By ΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΑ (GREEK) TÜRKÇE (TURKISH)
The echoes of the Gymnich summit (Informal Meeting of EU Foreign Ministers) held in Brussels last week continue.
By echoes, I mean that the meeting was more positive than expected and the messages given afterwards have created optimism both in Turkey-EU relations and the Cyprus problem.
Although the statement made by the Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan on his return to Ankara that “Turkey-EU relations should be evaluated separately from the Cyprus problem” has upset some people, it is already a known fact that this cannot be possible both in theory and in practice.
If there is a possibility of this, I am sure that Greece will support this request first and foremost. Because the reality beyond the imagination of our jingoist team is that Greece does not even want to hear the ‘C’ in the Cyprus problem.
In fact, the two statements that marked the Gymnich summit came from the Greek Foreign Minister Gerapetritis.
Before the meeting, the Greek minister advised his Turkish counterpart, whom he hosted at the Permanent Representation of Greece in Brussels, that ‘Cyprus negotiations have to start’, and then stated after the meeting that his country supports Turkey on its path to EU.
It is well known that the two countries have recently established warm relations, especially after President Erdoğan’s historic visit to Athens and the signing of the historic Athens Declaration.
And it is also known that the Cyprus problem is one of the issues that will spoil this beautiful and productive relationship.
The ‘Famagusta’ series, which has caused nationalist delirium in the last few days, is exactly the kind of issue that will be a sign of this. [Editor’s note: reference to a television series on Netflix]
No, I am not going to go into that issue because I think I am educated enough to know that the history of Cyprus is already a ‘history of disinformation’. However, I cannot stand it when some things are completely denied, and when people act as though certain things never happened, or were never lived. A message I shared on social media on this issue and the discussions that took place in the comments section are indications of what the proponents of non-solution are planning. Yet, I am not the matter of discussion here.
But, for example, Ersin Tatar‘s desire to speak to the Turkish media, which has intensified due to the upcoming elections, and his statement that ‘this series is a sinister game of Greeks and Greek Cypriots’ is another example of the potential to ‘spoil the relationship’ I wrote above.
However, I say let’s leave these issues aside because the Cyprus problem is experiencing its most heated days since the 2017 Crans Montana summit.
The general theme of what was discussed at Gymnich also indicates that this problem is no longer sustainable.
As a matter of fact, the annual UN meetings to be held in September and the road map that may emerge afterwards are of vital importance.
Writing a very striking article last week, journalist Yusuf Kanlı, who has close relations with Ankara, talks about just such a road map.
According to Kanlı, Secretary-General Antonio Guterres is leaning towards taking the initiative once again. I say ‘once again’ because in his first days in office, he had taken the necessary initiative on the Cyprus problem, which fell in his hands, without hesitation, but this initiative was interrupted in the foothills of the Alps in a very luxurious holiday resort; however, it did not end there.
Nowadays, it is obvious that the Secretary-General wants to ‘blow on cold water’, so to speak, and that he has been scrutinising without getting too ‘excited’ over the matter.
However, there is another very critical point here. What I mean is the situation of Maria Holguin, who is seen as the ‘successor’ of the Secretary-General and is even expected to be the first female Secretary-General of the UN according to various diplomatic sources.
I say ‘situation’ because some circles, the opponents of a solution, those who want the status quo to continue as it is, and the captains of jingoism on both sides are adamant that Holguin’s tenure, which lasted for the first 6 months of 2024, was a ‘failure’ and that the job is over.
But if Holguin returned empty-handed, as they say, why are we still talking about the start of a process?
More importantly, why is Holguin’s report to Guterres being kept secret?
What is written in that report? Why is no one speaking openly about the road map that Holguin has outlined and that will somehow work in everyone’s favour?
Yusuf Kanlı wrote in his article last week that the Cyprus problem is not only an ‘inter-communal’ but also an international issue involving Turkey, the most geostrategic actor in the Eastern Mediterranean with a population of nearly 90 million. There is no doubt that it will be resolved on international platforms.
In other words, the Cyprus problem and its solution is not only decisive for Turkey-EU relations, but also for the Eastern Mediterranean as well as the equation in the Middle East. The framework for this is also laid out in that article.
What is needed is a road map, and Holguin has obviously laid this map out in general terms.
That is why the negotiations for the settlement of the Cyprus problem are being drawn in unprecedented ways this time, for example, with an arbitrator, with a timetable and with ‘who gets what’ in the end. In other words, a result-orientated path. No work for nothing!
In other words, as the Greek Cypriot press put forward, and as I wrote in my last article, ‘those who drag their heels’ will be punished!
As I have written many times before, the Guterres criteria, which consist of 6 articles, essentially talk about a solution that envisages a decentralised federation. Yusuf Kanlı also mentions this model and the confederal model in his article. In my opinion, the word ‘confederal’ is out of the question because that model can only work between two recognized structures. The decentralised model, on the other hand, is a type of federal solution, but practically, if not theoretically, it is similar to a confederal structure.
I have talked a lot about a ‘federation by evolution’, that is, an evolutionary federation, which I think is the model that resonates with what is described above the most.
What is it? Simply this: Let’s create a common state with minimum shared authority (and the most functional) through a decentralised model, let everyone maintain ‘municipal’ services (Health, Public Works, Education, etc.) in their own constituent state, and if the common state succeeds and future generations want to share more authority, let them do so.
Evolution can shed light on human history but also on politics if it is utilized as an instrument by it. Sounds utopian? I am no Thomas More but when I see the certainty, rationality and especially the necessity of certain things, I do not hesitate to assert these opinions.
Therefore, we have to take an evolutionary approach not only to the formula to be achieved through the settlement of the Cyprus problem, but also to the settlement process.
In this context, I wrote in an article last year that ‘the appointment of a special envoy, or a personal representative means a start’.
This has happened, the representative has been appointed, and now the next step is to organise a trilateral meeting.
On the other hand, the Turkish side has rejected at least 2 proposals in the last 2-3 months. Because a trilateral meeting will be interpreted as the beginning of something. Changing the rhetoric once again is not something that will happen just like that, so we will go ‘siga siga’ [Editor’s note: meaning ‘slowly’ in Greek].
So, what will happen in September?
Here is what will happen: Guterres will meet with the parties one by one within the framework of UN meetings. He will shape the road map and then he will make a call for a trilateral meeting.
The information I received is that this trilateral meeting will take place in the aftermath of the New York meetings, which I think is quite logical.
In other words, instead of an agenda in which the problems of the whole world are discussed and thousands of issues are on the agenda, a relatively much calmer period means, of course, focusing on the issue.
If this trilateral meeting is called, I think the process will start by itself and then – if there is an intention or if the negotiations yield results – we will enter a new negotiation process.
At this point, the period until October 2025, when the TRNC presidential elections will be held, may be very critical, and the process may turn into some sort of a referendum.
But we do not need to go into this now, we will see what will happen.
So first twosome, then threesome, and finally group…
And let this be the humour of it…
