By This post is also available in: ΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΑ (GREEK) TÜRKÇE (TURKISH)
All of this amounts to mere conversation to… pass the time. These are not matters of high politics, nor do they even touch upon the essence of the Cyprus issue. All of these appear as minor details when compared to the critical questions about the Cyprus problem that remain unanswered: Do Ankara and the Turkish Cypriots ultimately want a two-state solution? Or a single-state solution? And if they want a single-state solution, do they accept one with zero Turkish guarantees and zero Turkish military presence?
And so the UN Secretary-General’s personal envoy for Cyprus, Ms María Angela Holguín Cuéllar, has arrived in Cyprus for consultations, declaring herself “very pleased” to have returned to the island.
Her objective, as she stated following her 75-minute meeting with Nikos Christodoulides, is “to work hard this month until the next meeting with the UN Secretary-General in July, so that there will be some results based on the agreement reached at the March meeting”. She added that “there was an excellent atmosphere there, the Secretary-General continued to push for Cyprus. I’m pleased to be here and will work very hard so that we have something tangible for July, and we’ll see what happens after that”.
When asked to clarify what she meant by “tangible,” Ms Holguín said: “Regarding the Confidence-Building Measures (CBMs) that were agreed upon in March. We want to go in July with tangible results from the CBMs, and that’s what I’ll be doing here during these days”.
When asked whether this concerns all six CBMs, Ms Holguín replied: “That would be ideal. We’ll see what happens”.
In short, the otherwise quite likeable María Angela Holguín Cuéllar has 60 days at her disposal to secure agreement on the six CBMs, whilst also leaving some doubt as to whether all six will ultimately be agreed upon!
The six CBMs are: 1) Technical Committee on Youth with 12 members from each side; 2) Environmental Technical Committee; 3) Technical Committee on Monuments aimed at cemetery restoration; 4) Demining; 5) Checkpoints; 6) Energy (photovoltaic park on the green line). Subsequently, the Greek Cypriot side placed two additional issues on the table: one concerning the Pyla project and the second relating to requests from the Maronite community.
On the first four CBMs, progress and agreement have already been achieved (such as the Youth Committee issue and the restoration of 30 cemeteries), whilst no progress has been made on Checkpoints and Energy matters.
However, if we wish to be honest and not deceive ourselves, these six CBMs are ridiculous. Not in terms of substance, but in terms of process. We have spent time on a five-day conference, appointed two envoys—one from the UN Secretary-General and one from the Commission—for everyone to deal with six CBMs, which should have already been agreed upon in just two or three meetings of the negotiators, not even the leaders.
The absurdity of the situation is that María Angela Holguín Cuéllar will spend time on this and consider it a success should the two leaders agree on all six CBMs.
And then what? Then we will proceed to a second five-party or multi-party conference, or whatever you wish to call it, to agree on what? To say what? To discuss what? Whether Pyroi or Kokkina or Mia Milia or Louroujina will open, or has opened?
All of this amounts to mere conversation to… pass the time. These are not matters of high politics, nor do they even touch upon the essence of the Cyprus issue. All of these appear as minor details when compared to the critical questions about the Cyprus problem that remain unanswered: Do Ankara and the Turkish Cypriots ultimately want a two-state solution? Or a single-state solution? And if they want a single-state solution, do they accept one with zero Turkish guarantees and zero Turkish military presence?
As long as these two critical questions remain unanswered, and we have two envoys who will monitor the restoration of 30 cemeteries, you understand that we are only talking for the sake of talking. To pass the time… and to allow Ankara to use the “open process” as an alibi for its own “wants”. And as we have said before, an “open process” suits all other parties involved. It suits the local leadership so they don’t hear nagging that things have frozen and they’re doing nothing, it suits the Turkish Cypriot leadership to show they’re “fighting for it,” it even suits the UN itself to demonstrate that “work is being done”…
This article was originally published on 25.05.2025
