RESTRICTIONS IMPOSED
ON THE TURKISH CYPRIOTS
 Turkish Cypriots cannot have contacts and cooperation with the
international organizations and specialized agencies, such as
Interpol and World Health Organization.

 Approximately 48 thousand higher education students, most of

which are foreigners attend universities in North Cyprus. The
Greek Cypriot authorities are also blocking academic
cooperation between these universities and higher education
institutions from other countries.

 Greek Cypriot authorities try to curtail the tourism flow to

Northern Cyprus
FUNDAMENTAL BASIS OF A
SETTLEMENT
Internal balance:
 Equal partnership of the two peoples
Polical equality and
Equal status of the two Constituent States
External balance:
 Maintain the balance between Turkey and
Greece over Cyprus & East Mediterranean
 Turkey must enjoy the same rights on Cyprus
as Greece
PARAMETERS on SUBSTANCE
 Political equality of two sides,
 Equal status of two Constituent States,
 New Partnership State,
 New State of Affairs,
 Bi-zonality, Bi-communality,
 Power sharing,
 Settlement must become EU primary law
 No hierarchy, no domination, no jurisdiction
 Treaties of Guarantee and Alliance,
 Separate simultaneous referenda,
PARAMETERS on PROCEDURE
 Good Offices Mission of the  No preconditions. All issues
UNSG on the table

 Equal footing  Negotiate until a settlement

is reached
 Mutual acceptability
 Reasonable time frame
 Each side represents itself
and no one else
 Deadlock resolving
mechanisms
 Endorsement of the UN
Security Council
 “Integrated whole” approach
CONFIDENCE BUILDING
MEASURES (CBMs)
 After being elected (17 April 2005), President Talat
proposed the following package of CBMs in his letter
of 6 July 2006 to the UN Secretary-General:
 Deconfrontation

 Military exercises

 Lokmacı (Ledra Street) crossing point

 Reconciliation Commission
CONFIDENCE BUILDING
MEASURES
 President Talat on 16 October 2007 detailed his
proposals

 New crossing points and passages:

 Opening of the Lokmacı (Ledra) crossing point;

 Opening of the Yeşilırmak (Limnitis) crossing point;

 Ensuring free passage to and from Erenköy (Kokkina)

 Opening the Yiğitler-Pyla road

 Cooperation through UNFICYP

 Erenköy
(Kokkina) TRNC
LOKMACI
(LEDRA)

Yeşilırmak (Limnitis)
The Area that
will benefit from
the opening
of the gate
Pile Road
DİKELYA

GCA

AKROTİRİ
NEW PROCESS – 21 MARCH 2008
NEW PROCESS
21 March 2008 Meeting
CORE ISSUES TECHNICAL COMMITTEES
(Working Groups)
1. Governance and 1. Crime/criminal matters
power sharing 2. Economic and commercial
2. Property matters
3. EU matters 3. Cultural heritage
4. Economic matters 4. Crisis management
5. Security and 5. Humanitarian matters
guarantees 6. Health
6. Territory 7. Environment
Confidence Building Measures

 The Lokmacı (Ledra Street) crossing point which has remained

closed since 1963 opened through T/C initiative on 3 April 2008
Confidence Building Measures
 The two leaders, in their meeting of 26 June 2009 decided to
proceed with the opening of Yeşilırmak(Limnitis) crossing point.

 In this context;
 Crossing of TRNC citizens to Erenköy(Kokkina) will take place with the
escort of UNFICYP.
 Transfer of supplies of non-military nature to Erenkoy will also be done
with UNFICYP escort.
 In case of fire, T/C fire engines and accompanying water tanks will be
able to call at Erenköy.
 Reciprocally, G/C ambulances will cross in the opposite direction to
hospitals.
 Ambulances will be able to go to Erenköy
 Erenköy will be connected to the nearest electricity grid before the
opening of the crossing point.
 Erenköy
(Kokkina) TRNC

Yeşilırmak (Limnitis)
The Area that
will benefit from
the opening
of the gate

DİKELYA

GCA

AKROTİRİ
NEW PROCESS
23 May Meeting – Joint Statement

The two Leaders “reaffirmed their commitment to a bi-

zonal, bi-communal federation with political
equality, as defined by relevant Security Council
resolutions”.

They agreed that “This partnership will have a Federal

Government with a single international personality,
as well as a Turkish Cypriot Constituent State and
a Greek Cypriot Constituent State, which will be of
equal status.”
NEW PROCESS
1 July Meeting – Joint Statement
The leaders agreed in principle on the issues
of single sovereignty and citizenship.

The details of their implementation will be

discussed during the full-fledged
negotiations
NEW PROCESS
25 July Meeting – Joint Statement
“The aim of the full-fledged negotiations is to
find a mutually acceptable solution to the
Cyprus problem which will safeguard the
fundamental and legitimate rights and
interests of Greek Cypriots and Turkish
Cypriots.

The agreed solution will be put to separate

simultaneous referenda.”
COMPREHENSIVE SETTLEMENT
NEGOTIATIONS

 Began on 3 September 2008

 The two leaders met regularly – Covered the issues

of “Governance and Power-Sharing”, “Property”, “EU
Affairs”, “Economic Matters”, “Territory” and “Security
and Guarantees”
GC APPROACH
 Not enough momentum, rejects frequent meetings, uses
delaying tactics

 Back-tracking from Leaders’ Joint Statement of 23 May

 Questions fundamental concepts & established parameters

 Allegations against Turkey and the Turkish Cypriot side

 Maritime economic activity in the Eastern Mediterranean

 Armament efforts

 Tightened the isolations upon the T/Cs.

TC APPROACH
 Negotiating in good faith & constructive attitude

 Solution by the end of 2009; demanding a more

active UN Role & reasonable timetable for a
settlement

 UN parameters / UN Comprehensive Settlement Plan

starting point and base line.

 A New Cyprus
 A new state of affairs
 A new partnership state / a federal government with two
constituent states
 Coming into being with a transition period
TC APPROACH
 Bi-zonality / permanent derogations from the EU acquis

 Property rights without undermining bi-zonality / ceilings

 Political equality / power sharing mechanisms / rotation

 Internally Swiss model / externally Belgian model

 Turkey’s continuing guarantee

 Legal certainty and security of the settlement within the EU /

Primary law
TURKEY’S APPROACH
 Legitimate rights and interests in Cyprus and the Eastern
Mediterranean
 Actively supports UNSG’s good offices mission and T/C
sides constructive approach for a solution

 Turkey’s Action Plan of 24 January 2006 (S/2006/48)

 simultaneous lifting of all restrictions

 Treaty of Guarantee and Treaty of Alliance are essential for

a solution
 Settlement to preserve the balance between Turkey and
Greece / Peaceful and harmonious Eastern Mediterranean
 Equal treatment of the two motherlands Greece and Turkey
in Cyprus
EXPECTATIONS FROM THE
INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY

 Respect equality of status and titles of both sides.

 Support UNSG good offices mission

 Encourage the G/C side for a solution and urge them

to adopt a disciplined procedure and timeframe

 Remove isolations / Increase contacts with the T/C

side