A news report from the TRNC press dated 21 October 2026:
“President Ersin Tatar shared his views on the Cyprus issue during the ‘Er Meydanı’ programme, presented by Mustafa Alkan and broadcast on Genç TV.
Stating that the leader of the Greek Cypriot Administration, Nikos Christodoulidis, had not presented him with a written ‘19-point package’, Tatar said he could not accept the proposal to transfer Varosha to United Nations (UN) administration and to open Famagusta Port to direct trade under European Union (EU) control.
Whilst sharing the details of the Varosha-Famagusta Port proposal, which has long been debated in the Cypriot press, Tatar also explained why he had not attended the trilateral meeting in New York.
Stating that he was opposed to negotiations being conducted merely for the sake of holding talks, Tatar said: “I will not negotiate just for the sake of negotiating. I will not keep you dragging this out at this table for another ten years.”
Tatar described the proposal put forward by Greek Cypriot leader Nikos Christodoulidis in the following terms:
“To transfer Varosha to United Nations administration, in line with Security Council resolutions; and to open Famagusta Port under EU control. That is what has been said.”
Emphasising that the Port of Famagusta is already open, Tatar pointed out that the real problem is the inability to trade directly with the European Union. “The Port of Famagusta is an open port. Famagusta Port is not a closed port. The problem with our ports is that we are unable to engage in direct trade with the European Union,” said Tatar, adding that he had asked Christodoulides whether the direct trade regulation would come into force and had received a negative response. Tatar explained that the proposal did not envisage the direct trade regulation coming into force, but rather the commencement of direct trade on the basis of the Port of Famagusta being under EU control, and made the following remarks:
“Is this about the direct trade regulation coming into force? No, it is not about the regulation coming into force. But it is about direct trade commencing because it is under EU control.”
Arguing that the proposal was unbalanced, Tatar questioned the linking of the transfer of Varosha to UN administration with the opening of the Port of Famagusta.
“Why is this becoming a quid pro quo for handing Varosha over to UN administration? Are these balanced measures?” asked Tatar, noting also that the formula in question was not new. Pointing out that a similar proposal had been raised in 2006 during the term of the then President, Mehmet Ali Talat, Tatar stated: “This formula was put forward in 2006 during Mr Talat’s presidency. In other words, 20 years have passed since then; yet it has been presented as a new formula 20 years later.”
Clearly stating his stance on the proposal, Tatar said, “This is not something I can accept.” Tatar noted that the proposal had resurfaced, recalling that Talat had rejected it in 2006 and explained the reasons for his rejection.
Is there anything you find strange? When the name of Ersin Tatar – a figure from the Rauf Denktaş school of thought – was substituted in the article for that of Tufan Erhürman, who had defeated him by a landslide exactly one year ago to take that seat, did the events described in the article sound strange?
Of course not!
So what does that mean? It seems the matter is determined not by the man, but by the seat!
Let’s not take anything away from him: Tufan Erhürman is not the sort of man who goes around pulling the tail of every crocodile he comes across, like Ersin Tatar! (See: May 2024, visit to The Gambia) [Editor’s note: reference to a trip Ersin Tatar took to Gambia where he posed with a crocodile while holding its tail.]
Nor is he the sort of man who, whilst visiting a school, gets carried away playing football with the youngsters, heads the ball in mid-air and ends up cutting his hand and eye!
He’s certainly not the sort to hop on a plane at the drop of a hat to go on a trip to Turkey, or anywhere else!
Tufan Erhürman is a serious man. Ersin Tatar is not a serious man!
Erhürman is someone who’s a master of wordplay, who says a lot without actually saying anything, who takes no initiative, who takes no action, and who isn’t an entrepreneur.
Tatar, on the other hand, is an enterprising man who speaks his mind rather than resorting to wordplay; who never hesitates to take the initiative; who, upon spotting the Greek Prime Minister in the corridor, would pounce on him and force a conversation; and who, because he knows the business world so well, does not shy away from taking risks.
I am truly saddened that he could so easily squander the legacy of the elections he won exactly a year ago—a victory that thrilled not only us, but the South and the whole world.
To be honest, I never imagined that a year later I’d be writing his name in place of Tatar’s, making this comparison, and engaging in such satire!
But he made me do it!
How could I not! So many things come to mind!
For instance, at the Geneva summit in 2021, the then Greek Cypriot leader Nikos Anastasiadis proposed, “Ercan in exchange for Varosha”, and it was rejected!
It was essentially Turkey that rejected it, and this was explained by the then Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu.
It was me who, upon hearing this at that press conference, intervened and asked the question! Tatar got very angry with me and gave me a dressing-down, in his own way, live on air!
Later, it was he who sent me a message saying, “I was improvising there, don’t take it personally”!
Unlike in politics, Tatar was a genuinely sincere man when it came to personal relationships. I certainly did not agree with his views, but it was almost impossible not to like him!
Erhürman is also a good man; we hold him in high regard, but it is fair to say that his ideas are not original and that he has become estranged from his true self.
How else can one explain that someone who boasted of having ‘written the book on federation’ has now gone and removed that very word from even everyday usage!
Returning to the current issue, at the end of the 5.5 years that have passed, it is once again Turkey that has rejected the proposal—this time phrased as ‘the port of Famagusta in exchange for Varosha’. Erhürman, meanwhile, is merely acting as the ‘messenger’ conveying this response to the other side; nothing more!
This attitude of rejecting everything—first dismissed with statements such as “I did not reject it, it was not proposed, I did not receive a proposal”, and then ‘admitted’ as if nothing had happened—is extremely grave and regrettable.
For Erhürman, just as was said of Tatar, is someone who has been given the directive to say ‘no’ to all steps that would lead to progress on the issue of a federal Cyprus.
Turkey has, for at least the last 10 years, effectively discarded the federal solution model; any step back along this path runs counter to the policy currently being pursued. This is why Devlet Bahçeli keeps reminding people, at every opportunity and in the most unexpected places, to ‘stay alert – the federation is over’.
On the other hand, all the issues discussed—whether under the UN mandate, or in the broader literature on the Cyprus problem—constitute the substance of a federal solution.
The so-called ‘two-state solution’ has never been the subject of any official meeting, nor will it be in the future.
In this vein, the ‘methodology’ issue that has been thrust upon Erhürman is one of the most useful stumbling blocks recently devised by Turkey. Thanks to this stumbling block – or these preconditions – negotiations will never begin. In this context, I must give credit where credit is due to those who devised it.
And this new invention is precisely the sort of stumbling block that a wordsmith like Erhürman could easily explain!
If we also take into account his knack for skilfully mixing fact with fiction, it was actually not at all difficult to realise that Tatar was entirely unsuitable for this task. Consequently, the necessary consensus to select a new and serious figure had already been reached.
In fact, ever since that surprise visit to New York in September 2024, disguised as a ‘Socialist International’ event! And ever since the 50-day parliamentary leadership crisis that coincided with those very same days!
Indeed, the fact that Erhürman secured nearly 10 percent more votes than even the most ardent CTP supporters had anticipated is the most significant indication of that consensus.
Speaking of CTP, I note that there are those who attribute Erhürman’s immense vote share to themselves and believe the same shift will occur in the general election.
If I may remind these friends, Erhürman – who secured 63 per cent of the vote yet achieved nothing in a year, and who has driven hopes for a solution into the mire – is no longer a suitable example of ‘success’ for you.
When someone approaches you tomorrow and says, “We trusted Erhürman, and it was a disappointment; what makes you think you won’t be the same?”, what will you say?
In my view, you need to stop seeing yourselves through rose-tinted glasses, get a grip on the situation, and, if possible, stop leaving the Cyprus issue to the ‘Külliye’[Editor’s note: reference to the new presidential palace]! Take this as advice from a ‘friend’!
Finally, the word ‘politics’ derives from the Arabic term ‘siyasa’, which essentially means ‘horse trainer’.
How tragic it is that on the very day the ‘admission’ was made that the Varosha proposal had been rejected, and on the day Turkey signed the memorandum of understanding with Libya – which is likely to cause major tensions at sea – Tufan Erhürman attended a jockey club reception and had plenty of photographs taken.
I hope he also asked the jockeys a few questions along the lines of ‘how to train a horse’!
If not about politics, then at least he would have learnt a thing or two about grooming horses!
Source: DISAPPOINTMENT...
