The announcement that UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres would be visiting the island marked a significant development for hopes regarding a solution to the Cyprus problem, which had begun to fade in recent times.
After all, the last time Cyprus was visited by a UN Secretary-General, the date was 31 January 2010.
On that day, I was there too, as a young journalist, amongst the crowd gathered in front of the tents set up in the buffer zone.
I was bursting with excitement because Moon was expected to make a joint statement alongside the leaders of the time, Dimitris Christofias and Mehmet Ali Talat.
And it was thought that this statement would set out the points that would later go down in the history of the Cyprus negotiations as the ‘Talat–Christofias rapprochements’.
However, none of this came to pass.
The late Christofias, standing before us with an extremely grim expression, put a spanner in the works by blocking the issuance of this statement, thereby thwarting the Secretary-General, and that historic moment simply slipped away.
Subsequently, the April 2010 elections and Derviş Eroğlu’s victory meant we were forced to wait until February 2014 for the next opportunity—these are the unpleasant memories I feel compelled to recall in this article.
So, looking back now, I realise that the history of Cyprus is really nothing more than a sterile ‘repetition of history’!
However, bringing this journey through my memories to a close and returning to the present day, the Secretary-General—who is due to visit Syria first and then Jordan—will set foot on the island on 27 July, provided the conflicts in the Middle East do not reach a point where they affect security.
During this historic visit, Guterres will be accompanied by Jean-Pierre Lacroix, the UN Under-Secretary-General for Peacekeeping Operations, and Rosemary DiCarlo, the Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs and Peacebuilding.
On 28 July, Guterres will hold separate meetings with both leaders; on 29 July, he will convene a trilateral summit in the buffer zone in Nicosia, followed by a joint press conference.
It is also reported that during this visit, the Secretary-General will meet with members of the civil society and committee members from both sides.
So, why is Guterres coming to the island?
If you were to ask the die-hard status quo defenders who have hated the very mention of a ‘solution’ all their lives, he is coming to ‘say goodbye to us’!
If, on the other hand, you were to ask those jingoistic captains who not only hate the idea of a solution but also shout to the four winds that the whole world is our enemy, that everyone is against us, yet that we are in the right in everything we do, the answer you’d get would be: “The world is plotting against us again – don’t fall for it!”
In short, the visit our dear old Portuguese grandpa is set to make to the island has thoroughly unsettled these lot, and I for one hope their unease grows day by day! The fear of a solution is unlike anything else; it eats a man alive!
Yet, returning to the answers given to the question I posed above, I’d say Guterres certainly isn’t coming to the island just for a pointless visit!
Indeed, according to a report written yesterday by Politis columnist Stavros Antoniou, Guterres is coming to the island for the following reasons:
- To clarify the agenda of the potential five-party Cyprus conference planned for September, with the aim of preventing a repeat of past fruitless talks and ensuring the conference focuses on concrete outcomes; to ensure a timetable is drawn up for the process to be followed should negotiations resume;
- To encourage more active participation in the process by civil society on both sides.
The second point I mentioned is an initiative taken by Maria Holguin since her appointment. We know that, in this context, Holguin has been in contact with hundreds, if not thousands, of people from both sides of the island. That is a good thing.
However, the first point is somewhat frustrating.
Why, you may ask? As I have written and emphasised many times before, the new process in Cyprus has its own natural timeline: 31 December 2026!
By that date, Guterres will have handed over his post to the new Secretary-General, and 2027 will mark the point at which we will once again find ourselves mired in an electoral quagmire!
It is not just the 2028 elections in Southern Cyprus that are likely to be a major event; there is also the possibility of a snap election in Turkey.
Therefore, the fact that Holguin’s ‘5+1’ plan, announced in June—which until just yesterday was being discussed as taking place ‘at the end of July or the beginning of August’—is now being mentioned as taking place in September is, in my view, noteworthy.
What I am trying to say is that, given the current circumstances, we cannot afford to waste a single day; therefore, this process must begin and yield results as soon as possible.
In this context, we might also consider a number of other optimistic scenarios.
For example, we should take a closer look at what might happen at the tripartite summit between the Secretary-General and the leaders.
I wonder, might the Secretary-General turn up with a piece of paper in his pocket, making a move that would confirm the reports of a ‘new plan’ that appeared in the Greek Cypriot press three weeks ago and in The Independent last week?
If I may point out an important detail, the UN Spokesperson Djuracic, when asked this question at UN Headquarters the other day, sidestepped the issue rather than denying it—could this be a sign?
Is it a coincidence, then, that in the letter Holguin wrote to the parties on 1 July, he stated: “There is not a single line I have written regarding the reports that have emerged, but I find them very creative”?
However, whatever the case may be, no one can change the fact that the starting signal for this process was given during the Erdoğan–Guterres meeting held in Ankara in March.
I believe the impact of that meeting—which turned Erdoğan and the Secretary-General into a sort of ‘confidant-comrade’—is evident in the sentence “We declare our support for the Secretary-General’s new process” in the EU–Turkey declaration, which was unexpectedly announced in writing on 1 July.
This paragraph may have been interpreted in some commentaries as meaning “we are supporting the Secretary-General himself, not the UN”, but I would also like to add that there is no need for me to point out that the Secretary-General’s mandate rests with the UN Security Council!
All eyes are now fixed on the events to unfold next week.
Although no official announcement has yet been made, the fact that President Erdoğan is due to visit the island on 20 July and is expected to deliver critical messages is the hottest topic in political circles.
In light of what I have outlined above, I do not wish to entertain the possibility that the messages to be delivered could render Guterres’s critical visit ‘meaningless’.
Is that possible? Of course it is.
But the opposite could also be true!
In my view, what is highly likely is that the Secretary-General will present the agenda for a new summit—the date of which has not yet been determined—to the parties, with the aim of launching negotiations.
These details will not be ‘cooked up’ on 27 July and ‘served up’ on 28 July, as I believe negotiations on this have been ongoing for months, if not years.
Whether it is accepted or not, I cannot say, but it would be absurd to claim that Guterres would put forward a written text without securing Turkey’s support!
Now, if everyone is merely concerned with saving their own skin, if all this is some sort of game—or, I don’t know, an attempt to salvage the situation—then it must be understood that a new ‘fruitless’ tripartite meeting on 29 July would deal a ‘fatal’ blow to the resolution of the Cyprus problem.
I wish to state this very clearly.
Yes, we can remain hopeful for a solution. We can harbour a bold sense of optimism for this, but at this stage, we are neither foolish nor naive enough to settle for ‘a drop of honey to sweeten our lips’. What we want is for the path to a solution to be opened up—nothing less!
If I may recall one final ‘repetition’ analogy, the Mustafa Akıncı–Nikos Anastasiadis process took shape—first at the New York summit and then at the Mont Pelerin summit—right towards the end of Ban Ki-moon’s term of office, culminating in the Crans-Montana meeting where a solution was narrowly missed.
So, if Guterres wishes to leave a legacy for us and the new Secretary-General—much like the solid legacy he himself has built—I believe now is precisely the time.
But if the opposite is true, if all this is merely for show, then please let him not come; let him stay where he is—I believe that would be for the best for all of us.
I hope it is the former.
Source: IF HE IS COMING FOR NOTHING, HE MIGHT AS WELL NOT COME AT ALL!
