By This post is also available in: ΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΑ (GREEK) TÜRKÇE (TURKISH)
Ersin Tatar was yesterday’s guest on our programme, Agenda [Gündem]. In the programme, which broke viewing records, Tatar gave evasive answers to almost all the questions I asked and kept talking about his own rhetoric.
For example, he thinks that what he has done during his term of office is a great achievement, and not only does he think that way, but he also lives in a different reality.
He has turned his time at the summit of the Organization of Turkic States into a success story, which we are unable to comprehend, by saying, “We used to stand beside the table; now we sit at the table.”
When I pressed him and said, “But the declaration signed in Samarkand in April directly refers to UN Security Council Resolutions 541 and 550, which prohibit the recognition of the TRNC,” he replied, “They had to do it because they needed loans from the EU!”
I wonder what Ilham Aliyev, whom he calls ‘Ali’ and describes as his ‘close friend,’ would say if he heard these arrogant answers.
While he was talking about these as successes, I reminded him of the visit of former the US President, then Vice President, Joe Biden to Derviş Eroğlu, and Mehmet Ali Talat’s visit to the White House, he fell silent and moved on to other topics!
I also asked him about the incidents that took place at the famous press conference in Geneva in April 2021, where the two of us were the main protagonists.
For those who don’t remember, following the summit where Tatar and Turkey presented what they claimed was a new but actually old Taksim thesis, the then Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu had suddenly said, “Anastasiadis offered us Maraş in exchange for Ercan, and we rejected it.” Despite not having the right to raise a question in that moment, I had interjected and asked, “Why did you reject this formula, which the Greeks have rejected for years and which we have been demanding?”. Yesterday, I gave refernce to the same question and asked, “Would you accept it if it were offered now?”
On that day in Geneva, despite the fact that he was the one who got angry at the question before Çavuşoğlu, scolded me, and then sent a message to say, “Sorry, I tried to improvise,” yesterday his answer was, “That didn’t happen.”
When I pressed him further, he replied, “Maraş is our property. If we give it up and get direct flight rights to Ercan, it would be dangerous because the Greeks could later revoke that decision, and Maraş would be lost!”
So either Mr. Tatar thinks international law is child’s play, or he’s living in another world. That’s what I understood from his answers.
Yet, these weren’t the only bombshells of the programme.
For example, I asked him about the statements of Nikos Hristodulidis (whom he referred to as Hristofiyas several times during the programme) that were reported in the press, such as “Tatar won’t let me open the door because the army does not give him the permission” and “Erdoğan is not asked questions, he is given answers.” He replied, “That’s completely false.”
Then, when I pressed him again, he got annoyed, frowned, and shifted the topic to security issues.
I also asked him, “You once offered to negotiate sovereignty in exchange for land. Would you make the same offer now?”. He got angry and said, “If I answer that, you’ll take the topic somewhere else.” Then he turned around and said, “Denktaş suggested 29+ at the time, it was left unresolved; I am taking it up to 35.” He also said, “Times have changed!”, and went on and on.
Mr. Tatar, explaining that he had never put the recognition of the TRNC as a precondition, evaded my questions about ‘what is meant by sovereign equality’ with vague answers.
But the same Mr. Tatar did not hesitate to accuse Hristodulidis of not negotiating with him because he did not recognise the TRNC.
In his interview with Fidias, when reminded of his answer to the question, “Why did you say no to the Annan plan?”—namely, ‘Because the plan would have led to indirect Enosis’—and when asked, “If the TRNC is recognised and a two-state solution is implemented, wouldn’t we join the EU in the same sense?” he replied, “We want to establish privileged relations with the EU separately from Turkey.”
When pressed, “So, as the TRNC, will we just do as we please within the EU?” he replied, “I already want a two-state solution under the EU umbrella. Ask Kudret Özersay, if you so wish!”
As I said, Mr. Tatar seems to be living in a completely different world, and we are quite far from that world.
When I asked him, “Are you afraid of Tufan Erhürman? Why don’t you appear on programmes with him?” he replied, “I’m not afraid of him; his time will come.” He then added, “I get to decide when we are going to do that.”
I took the opportunity to say, “I’m inviting both of you; I’ll moderate, let’s do an impartial programme, now promise me,” but he dodged that too: “I don’t give promises to anyone!”
In short, no matter what I asked, he brushed off my questions with his usual joking and teasing manner, repeating lines from Vehbi Zeki Serter’s famous history book over and over again.
Despite this, we had a good laugh both before and after the programme.
When the programme ended, I teased him, “See, Mr. President, those who wanted us to fight didn’t get what they wanted.” He burst out laughing and said, “Let them wait.”
Then, like all Cypriots, we moved on to talking about going out for a bite to eat, and we drank our coffees.
The truth is that Mr. Tatar is a very sincere man. When I told him that he had collected many points from the Fidias interview, he was pleased and said, “I liked Fidias’ work too.”
If Fidias had known his history, which he doesn’t, saying, “I don’t know anything about politics,” he would have corrected Mr. Tatar when he linked the 1963 events to the Greek junta, and said, “Wait, Mr. Tatar, there were still four years to go before the junta” but that didn’t happen.
Therefore, Mr. Tatar is a sincere, pleasant man with excellent social skills. I even agree with his bold claim to Fidias that “If the Greek Cypriot people knew me, they would have loved me more than they love Akıncı.”
Why?
Because we have been in Greek Cypriot taverns with a mutual friend many times, and when we called him, the Greek Cypriots in the tavern would talk to him on the phone for minutes, calling him “Re Ersin!’”and then say, ‘very good man’ about him!
If he was given the chance, he would win over all the Greek Cypriots!
To tell you the truth, if Mr. Tatar had a ‘federal’ philosophy like his family, I am sure that with his social skills, he would have given the Greek Cypriots a hard time.
However, he is definitely not a federalist, and like his fellow idealists in the north of the island, he has dedicated himself to the partition of Cyprus.
And there is no doubt that he will fail just like the right-wing state leaders he follows.
Because even though he sings the song ‘the federation is dead’ at the top of his lungs, and even seems to believe it, the situation on planet earth is not like that at all!
Nevertheless, I commend him for his courage. Even though we don’t share the same views, he came on my programme and we had a civilised discussion.
I asked, he ran away, I chased him, he ran faster.
I thank everyone who showed interest in the programme, sent messages, and valued it…
This article was originally published on 17.07.2025
Source: HE RAN AWAY, I CHASED HIM…
