How interesting is this?

This site has gone live on December 8, 2005 and has already been mentioned in the Cypriot Press. This site was mentioned by a columnist from the Cyprus Mail. The response today from Haji Mike’s column tells me that one of my posts may have struck a nerve. Setting aside his opinion regarding this site...id like to say that anything that attracts public notice for this site is welcomed. Thanks Haji Mike and happy New Year to you and to all my new visitors!

Haji Mike’s article

The Game

"Playing the game properly" is a statement you may find in Turkish articles that discuss the Cyprus issue. There is no real progress being made to resolve the Cyprus dispute, quite the contrary. Cypriots hold the view that both communities stand to benefit from a real solution. In fact, the benefits of such a solution will undoubtedly bring benefits to the region as a whole. It was thought that Mr. Talat's ascend toward power would bring new thoughts and ideas that were needed to reconcile the two communities. Mr. Talat's intentions are becoming transparent. We see it, time after time, whether it is the issue of Ledra, direct trade, Varosha, refugee properties, etc etc. Mr. Talat speaking to the associated press today said “I am ready to give Maras in return for abolishing all the sanctions imposed on the TRNC." Varosha (Maras in Turkish) is a dead city located just north of the Attila line. Its inhabitants fled when Turkey invaded. The city has not been repopulated by Turkish Cypriots or colonists and remains empty to this day. A similar offer was given by the previous leader of the Turkish Cypriots, Mr. Rauf Denktash. He made this proposal in a letter to Mr. Annan in July of 2003. Varosha was always meant to be used as a carrot by the Turks to encourage the Greek Cypriots to accept any future agreement. This explains why the Turks never inhabited Varosha and instead decided to fence off the whole city. Here is where the two Turkish Cypriot leaders differentiate...Mr Denktash said "We are determined to pursue our new policy of conducting the talks not on an intercommunal basis but on an interstate basis." The plans may be somewhat similar but Mr. Talat would never make this statement, that wouldn’t be playing the game properly.

Aid Package

The EU recommended 259 million euro aid package to Turkish Cypriots when they voted "yes" to the Annan plan. The RoC government supports the aid package but was seeking decoupling of financial assistance and direct trade claiming that direct trade constitutes de facto recognition. Mr. Talat wants the aid package linked with direct trade between the north of the island and the EU. As a result of the differences...the European Union has abandoned an attempt to provide the aid package. An agreement was not expected. For months now, Mr. Talat and crew were quoted in the Turkish press stating that Northern Cyprus would not accept trade via Southern Cyprus and that the Turkish Cypriots may say "no" to the aid package if it means giving up on direct trade.

Guarantees

I recall the weeks prior to the referendum on the Annan plan that several Cypriot politicians were asking where are the guarantees for implementation of this plan? Some were even seeking to postpone the referendum for a short period of time because of the issue of guarantees. A simple question to a complicated plan...who is going to force Turkey to comply with the targets of the Annan plan if it decides that it doesn’t want to implement certain provisions? Why am I bringing this up today? Turkey signed the customs accord with the EU to the bloc’s 10 new states. Why then is Turkey still refusing to open its ports to Cypriot ships? Deputy Prime Minister of Turkey Abdullatif Sener today said that “Turkey will not take a unilateral step and open the ports to the use of Greek Cypriots unless the embargoes facing the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (Occupied North) are removed.” Can someone show me where this is stated in the customs accord that Turkey signed? There should be no question now why proper guarantees for implementation are important to any future agreement on a possible solution for Cyprus.

War Chest

The RoC government estimates as many as 10,000 foreigners living in Greek Cypriot property in the North. The Turks are obviously selling off occupied land to citizens from Western Europe in an attempt to prevent Greek Cypriots from returning to their properties. Greek Cypriot refugees like Mr. Apostolides continue to claim their title deeds through legal means, because of this...thousands of EU citizens, mostly Britons, this year formed a UK-registered lobby group to defend the rights of foreigners living in properties formerly owned by Greek Cypriots. This lobby group has built a huge war chest that is currently being used in the Orams trial. An assault on this war chest should be made immediately by opening up new lawsuits against foreigners who are citizens of an EU member State other than Britain and who have purchased property in the North that is in dispute. Speaking of the Orams, new developments today...please read below for more details.

British court to hear Orams case
Meanwhile criticism mounts over Cherie Blair’s involvement in the case

By Philippos Stylianou

As Greek Cypriot reaction to the involvement of the British Prime Minister’s wife Cherie Blair in the controversial Orams case widens, the High Court in London is today expected to hear the positions of the two sides and decide how to proceed.

Turkish Cypriot UK solicitor Hassan Vahit, who appears for Linda Orams, said Cherie Blair had made a significant contribution in drafting Mrs Orams’ appeal. He noted that he expected the trial to open towards either the end of January or the beginning of February 2006.

Constantis Kandounas, the Nicosia lawyer of Greek Cypriot refugee Meletis Apostolides who won a Nicosia District Court decision against the Oramses, said they were waiting to hear what the Attorneys of the other side had to say in the British Supreme Court.

He did not rule out that Cherie Blair acting for the Orams would ask for a postponement until an appeal by Linda Orams in the Supreme Court of Cyprus was heard. A date for the hearing of the Cyprus appeal has yet to be set.

The Cyprus court ordered Linda Orams and her husband David to demolish a luxury villa they built on land they had bought from a Turkish Cypriot in the occupied part of Cyprus and which belonged to Meletis Apostolides.

British assets

In the light of being unable to enforce the decision in the occupied areas, Apostolides asked the decision to be enforced in the British Courts against the Orams’ British assets under an EU arrangement.

The British High Court will not dwell on the merits of the case but on matters of procedure and public interest.

Asked to comment on the retaining of Cherie Blair from the Matrix Chambers to represent the Orams in the case, Candounas simply said: “We are delighted.”

His client Meletis Apostolides has retained the services of Blackstone Chambers, one of the most prestigious of the UK, with Thomas Beazley QC leading a team of other lawyers and solicitors. They include Simon Congdon of the Holmans Fenwick Willan Solicitors and another QC from Brickstone Chambers.

“We regard the issue as a strictly legal one and we shall fight along the lines of an impartial and objective process,” Apostolides himself said when asked about having the British Prime Minister’s wife against him.

Cherie Blair nee Booth spoke out on Wednesday for the first time in the face of mounting criticism for undertaking the defence of the Oramses.

Autonomous

Repeating what the British High Commissioner in Nicosia had already said, she told the daily ‘Simerini’ that her capacity as wife of the British Prime Minister had nothing to do with it. “I am an autonomous lawyer and follow the rules of my profession,” she said.

Mrs Blair added that the Orams had bought the property in good faith and now they risked losing that property and their property in the UK without any compensation.

Commenting on Cherie Blair’s statement, Government Spokesman Kypros Chrysostomides said yesterday that he did not think the rights of the Orams weighed more heavily than the rights of the Greek Cypriot refugees.

He added that all these matters would be raised with the British government in the context of the dialogue established when President Papadopoulos met Prime Minister Tony Blair in London.

The British Charge d’ Afaires in Cyprus Robert Fenn Peter was summoned to the Foreign Office to hear a complaint from Permanent Secretary Sotos zakhaios about Mrs Blair involvement in the Orams case.

Although President Papadopoulos and Foreign Minister George Iacovou expressed their strong displeasure at the development, they both stated their trust in the impartiality of British justice.

Cypriot reactions to Cherie Blair embracing the cause of Britons who bought stolen Greek property in the occupied areas against official British policy was given wide coverage by the British press.

The National Federation of UK Cypriots said the Cypriot community was upset, bitter and disappointed at the action of Mrs Blair to support before the court of justice those who violated the human rights of Greek Cypriot refugees and international laws and principles.

They called on her to reconsider supporting the usurpers of other people’s property.

Poltical parties and organisations issued statements condemning Cherie Blair’s action.

Brian Coleman, London Assembly Member for Barnet and Camden has criticised Cherie Blair’s decision to defend the Orams. In an announcement he said:
“I am appalled that Cherie Blair has chosen to defend Mr and Mrs Orams. People who buy illegally acquired properties are making the situation in Cyprus far worse for those dispossessed by the Turkish invasion. I hope this case will serve as a warning to others that buying illegally acquired properties will not be tolerated.”

Cyprus Weekly, December 2005

Domestic Remedies

Some Turkish columnists are delighted at the recent ECHR ruling in the case of Ms. Aresti even though Turkey was found guilty of human rights violations. Perhaps these columnists welcomed this decision because they are champions of human rights? Far from it, they welcomed the court’s ruling because they believe it to be a recognition of the legal system in the occupied north. Mr. Birand from the Turkish daily news in his column today stated “Even if it (court’s ruling) doesn’t mean any official recognition of the KKTC (occupied North), it certainly recognizes it as an entity.” Last April, ECHR ruled in this same case that effective domestic remedies were not possible because restitution was not being offered. Now the court is saying that a domestic remedy may be possible only if there is a genuine effective redress. To Mr. Birand, a genuine effective redress means...“This means the Greek Cypriot petitions will be postponed for at least 10 years. Turkey and the KKTC will gain some time, and the threat of paying so much compensation will be removed for a while.” What a humanitarian. Fortunately, that is not what the court's decision means, lets see what the court really says...“Turkey should introduce a remedy, within three months, which secures, in respect of the Convention violations identified in the judgment, genuinely effective redress for the applicant…”The court goes on to say "Such a remedy should be available within three months and redress should occur three months after that." So you see, its not 10 years as Mr. Birand stated. The court is seeking a proper remedy in a couple of months. Before the ECHR ruling, Mr. Talat expected the ruling to recommend that Turkey open internal judiciary means for refugees, that is why he rushed to create a new property compensation bill. Addressing concerns from Turkish nationalists, Mr. Talat said this..."The target of the new property law (adopted by the occupied North) does not aim to solve property problem in Cyprus." Correct, the target of this law is world public opinion. It is nothing more than a show meant to cover up the unprincipled reality that is the aftermath of the Turkish Invasion. The Turks are seeking more time to cement the division of Cyprus as 31 years is not long enough and they will hammer away at the idea that it’s the Greek Cypriots fault for maintaining this division. After all, it is the Greek Cypriots who rejected last year's Annan plan. Mr. Birand in his column today did not mention the “NO” vote once, he mentioned it twice. Well, Turkey succeeded in gaining time...a short period of time. The true test will be if Turkey allows Ms. Aresti access to her property. If not, will the ECHR accept the chump change offered by the Turks as compensation for lost property?

Cyprus Debates ECHR Decision

Cypriot papers today set aside space to debate the recent ECHR Judgment against Turkey and the possible ramifications from the court’s decision. The views were for the most part, positive. Here is what the Cyprus Weekly had to say about the matter.

Turkey guilty

By Alex Efthyvoulos

Turkey was found guilty yet again yesterday by the European Court of Human Rights of violating the rights of Greek Cypriot refugees by denying them the right to return and to regain use of their homes in the occupied north of Cyprus.

The judgement dealt with the application of Famagusta refugee Myra Xenides-Aresti who fled her home at the time of the Turkish invasion in 1974 and has not been allowed to return, or to regain her property ever since.

The Court based its judgement on previous similar cases by Greek Cypriot refugees, like the one by Titina Loizidou.

But in what is regarded as a major development the Court, while reaffirming that Turkey “continued to exercise overall military control over northern Cyprus, added that “the fact that the Greek Cypriots rejected the Annan Plan did not have the legal consequence of bringing to an end the continuing violation of the displaced persons' rights,'' as claimed by Turkey.

The Court reserved sentencing Turkey for these violations giving it six months “to introduce a remedy, which secures genuinely effective redress for the Convention violations identified in the instant judgement.''

Link

But in yet another major development the Court went on to link Turkey's compliance in the Xenides-Aresti case with all the 1,400 other similar applications by Greek Cypriot refugees pending before it.

The Court said it could not ignore the fact that there were already approximately 1,400 property cases pending before it, brought primarily by Greek-Cypriots against Turkey.

The Court considered that Turkey had to introduce a remedy which secured, in respect of the Convention violations identified in the judgment, genuinely effective redress for the applicant as well as in relation to all similar applications pending before the Court, in accordance with the principles for the protection of the rights laid down in Article 8 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1. “Such a remedy should be available within three months and redress should occur three months after that.''

The Court also rejected Turkey's claim that property rights could be settled through the intercommunal talks. It declared that “the inter-communal talks cannot be invoked in order to legitimate a violation of the Convention.''

Compensation law

The Court also rejected Turkey's claim that the breakaway Turkish Cypriot state should be given the opportunity and the time to consider their compensation law for Greek Cypriot refugees, as well as the claim that a decision by the Rights Court for the payment of compensation to Greek Cypriot refugees “would seriously hamper and prejudice negotiations for an overall political settlement, including the complex property issue which it is hoped will be solved by diplomatic means.''

The Court ruled that Turkey, as the occupying power of north Cyprus, violated two articles of the European Convention of Human Right, Article 8, dealing with the right to respect for the applicant's home, and Article 1, dealing with the protection of property.

In connection with Article 8 the Court noted that since 1974 Xenides-Aresti “has been unable to gain access to, to use and enjoy her home.'' It consequently reaffirmed its earlier judgement in the case of Cyprus v Turkey, “that the complete denial of the right of Greek-Cypriot displaced persons to respect for their homes has no basis in law within the meaning of Article 8 of the Convention.''

Dealing with the violation of Article 1 of Protocol 1 of the Convention, which guarantees every person's right to the peaceful enjoyment of their property, by the Court rejected Turkey's claims that property rights should be settled as part of a comprehensive settlement of the Cyprus problem.

“The Court found no reason to depart from the conclusions which it had reached in previous cases, in particular the case Loizidou v. Turkey: As a consequence of the fact that the applicant has been refused access to the land since 1974, she has effectively lost all control over, as well as all possibilities to use and enjoy her property.

The continuous denial of access must therefore be regarded as an interference with her rights under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 [....] It has not [...] been explained how the need to rehouse displaced Turkish Cypriot refugees in the years following the Turkish intervention in the island in 1974 could justify the complete negation of the applicant’s property rights in the form of a total and continuous denial of access and a purported expropriation without compensation. Nor can the fact that property rights were the subject of inter-communal talks involving both communities in Cyprus provide a justification for this situation under the Convention.''

Accordingly, the Court concluded that there had been and continues to be a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 by virtue of the fact that the applicant is denied access to, control, use and enjoyment of her property and any compensation for the interference with her property rights.

The Court's judgement was reached with the dissenting opinion of one of the seven judges, Turkish judge R. Turmen.

Cyprus Weekly, December 2005

ECHR Finds Turkey Guilty

A judgment has been made by ECHR concerning the case of Mrs. Myra Xenides-Arestis vs. Turkey. The ECHR has confirmed that the title deed of Mrs. Myra Xenides-Arestis is legitimate and her ownership of property has not been affected by Turkish occupation. Below is a press release issued by the Registrar so that you can read what the Court demands and what violations Turkey is guilty of as it relates to this case.

For Information regarding this judgment please visit here.

Media Frenzy

The Blairs became the subject of a media frenzy in Cyprus a couple of days ago when Mrs. Blair confirmed she would be heading the defence of David and Linda Orams. The Orams were found guilty of illegally building on land belonging to a Greek-Cypriot refugee and were ordered by a Cypriot court to pay compensation to Meletios Apostolides. The court also threatened to seize assets in Britain if the Orams do not comply with the ruling. I wasn’t going to comment on the matter as I see nothing wrong with Mrs. Blair defending British citizens. In any event, what good is the war chest the Orams and their supporters built up when the title deed of Meletios Apostolides is unquestionable? The reason for commenting on this today was because two things have occurred since Mrs. Blair’s involvement in this case. For one, it has unified the Cypriot people who feel the world has turned a blind eye to their plight. More importantly, the publicity may deter sensible people pursuing financial gain from illegal land grab. Below is an article (from the Cyprus Weekly archives) that discusses this matter in greater detail.

Talat fury as refugee takes property case to UK

By Philippos Stylianou

TURKISH Cypriot leader Mehmet Ali Talat is reportedly furious at the prospect of British and other EU nationals facing legal action in their own countries for buying Greek Cypriot refugee property in the occupied areas.

But it emerges he had been directly warned about this and remained unimpressed.

Greek Cypriot lawyer Constantinos Kandounas, who is determined to have a Nicosia court decision enforced through the British High Court against a middle-aged English couple for building on such property in Lapithos, near Kyrenia, met Talat face to face in September and pleaded with him to put a stop to the mass sale of Greek Cypriot houses and land.

"I saw Talat in July and September and on the second occasion I told him he could not talk of peace and at the same time allow our properties to be sold out," Kandounas, a rapprochement activist told the Cyprus Weekly at his law office in old Nicosia, and added:

"I told him he must do something to put a stop to this, otherwise there would be nothing left for the Greek Cypriots to return to; I also said that we could not just sit around and see our properties disappear, and I specifically told him that I was going to launch law suits against foreigners who ‘bought’ our properties. Talat said to me: ‘Do what you like.’ "

Candounas, himself a refugee from Famagusta, did just that and two months later he landed the first ever court decision ordering foreign EU nationals out of usurped Greek Cypriot property in the North, in this case an orchard in Lapithos belonging to CTO architect Meletis Apostolides, on which David and Linda Orams from Hove, Sussex, had built a luxury villa with swimming pool two years ago.

The judgment has sent shivers to all others who knowingly or not have settled on refugee property, since a 2001 EU regulation makes national court rulings enforceable in the country of the guilty party. And this is what Candounas and his client intend to do now that Cyprus is a full member of the EU.

The decision issued by the Nicosia District Court on 9 November 2004 orders the Orams to demolish the house along with the swimming pool and perimeter wall and return the property to the rightful owner without further ado. Furthermore, they are ordered to pay 7,654,83 cents in damages and 294.41 a month from December until the property is returned to Apostolides, plus court costs.

Insulting

Meletis Apostolides, who was 24 when his family were forced out of their home and property by the invading Turkish army in 1974, holds dear memories of his life there and wants to replant the citrus grove uprooted for development by the British couple.

"I do not have anything against the British, Germans or any other nationals coming to live in Cyprus as long as they don’t do it as receivers of stolen goods," Apostolides, a father of two adult children, told The Cyprus Weekly. "This behavior is insulting to the British who live legitimately in the free part of the island and to the well-meaning English people at large. A message must be given that they cannot do this sort of thing without consequences."

As the enforcement of the Nicosia court decision in the occupied areas is not feasible, Apostolides could ask the English High Court to confiscate the Orams’ property assets in the UK to meet the pecuniary aspect of the decision.

According to the EU regulation, following a request by a national court to have its judgment enforced by the courts in the guilty party’s country, the latter courts cannot review the merits of the original decision but can only decide on procedural matters.

The London Times in a full page article under the title "Britons face losing homes in Cyprus as refugees reclaim land" wrote that it will be the first time that the High Court has tested the EU 2001 regulation.

Apostolides said he was shocked to find out that a house stood in the place of their old orchard and decided to do something about it. He started by finding out who the trespassers were and when he achieved this he looked for the right lawyer to handle his case.

Lawyer Constantinos Kandounas said the crucial part was serving both the law suit and the court judgment on the Orams. When they filed the case at the Nicosia District Court they also had to hand it to the respondents in Lapithos.

This they did under pouring rain knocking at the Orams’ door with a court bailiff and a Turkish Cypriot employee of Kandounas. Linda Orams took the documents but refused to sign for them.

The Orams failed to appoint a defence until it was too late and the court had already issued its judgment in favor of the applicant Meletis Apostolides. Serving the court decision on the trespassing couple proved easier, as the plaintiffs had the cooperation of the Oram’s Turkish Cypriot lawyer Minhan Sagiroglu, at whose office the judgment was served. Yet the Orams refused to sign.

The Orams this week finally applied unilaterally to the Nicosia District Court for a stay of the decision and to have it set aside. Kandounas has asked the Court to allow his participation in the proceedings and at the same time has filed another case against the Orams for contempt of court in refusing to comply with its ruling.

All three cases - the Orams’ application, Kandounas application to participate in the proceedings and the contempt of court - will be heard on December 20 and, depending on the outcome, Apostolides will ask the British High Court to enforce the Cypriot court’s decision in the UK.

"The Orams will most probably contest this, but their options are limited by the EU regulation," Kandounas said, and added: "They will have to prove that they had a good reason for not appointing a defence in the case against them, and also that they have a good case."

Kandounas is well-known for his participation in the bicommunal contact effort, having set up his own information centre for Turkish Cypriots when movement restrictions were eased. He has also made a written submission to the Select Committee of the British Parliament which is carrying out an inquiry on Cyprus and was interviewed by the Committee during its recent visit to the island.

In his interview with the Cyprus Weekly, Kandounas said he is preparing more law suits against other EU citizens, besides Britons, who have usurped Greek Cypriot property in the occupied areas.

"We have to react if we really want to work for a solution to our problem," he said.

ECHR Judgment

There will be an important judgment this Thursday by ECHR concerning the case of Mrs. Myra Xenides-Arestis vs. Turkey for the violation of her human rights by preventing her access to her property in the North of Cyprus. The applicant, Mrs. Arestis who was born in Famagusta in 1945 will hopefully be compensated for the loss of her property. Obviously this decision is very important and will be closely monitored by thousands of Cypriots who have launched legal proceedings that are now pending before ECHR.

The Will of the People

Joost Lagendijk, a European Parliamentarian from Netherlands and co-president of the Turkey-EU Joint Parliamentary Commission gave a speech in Istanbul today where he brought up the issue of Cyprus. According to Mr. Lagendijk, the EU made a big mistake in accepting a divided Cyprus as a member and noted that Turkish Cypriots and the Turkish government supported the Annan plan. In light of this, certain EU leaders were exerting efforts on behalf of the Turkish Cypriots. Clearly Mr. Lagendijk does not speak on behalf of all the people of Netherlands and he has a right to his opinion. Frankly, it’s an opinion that holds no water. With his logic, Netherlands should have been isolated from the rest of the EU because it did not vote “Yes” to the EU referendum. When the Netherlands said “No” to the EU constitution...the Cypriot government said that it stood by the people of Netherlands and that it respects the will of the people of Netherlands. Rejecting the EU constitution does not affect only Netherlands...it affected the entire EU. The Cypriot government approved the EU constitution yet it stood by the decision of the people of Netherlands. The people of Netherlands, rightly so… expect a revised EU constitution that addresses the concerns of its people. The Cypriots are asking for the same thing with the Annan plan. Why should we be treated any differently?

The PR campaign

You will find one sided news articles printed daily when it comes to the issue of Cyprus. A PR campaign is in full swing…its purpose is to see that Turkey is successful with its EU accession course.

Turkey must become an EU member only if it properly complies with EU norms. Is it Europe that is joining Turkey or Turkey joining Europe?

I have read many one sided stories on Cyprus and none were as offensive as the article I read today. Surprisingly enough, this article in question is not from a Turkish daily. No, it’s from the other guarantor power…the UK. Britain is supposed to be a guarantor power of one state in Cyprus not two. The Telegraph states “We called for Turkish intervention in Cyprus when the pogroms began in 1963, and warmly applauded the troops when they landed in 1974. More recently, we championed Turkey's accession to the EU.”

Forget about using war as a last resort. Apparently when it concerns Cyprus...the invasion of 1974 did not come soon enough. One of the many reasons why Cyprus rejected the Annan plan was because it would have strengthened guarantor powers. This article by the Telegraph is simply another confirmation for those who overwhelmingly rejected the plan.

Surreal Events

Mr. Selcuk Gultasli from the Turkish Daily Zaman doesn’t hold back his displeasure at the “sequence of surreal events in Cyprus” which is what he titled his column today. Like so many other Turkish columnist, he starts off his column by reminding us of who it was that rejected the Annan plan … “We wrote hopeful stories after the Greek Cypriots said “no” to the Annan Plan." Mr. Selcuk Gultasli also quotes from the then-EU Commissioner for Enlargement Gunter Verheugen…“The Greek Cypriots cheated on us.” Perhaps Mr. Gultasli can tell us what Mr. Verheugen said about the elections in northern Cyprus and Kurdish rights in Turkey or did Mr. Gultasli not keep those quotes for his columns? Mr. Gultasli then compares The President of Cyprus to that of Austria’s Joerg Haider. Why all this rhetoric? Because The President urged the Cypriots to vote down the plan which would have happened at any event as the majority were against it. It was our democratic right to say we want better and that obstructionism will not lead to concessions in negotiation. Mr. Gultasli questions the EU’s reputation for…as he put it “rewarding” Cyprus and not isolating it and its President, Papadopoulos. He resents the fact that Cyprus is in the EU and as such, playing a role in Turkey’s accession course. Joining the EU was no reward for Cyprus…it earned it by closing all 30 chapters. If Mr. Gultasli is looking for a reward being handed out then he should look no further then the first sentence in his own column. The Turks rewarded with the Annan plan had many people taken aback at the surreal events in Cyprus.

Ledra crossing backfire

Today’s article from the Cyprus Weekly raises similar points that have been made previously on this site concerning the Ledra issue.

Turkish actions at Ledra Street crossing backfire
by Menelaos Hadjicostis

Turkish army muscle-flexing on the ceasefire line dissecting divided Ledra Street has backfired as construction of a footbridge has flustered the United Nations and earned disapproval from ordinary Turkish Cypriots.

UN dissent over works designed to conceal a heavy Turkish military presence on the ceasefire line was encoded in a Security Council resolution extending the UN peacekeeping force's mandate for another six months.

In the preamble to resolution 1642, adopted unanimously on Wednesday, the Security Council expresses "concern that… differences have arisen over construction activity related to the proposed additional crossing point at Ledra Street".

The UN decision-making body also urged both sides to work with UNFICYP for a mutually acceptable arrangement that would finally open the busy thoroughfare to pedestrian traffic from both sides of the divide to the delight of shopkeepers.

The council encouraged the opening of additional crossing points to the existing five that saw over nine million crossings since travel restrictions were eased in April, 2003.

Strenuous
Nicosia welcomed the formal expression of concern over Turkish machinations at Ledra, amid news of a strenuous effort to reword the resolution and absolve Ankara and its army commanders on the ground in the occupied north.

President Tassos Papadopoulos disclosed that some unnamed nations attempted to excise any references to "construction" so that the controversial footbridge and adjoining works are not made to appear as the root of the Ledra Street problem.

"Great efforts were made to keep the work ‘construction'

of the bridge in the text. Some countries wanted to delete the clear reference to occupation army construction," Papadopoulos told reporters before flying to Brussels for an EU summit yesterday.

Papadopoulos said neither does the resolution's wording put Nicosia on an equal footing with the Turkish side over blame for the Ledra Street impasse.

"The resolution calls on both sides to make efforts to solve the problem that has arisen at Ledra Street. The resolution does not equate both sides in terms of responsibility for the Ledra Street deadlock," said Papadopoulos.

Extension
Although couched in more diplomatic language, resolution 1642 was an extension of a strongly-worded UNFICYP statement rebuking the Turkish side for unilateral action that ultimately scuttled plans to open what has long been seen as one of the most potent symbols of the island's division.

Calling on construction at Ledra Street to cease, UNFICYP said the absence of mutual agreement to open the street neither sanctions, nor gives license to either side for unilateral action.

"…the Turkish Cypriot side opted to act pre-emptively to execute its project, and persists in acting unilaterally toward an objective that, by definition, must be bilateral.

"UNFICYP must point out that, regrettably, unilateral initiatives are incompatible with the spirit of confidence-building measures that have driven the carefully coordinated effort since April 2003 to promote and ensure the orderly opening of crossing points on the island."

Nicosia had argued that the footbridge breached a ceasefire agreement reached at the end of hostilities following the 1974 Turkish invasion by encroaching on the UN-controlled buffer zone.

UNFICYP disputed this, but the Turkish side's intentions were transparent. For the illegal regime, pressing on with construction intended to discredit Nicosia's wish to open Ledra and again portray Papadopoulos as the recalcitrant spoiler, while notching up more political capital and earning international plaudits.

Tactical
The only hitch was the Turkish army's insistence – as Turkish Cypriot leader Mehmet Ali Talat readily admitted – to build a footbridge over once-thriving Ermou Street that is now the main military thoroughfare connecting guard posts.

Thus, Turkish army commanders would consolidate their presence in and around Ledra while simultaneously sending the message that the politics of reconciliation would never supercede tactical considerations.

Moreover, the sight of gun-toting Turkish troops and military vehicles crossing underneath pedestrians traversing the bridge would have a strong psychological impact, impressing in the minds of civilians the might of a ubiquitous occupation army the protector of the illegal regime.

Papadopoulos offered another explanation for the bridge – a clear attempt at a military advance inside the buffer zone to half of the entire 180km length of the no-man's land.

Papadopoulos also offered the manning of a guard post recently built deep inside the buffer zone near Louroudjina as further proof of a calculated advance.

Under increasing pressure, Turkish Cypriot officials thumbed their nose with defiant bluster and bravado culminating with Talat's outburst: "We are not obliged to anyone to account for what happens within the boundaries of the TRNC".

Arrogant
Talat laughed off any suggestions at either a pause in construction or bringing down the bridge altogether.

That prompted a sharp riposte from Nicosia.

"Statements from the other side show that they continue to act in an one-sided and arrogant fashion and are not demonstrate any disposition to change their policy," said Government Spokesman Kypros Chrysostomides.

But pressure on Talat and crew has also come from within, with Turkish Cypriot merchants voicing their opposition to the bridge they said would hamper the unimpeded flow of people and money.

Turkish Cypriot Chamber of Merchants and Craftsmen Chairman Hurrem Tulga warned members would keep their shops closed today to protest against the bridge he said is unnecessary and should be removed.

Tulga said merchants on the Turkish-held end of Ledra have suffered worst in the pocket book because pedestrian traffic there has dried up.

He scolded the illegal regime, saying those purporting to want an end to Turkish Cypriot isolation are themselves causing isolation at the proposed Ledra Street crossing.

Despite the angry rhetoric, Turkish Cypriot officials may now be buckling and sitting up to listen.

Turkish Cypriot daily Halkin Sesi quoted occupied Nicosia mayor Kutlay Erk as admitting that the Turkish side had in its hands a government proposal on opening Ledra in a mutually acceptable way.

The thrust of the government proposals is a general military pull-back from the area to ease pedestrian traffic.

Erk said the Turkish side was ready for negotiations on the proposal that could start under UN auspices.

Cyprus Weekly, 16 - 23 December 2005

A wolf in sheep’s clothing

The Turkish Cypriots thought they had a reformist in Mr. Talat but instead they wound up with a wolf in sheep’s clothing. For some time now, Mr. Talat among others coordinated a smear campaign to ridicule the President of the Republic concerning the issue of Ledra. Chuckling with such comments as “We could put up a curtain for them if they wish.” Mr. Talat tried to show the world that its the current leadership in Cyprus who wants to maintain the status quo. Mr. Talat suggesting that if Mr. Papadopoulos is stubborn on a simple crossing how will there be an agreement on a possible solution to Cyprus. The implication of this being that maybe its time for countries to deal directly with the North of Cyprus because finding a solution with the current Cypriot President will not be possible. Ironically, it was the current leadership in Cyprus…Mr. Papadopoulos government who first suggested the Ledra crossing in 2004. The Cyprus mail today has reported that the Turkish Cypriot shop owners in Nicosia have announced a large protest on Friday calling on Mr. Talat to remove the bridge. “We do not agree that the bridge should be there. It is both meaningless and an obstruction to the free flow of people between the two sides,” Turkish Cypriot Shop Owners Association head Hurrem Tulga told the Cyprus Mail yesterday. But it appears that Mr. Talat is too busy trying to sway world public opinion than do what he was brought to power for and that is making reconciliation between the two communities possible.

Direct Trade

They're several personalities making the news today--all raising the same point and that is direct trade between the EU and Northern Turkish breakaway State. Mr. Talat who was addressing the conference at Sabanci University in Turkey said “End of isolation will bring Greek Cypriots to negotiating table.” Mehmet Ali Birand from the Turkish Daily News also brought up the same issue in his column. Mr. Birand reminded us today once again of who rejected the Annan Plan. He starts off his article by saying “Following a "no" vote from the Greek Cypriots in a referendum on the Annan plan”… and then he goes on to say that there is no direct trade between the EU and Northern Cyprus because of the “lies Papadopulos told the EU.” Isnt direct trade an economic attribute of an independent state? Who are these people kidding? In his article, Mr. Birand goes on to criticize Rauf Denktas for not being cunning enough with the previous plans for if he was…Cyprus might not have been admitted in the EU. I remember reading a lot of news articles back then and I don’t recall any columnists from Turkey criticizing Rauf Denktas for his strong opposition to previous plans. In the last few lines of Mr. Birand’s article, he concludes by saying “And that is the story of how we arrived at the point at which we are today with the Greek Cypriots, who hate us.” He categorizes all Greek Cypriots as hating Turks. What an absurd statement to make by a Turkish columnist who is clearly throwing up a smoke screen. Maybe Mr. Birand can tell us which group of people actually enjoy being forcefully displaced?

Ill-gotten assets

If you ever have read articles on Cyprus from certain sites...it’s a sure bet you have come across advertisement on buying property from Northern Cyprus. I recently read an article where I was bombarded with adds to such an extent that I had a hard time reading the article itself. Before you sense financial gain, here is another sure bet...you run the risk of losing all your money exploring such an endeavor. According to official records from the RoC, ownership of private land property in the North belongs by 82% to Greek Cypriots. Heartened by support from the European court of human rights...thousands of Greek Cypriots are launching legal proceedings that are now pending before ECHR. As a result, you may discover that what you really hold is a worthless title deed.

A human rights issue?

Just read an article that was picked up by several news wires. This article was about Turkish Cypriot Football players stripping off clothing in protest of the embargo. A publicity stunt organized by Huseyin Caglayan. He happens to be a UK fashion designer said the article. Mr. Huseyin said “This campaign is about human rights, not politics.” So “Balls to Embargoes!” is a human rights issue and not some perverted fetish he may have…very well then. Tell us when your campaign relating to Turkey’s embargo on Armenia will begin. Yes...Turkey, the only democratic country in the entire world that has a trade embargo on Armenia. Showing once again it will do as it pleases even if it means disregarding international norm. Speaking of the Caucuses…lets focus in on Armenia’s neighbor Azerbaijan. It seems that the election held in Azerbaijan a couple of weeks back had some voting irregularities to say it mildly. This however was never picked up by news wires…no, instead we have “Balls to Embargoes!” This only proves to show that there is a double standard when it comes to this region.

Enclaved Greek Cypriots

Who are they?

As a consequence of the tragedy brought about by the first and second rounds of the Turkish invasion on 20 July and 15 August 1974, about 200.000 Greek Cypriots, who lived in the areas occupied by the Turkish troops, were compelled by force to leave their homes and properties and move to the free areas. They became refugees in their own land. However, despite the policy of terror implemented by Turkish troops, the hardships, oppressions, intimidations and threats, about 12.300 people refused to leave their homes in the area occupied by the invaders and tried to keep their possessions - their land, their homes and their property. Since then, these people have been known as the enclaved and their plight has been one of the most tragic aspects of the Cyprus problem.

Facts prove the sad reality

Immediately after the end of the hostilities in 1974, the enclaved were about 12.300 people, most of them Greek Cypriots and a few Maronites. They were mainly concentrated in the Karpass penins- la and particularly in the villages of Rizokarpaso, Agia Trias, Leonarisso, Agios Andronikos, Agios Therissos, Trikomo, Karpaseia, Kormakitis, Asomatos, in the town of Keryneia and in Apostolos Andreas Monastery (see map on page 24). In 1994, only 715 enclaved (520 Greek Cypriots and 195 Maronite Cypriots), the vast majority of whom are above 60 years old, remain in the occupied areas. It is to be noted that since 30 June 1994 there are no longer any enclaved in Trikomo.The sharp reduction in their number was due to the systematic expulsions organised by the illegal authorities together with their policy of harassment (see graphs on page 23). All these combined with a well-planned project of colonisation of the occupied parts of Cyprus, with the influx of about 85.000 Turkish mainland settlers, aimed at changing the demographic character of the island.

The table below shows the occupied areas where the enclaved live and the number in each area as it was on 30.6.1994.

	VILLAGE OR TOWN	POPULATION
1	RIZOKARPASO	355
2	KORMAKITIS	159
3	AGIA TRIAS	134
4	KARPASEIA	24
5	ASOMATOS	13
6	LEONARISSO	10
7	AGIOS ANDRONIKOS	6
8	AGIOS THERISSOS	6
9	APOSTOLOS ANDREAS MONASTERY	4
10	KERYNEIA	4
11	TRIKOMO	0
	TOTAL	715

The methods of the Turkish leadership include a wide variety of inhuman acts, ranging from physical violence to psychological brutality, so as to force the inhabitants of the various villages to sign "applications" to move to the government-controlled areas. This was intended to enable them to carry on expelling the enclaved under the pretext that the Greek Cypriots "move on their own free will" after submitting applications and that "although not encouraged to stay, they are not forcibly expelled". The expulsions, which are part of Turkey's policy of ethnic cleansing directed against the Greek Cypriots, were intensified between 1975-77 while the talks were still going on and despite of the Third Vienna Agreement, and continued later on, in 1981. The year in which the expulsions intensified was in 1976, leading to a reduction of 57% in the population of the enclaved.

POPULATION DEVELOPMENT OF ENCLAVED

END OF YEAR	POPULATION OF ENCLAVED NUMBER	REDUCTION	%
1974	12.289	-	-
1975	9.544	-2.745	-22
1976	4.095	-5.449	-57
1977	2.627	-1.468	-36
1978	2.315	-312	-12
1979	1.989	-326	-14
1980	1.807	-182	-9
1981	1.477	-330	-18
1982	1.316	-161	-11
1983	1.250	-66	-5
1984	1.133	-117	-9
1985	1.050	-83	-7
1986	1.015	-35	-3
1987	951	-64	-6
1988	908	-49	-5
1989	869	-33	-4
1990	824	-45	-5
1991	788	-36	-4
1992	753	-35	-4
1993	728	-25	-3
1994*	715	-	-

• NOTE: Number of enclaved on 30.6.1994

What has urged these people to remain on their land of their own free will despite the hardships they have endured?

Above all it was their great love of their places of origin, of their homes and of their property with which they have become closely linked due to their hard labour. Another factor which contributed to this, was the expectation for a quick solution to the Cyprus problem and the strong belief that justice would prevail, thanks to the intervention of the international community.
Finally, the fear of becoming refugees and the uncertainty they would face, if they abandoned their property, also provided another incentive for staying. The Cyprus government has assisted them by offering monthly subsidies for food through UNFICYP. On 5 August 1994 they also received an allowance to repair their houses. In addition to the government, individuals, and in particular, elementary school teachers, priests and nuns, have all actively and tirelessly contributed to the welfare of the enclaved, despite repeated threats against their lives by the illegal regime.

The Third Vienna Agreement

In 1975 an agreement was concluded between the intercommunal negotiators, Glafcos Clerides (the present President of the Republic) and the Turkish Cypriot leader, Rauf Denktash, regarding the Greek Cypriots living in the occupied areas and the Turkish Cypriots living in the government controlled areas. The major provisions of this agreement, known as the Third Vienna Agreement, according to a press communique issued on 4 August 1975, are the following:

1. The Turkish Cypriots at present in the south of the island will be allowed if they want to do so, to proceed north with their belongings under an organized programme and with the assistance of UNFICYP.
   
2. Mr Denktash reaffirmed and it was agreed "that the Greek Cypriots in the north of the island are free to stay and that they will be given every help to lead a normal life, including facilities for education and for the practice of their religion, as well as medical care by their own doctors and freedom of movement in the north."
   
3. The Greek Cypriots at present in the north who, at their own request and without having been subjected to any kind of pressure, wish to move to the south will be free to do so.
   
4. UNFICYP will have free and normal access to Greek Cypriot villages and habitations in the north.
   
5. In connection with the implementation of the above agreement, priority will be given to the reunification of families, which may also involve the transfer of a number of Greek Cypriots, at present in the south, to the north.
   

Has this Agreement ever been implemented?
The Cyprus government implemented the part of the agreement regarding the Turkish Cypriots; consequently, all Turkish Cypriots, except a few living in the areas controlled by the State, were transferred to the occupied areas according to the provisions of the agreement.
It must be noted, however, that the vast majority of them did not leave on their own free will but were forced to move to the occupied areas through the use of various brutal acts perpetrated by TMT, the illegal terrorist organisation of the Denktash regime. The touching scenes of parting with neighbours, which took place then, constitute a real proof that Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots can co-exist. None of the provisions of the agreement regarding the Greek Cypriots living in the occupied areas, was ever implemented by the Denktash regime. The Turkish Cypriot leader, Rauf Denktash, not only failed to honour his signature by implementing the agreement he signed, but he repeatedly violated all its provisions. In their persistent attempt to take advantage of the de facto situation and divide the island by changing its demographic character, Turkey and the Turkish Cypriot regime have implemented a series of well-planned coercive and suppressive measures, imposed on the Greek Cypriot enclaved, in order to throw them out of their homes and properties. Blatant violations of human rights
confirmed by objective reports

United Nations

A confidential UN report condemns Turkish Cypriot "authorities" for the systematic abuse of the human rights of the enclaved Greek Cypriots, who remained in the occupied area following the 1974 invasion.
The report, prepared in April 1994, documents in detail the pressures brought to bear on the 12.300 Greek Cypriots who remained in the Karpass Peninsula following the 1974 invasion. These ranged from restrictions on travel, the right to own property, freedom of movement and discrimination in education, health care and religion. The outcome of the afore-mentioned is, that only 570 Greek Cypriots remain in the Karpass today. In a condemnation of Turkey and of the Turkish Cypriot leadership, the report concludes: " the Greek Cypriots of Karpass are now a small minority in a part of Cyprus, which was once almost totally Greek Cypriot, and they are subject to a system whose long-term aim appears to be directed towards the eventual extinction of the Greek Cypriot community in Karpass."
The report, which was sent to the UN Secretary General in April, documents what amounts to an open breach of the 1975 Vienna Agreement, under which the Turkish Cypriot side agreed to protect the interests of the enclaved. It also acknowledges that the UN peacekeeping mission has been "frustrated, hampered and limited" in its efforts to implement and monitor the Vienna Agreement.
"This is the result of a deliberate policy on the part of the 'northern' authorities. That policy is based primarily on restricting UNFICYP's freedom of movement and access to the Greek Cypriot community and is contrary to the Vienna Agreement", the report states. Report of ASME-HUMANITAS
The H. Struebig/A. Krieg delegation of the German humanitarian organisation ASMEHUMANITAS, which visited Cyprus in April 1976, had instructions to investigate violations of humanitarian provisions. They had the opportunity to visit the Turkish occupied part of Cyprus and to talk to the authorities responsible for the Turkish Cypriot community.
After Mr Denktash's protests, the delegation continued its investigations and completed the final report in 1977. According to the report: "... b) the population in the north faces great difficulties because of lack of security for their lives and property.
c) The conditions of life of the Greek Cypriots in the north are particularly oppressive as they are deprived of their basic human rights. We established these facts by visiting the Karpass area and talking to many persons on May 3rd 1977. In particular:

1. they are deprived of the freedom of movement and trade.
2. They live under permanent fear for their life and property because of continuous harassment by the mainland Turks and lack of protection.
3. They are deprived of secondary education and of sufficient elementary school facilities.
4. They are deprived of proper medical services.
5. They are not allowed to look after their fields freely and in many cases not even at all.
6. Homes and other properties are often the object of theft and the people are being beaten and generally inhumanely treated.
   The problems of the population in the north are becoming greater because of the attitude of the mainland Turks who have settled there in thousands. We received many complaints of many crimes and atrocities committed by the mainland Turks against the population of the north, both Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots without being punished..."

Council of Europe

Various violations of human rights are denounced in the report dated 10 July 1976 and further confirmed by the European Commission of the Council of Europe report, dated 9 October 1983 and in particular :

• Deprivation of possessions, looting and wanton destruction. The Commission accepted testimony as proving beyond any reasonable doubt that looting and robbery on an extensive scale by Turkish troops and Turkish Cypriots have taken place.
  
• Discrimination. The Commission notes that the acts violating the Convention were exclusively directed against members of one of the two communities in Cyprus, namely the Greek Cypriot community.
  

Council of Europe rapporteur on the demographic structure of the Cypriot communities, Mr CUCO, denounces this situation in his report dated 27 April 1992: "I drew a preliminary conclusion from my talks with all the parties concerned: the establishment of Turkish settlers in the northern part of the island is an indisputable fact. The presence and naturalisation of the settlers undoubtledly constitutes a further barrier to a peaceful negotiated solution of the Cyprus conflict."
The report was adopted by the Assembly on 7 October 1992.

European Ministers of Education

On 28 September 1994, the European Ministers of Education expressed concern about the difficult circumstances under which schools operate in the occupied areas of Cyprus. Their views were included in reply letters sent to Cypriot Minister of Education and Culture, Claire Angelidou, who appealed for their intervention to persuade Turkey to allow schools to operate in more humane and safe conditions.

Foreign press reports

Dozens of articles were written in the foreign press about the inhumane living conditions the enclaved are suffering in the occupied areas. We mention only a few of them:

• The Sunday Times, 6 November 1977 In an article dated 6/11/1977, the English newspaper The Sunday Times reports the following: "accounts of a widow's murder and of another alleged murder and an attempted murder have been revealed by refugees. Greek Cypriots say the murder was only the latest in a series of incidents in the township of Rizokarpaso, in the isolated north eastern tip of the divided island, aimed at terrorising the township's remaining Greeks into fleeing south and leaving their property for the Turks. The Cyprus government has asked the United Nations peace-keeping force to investigate all three "but the Turks don't allow us to investigate", said a U.N. spokesman."
  
• Die Weltwoche, 30 August 1978 In a report published on 30/8/1978 in the German-language Swiss newspaper, Die Weltwoche, Peter Schmid, who visited the occupied part of Cyprus as a guest of the Denktash regime, describes the experience he had during a visit to Rizokarpaso, which reveals the state of terror under which the enclaved live. ÒI ordered a drink at the Greek tavern and when the proprietor brought it, I followed him into the kitchen to talk to him in private. The grey-haired man avoided my eyes and evaded every question. "Speak freely," I urged him. "That would be the end", he whispered. Outside, in a covered market place, I found that several hundred Greeks, mainly wrinkled old people had gathered together. When their clothing is distributed, their names are called out and the items of charity are thrown to the recipient."
• Milliyet, 8-14 January 1979 A Turkish journalist, Refik Erduran, confirms that the enclaved live under inhuman conditions and speaks of the need to rectify this situation, as it would serve Turkish propaganda. In a series of seven articles on the Cyprus problem, published in the Instanbul daily Milliyet (8-14/1/79) he writes that the Cyprus government "repairs and maintains even the empty Turkish Cypriot houses. It also makes sure that the foreigners on the island observe this fact. But the money spent is well worth the positive impression it creates. We too had a trump card we could use in the same way. We could ensure that the handful of Greek Cypriots who remain in the Karpass peninsula could achieve a higher standard of living than the one they enjoyed before. We could meet their educational, transportation and health needs; we could prevent any settler from moving into their villages, we could make sure that they would not feel uncomfortable in any way, we could provide them with credits and agricultural aid. We could almost force them to live better. We could do all this at a cost of 5 to 10 million Turkish liras and the region would pay this money back in produce in a few years. Then we could exhibit this showcase to the whole world.
  But we did not do any of these things. Our inadequacy in propaganda springs not from lack of words but from our inability to make proper use of such opportunities."
• 24 Heures, 3 June 1980 Having visited Cyprus in 1980, Gilberate Favre of the French-language Swiss newspaper 24 Heures, reported the following:
  "The number of Greek Cypriot refugees is not about to diminish for nearly everyday, Cypriots enclaved in the Karpass region, in the Famagusta district, are expelled by the Turkish army.
  "A quarter of an hour to leave everything" According to refugees' testimonies, the methods of intimidation of the Turkish army are diverse. First of all, there is the daily war of humiliations and "punishments" to give an example of them. There is also an attempt to give this policy of expulsion an aspect of legality although, in actual fact, it is contrary to the Charter of Human Rights. "I was given a quarter of an hour to leave my house and my village", a refugee says. "Turkish soldiers made me sign a statement according to which I wanted to leave my village. Then they took me to the U.N. zone and showed my statement to U.N. soldiers." ... Nodding his head saddly, an old man, who has lived under Turkish occupation for four years, tells me that he was willing to put up with almost anything in order to remain in his house and in his ancestral village."

A few illustrations of the blatant violations of human rights

In order to eliminate the Greek Cypriot element from the occupied areas, completely isolate the two communities of the island and allege that co-existence is "unrealistic", a most reprehensible policy was conceived, i.e a combination of the brutal separation of families with the systematic colonisation of the occupied areas. There is a continuous influx of thousands of Turkish settlers from Anatolia, who do not only change the demographic structure of the island but also harass both Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots living in the occupied areas. The mainland settlers, estimated presently at about 85.000, were used as a lever of pressure on the enclaved so as to force them to abandon their homes. Most of the crimes committed by Turkish mainland settlers against Greek Cypriot enclaved, were intended to terrorise them further, so as to leave their land and properties which were subsequently distributed amongst the mainland settlers.
Threats constitute another measure of psychological pressure. Some of the threats used to "persuade" the Greek Cypriots to sign applications are the following: "If you do not sign, you will join the ranks of the missing", "if you do not sign, you will in any case be removed from your home and be taken to another area," "if you do not sign, you will in any case be evicted, but without any of your belongings". In order to realise the full extent of the violations of human rights in the case of the enclaved, the following are some illustrations of the inhumanities perpetrated against the Greek Cypriots in the Turkish occupied area. It is to be noted that this is not a compehensive list.

1. Separation of families. The vast majority of Greek Cypriot prisoners of war were released in the areas controlled by the Government of the Republic of Cyprus and were never allowed to be reunited with their wives and children as should be the case according to the provisions of the Vienna Agreement.
   In addition, most children were obliged to leave their homes in order to go to secondary school. In both cases, families were either brutally separated or obliged to move to the south so as to lead a normal family life again. Children under sixteen are allowed to visit their parents during the Christmas and Easter holidays, but always at the discretion of the occupying regime. Many has been the time when the children, ready to take the bus, have been turned back.
2. Lack of Education. The lack of education possibilities for their children is another form of indirect but effective pressure exerted on the enclaved to make them leave their land. The Denktash regime has never allowed the operation of secondary schools. Only three elementary schools were allowed to operate in the villages of Rizokarpaso, Kormakitis and Agia Trias. Thus, many children are obliged to come to the areas under the control of the Cyprus Republic, away from their families in order to attend secondary schools. Another form of pressure is the refusal of the Turkish Cypriot regime to allow any replacements of teachers, who were forced to leave the occupied areas. Today there are only four teachers left. They are obliged to face the threats of the illegal regime on a daily basis and they have to make enormous efforts and undergo many sacrifices in order to keep the three elementary schools in operation. In the two elementary schools for Greek Cypriots, the very few pupils are not allowed to be taught history, religion and geography of Cyprus. Despite the fact that the Ministry of Education sends the textbooks on time, in July, these are kept and "checked" by the Denktash regime which delivers them around the end of November or at the beginning of December or it may choose not to deliver them at all.
   
3. Murders. There is a long list of murders of helpless people, mostly the elderly. Incidents of murders were reported with dates and specific details by people who were once enclaved. In most cases, they have been confirmed by foreign press reports. Such characteristic cases are the ones of Demetris Demetri and Flourentza Flourou from Rizokarpaso, who were both robbed, stabbed, cut into pieces and eventually burnt by mainland settlers in May 1990. Even in the case of such incidents, the so-called "police" of the Denktash regime has taken no measures to protect the enclaved and never has any offender been arrested or punished.
   
4. Rapes and threatened rapes. A flagrant case of rape was that of a fourteen-year-old girl who, on 3/10/76 was raped in the presence of her father, who was at the same time assaulted, beaten up and robbed.
   
5. Savage beatings. Greek Cypriot men of all ages are savagely beaten up and then asked to sign applications to leave, under some pretext or another, and frequently without a pretext. This is a daily occurrence in all occupied Greek Cypriot villages.
6. Detention and ill-treatment. Greek Cypriot men are arrested and detained for a number of days, without reason, ill-treated and then asked to sign applications in order to leave.
7. Forced labour and humiliations. Forced labour and humiliation are part of the everyday life of the enclaved. The innumerable occasions when Turks have forced Greek Cypriots to carry out specific tasks are vividly described by those previously enclaved who sought refuge and are now living in the area controlled by the Cyprus government. They describe, for instance, how Greek Cypriots were forced to build the house of a sergeant of the Denktash "police" in Agios Andronikos and were then refused payment for their work.
8. Plundering of movable and immovable property. Enclaved Greek Cypriots, who were not able to prove, by producing title- deeds, that the houses in which they lived belonged to them (either because they lost the title-deeds or because the houses belonged to their children or parents) were forcibly driven out and were obliged to live in barracks or with relatives. Their houses were subsequently seized by the Turkish Cypriot administration. On many occasions, property owned by the enclaved was confiscated and given to settlers from mainland Turkey. The property, which had not officially been confiscated by the Denktash regime, was either plundered by mainland settlers or included in the military "restricted areas" or, was out-of-bounds to the enclaved. In addition, the enclaved were never certain that they would ever enjoy any income from their labour. In many cases, mainland settlers would harvest the fields sown by the Greek Cypriots, the lawful owners of those fields.
9. Burglaries. This is a routine event, from which no home escapes. Even the elderly, as well as the invalided are not spared. With a view to terrorising the enclaved, masked men raid the houses of the enclaved Greek Cypriots during the night, whom they beat up, sometimes to death.
   Another method widely adopted to terrorise the Greek Cypriots, includes knocking on doors during the night, throwing stones at houses and firing shots in the air.
10. No freedom of movement. Greek Cypriot in the Turkish occupied area has ever been granted anything remotely resembling freedom of movement. They are all strictly confined to the precincts of their villages and are subjected to strict curfews. The enclaved are not allowed to visit the nearby villages without "police" supervision, unless they report to the "police" on the purpose of their visit beforehand. All men between the ages of 18 and 50 must report to the "police" once a week. Even today the enclaved are not allowed to visit the free areas unless they have submitted an application. Such applications must be submitted two weeks in advance and time limitations are imposed on their stay in the government controlled area. Many are the times the Denktash regime has denied them permission to visit the area controlled by the government of Cyprus. As a result, the Greek Cypriot enclaved can never be sure when they will be able to do so.
    The steps taken to isolate and restrict the movement of the Greek Cypriots have been intensified as the years passed. As a result, the enclaved are not even allowed to go out in the fields near their villages without the permission of the Turkish Cypriot "police". As for the visits to nearby villages or to the town of Ammochostos, they are very rare indeed. When they occur, they always take place under the supervision of the Turkish Cypriot "police".
    
11. No communication. The Greek Cypriot enclaved are always forbidden to come into contact with any visitors unless the so-called "policemen" of the Denktash regime are present. Even direct contact with UNFICYP soldiers, whose movement is seriously limited, is not allowed without the presence of "policemen". When food is distributed by the United Nations,"policemen" are present in order to prevent any free conversation between the enclaved and U.N. soldiers. Moreover, communication between the enclaved and their relatives in the free areas is virtually impossible as there is not a single telephone in the villages inhabited by the enclaved. Correspondence with their relatives is only allowed through the United Nations but mail is checked by the "police" of the Denktash regime.
    
12. No medical care. The provision of the Third Vienna Agreement concerning medical care was never implemented. No Greek Cypriot doctors were ever allowed to settle in the area or to visit the enclaved on a regular basis. The Denktash regime refuses to give permission to the enclaved to visit the free areas for medical care. There have been, for example, incidents in which the enclaved were forced to leave their houses and land and move to the free areas because of health problems and the lack of adequate medical care in the occupied areas. Following their recovery and when they wish to return to their houses the Denktash regime refuses to allow them back.
    
13. Restriction of trade. The shepherds are restricted to grazing their flocks only a short distance outside their village. They use old abandoned houses in the villages as sheepfolds in order to try to prevent animal robberies by the mainland settlers. Moreover, Turkish settlers take their sheep into the cultivated fields, thus, destroying the crops.
    Fishermen are no longer allowed to fish and their boats have been mostly stolen by the Turks.
    Moreover, according to witnesses, Turkish settlers used to buy their groceries on credit from shops owned by Greek Cypriots but never payed for them. Every kind of commercial and economic deal between enclaved Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots is prohibited "by law". Anybody caught violating this ban is arrested and brought before Turkish Cypriot courts which impose heavy fines. The object of this measure is to impose such financial constraints on the enclaved so as to force them to request their transfer to the free areas.
    Apart from farming restrictions, their ability to earn a living is further limited by their being forced to sell their produce at ridiculously low prices.
14. Religious intolerance. The enclaved Greek Cypriots are unable to practice their religion freely. They are not allowed to attend church services and it is forbidden for the church bells to toll. Besides, it must be noted that most churches have been desecrated. In 1994, there were only two priests in the occupied areas.
15. House searches. Turkish "police" search Greek Cypriot houses requesting ownership documents for items such as cookers, heaters and radios etc. Any items for which no such documents can be produced, are confiscated.

19 years after the signing of the Vienna Agreement...

Almost two decades after the signing of the Agreement, Greek Cypriot enclaved, whose population has dramatically shrunk to a point threatening their future existence there, continue to live in appalling and unacceptable conditions.

Do the enclaved have a future?

Concluding, it is obvious that the enclaved face an extremely serious danger. Unless practical measures are implemented, they are condemned to annihilation as their existence is being seriously threatened.

The role of the international community

Only the international community can urge Turkey to comply with international law and finally, fully implement the Third Vienna Agreement in the form of a temporary measure until a final and just solution of the Cyprus problem is reached. In this respect, the international community should, above all, become aware of the tragedy and calamities of the enclaved, and consequently safeguard the right of these people to remain in their ancestral land in conditions of safety and dignity.

A humanitarian issue

It should be understood that as this is obviously a humanitarian issue, a special and separate aspect from the political aspects of the Cyprus problem and an issue of violation of human rights, the implementation of the Third Vienna Agreement is a matter of ethics and of principle. If not rectified, Turkey's unacceptable conduct might prove to be a dangerous precedent for some unscrupulous leaders, who will certainly not hesitate to imitate such a conduct because of the international community's tolerance.

A test case for Turkish good will

The respect of the human rights of the enclaved on the part of the Turkish side is a test case for Turkish credibility for any future agreement. The intransigence of the Turkish side in the case of this humanitarian issue leads to justifiable queries: "How can the Greek Cypriots trust any future agreement when the existing agreement on the enclaved has been so blatantly violated?"
Finally, the role of the enclaved in the success of any future settlement of the Cyprus issue and in the creation of confidence between the two communities is underestimated. This handful of people could be the link between them, they could be the bridge between the occupied areas and the free areas and the proof (contrary to the allegations of advocates in favour of the partition of the island) that the two communities can and must co-exist in order to build together a brilliant future for a single and sovereign Republic of Cyprus.

THE MISSING CYPRIOTS

The humanitarian problem of the missing persons in Cyprus, could be described as the most tragic issue of all. Altogether 1,619 Greek Cypriots including civilians, women, children and old people - who in most cases were seen alive in the hands of the Turks well after the cessation of hostilities, in August 1974, have not been seen since and their fate remains unknown.

Considering that the Greek Cypriot population at the time numbered only 530,000, this figure is excessively large. If we were to calulate the number of American missing persons during the eight-year Vietnam war by analogy to the missing persons of Cyprus in relation to its population, then this number would be approximately 750,000.

There is indisputable evidence that most of those who never returned were detained by Turkish soldiers and/or armed Turkish Cypriot elements under the command and control of the Turkish Army during the Turkish invasion. Evidence that Greek Cypriots were captured and held in concentration camps was not disputed even by the Turkish side. The Turkish authorities themselves had issued lists of Greek Cypriot prisoners of war but subsequently some of these people were never released and yet no explanation on the part of Turkey has been forthcoming.

There were also people who were listed by the International Committee of the Red Cross (I.C.R.C.) as prisoners of war or as enclaved persons in the Turkish occupied areas of Cyprus but who were not released. Greek Cypriot prisoners who had sent messages to their families over the illegal Turkish Cypriot radio "Bayrak" are still missing. Other missing persons were identified in photographs in Turkish newspapers.

The U.N. General Assembly in its Resolution 3450 of 9 December 1975, expressed concern "about the fate of a considerable number of Cypriots who are missing as a result of armed conflict in Cyprus" and reaffirmed the basic human need of their families in Cyprus to be informed about the fate of their missing relatives.

Despite repeated appeals by the Government of Cyprus and the relatives of the missing persons and a number of International Organisations to the Turkish Government, Turkey, contrary to International Law and in particular the provisions of International Human Rights Instruments refuses to provide any information about the fate of the 1,619 missing Greek Cypriots. Instead, the Turkish Government insists that they must be considered dead, without evidence. Turkey's negative approach to the issue explains to a great extent the lack of any progress in the efforts for resolving the issue pursued through the Committee on Missing Persons established in 1981 and operating in accordance with the relevant UN General Assembly Resolutions.

Turkey's insistence that it knows nothing about the fate of the missing persons and that no Greek Cypriots are held is not supported by any facts. On the few occasions where the Turkish side was compelled to accept during discussions in the presence of UN and ICRC Representatives - unanounced visits to places where according to information Greek Cypriots were to be found, several Greek Cypriot "missing" persons were found imprisoned in the areas occupied by the Turkish Army.

In 1975, the Human Rights Organization Amnesty International, presented the Turkish Government with a list of 40 missing persons about whom it had compiled such evidence which, in most cases, points to their presence in Turkish prisons. No response to Amnesty's demand for an account was ever received from the Turkish Government.

The European Commission of Human Rights of the Council of Europe in its report which was adopted on 10 July 1976, on the violation of human rights by Turkey in Cyprus, found Turkey responsible under the Convention on the issue of the missing persons. The Commission concluded that:

"There is a presumption of Turkish responsibility for the fate of persons shown to have been in Turkish custody. However, on the basis of the material before it, the Commission has been unable to ascertain whether and under what circumstances Greek Cypriot prisoners declared to be `missing' have been deprived of their life".

Turkey's refusal to provide the families of the missing persons with any information about the fate of their relatives is also in contravention to the 1949 Geneva Conventions and Human Rights Conventions.

Faced with a stalemate, the Third Committee of the U.N. General Assembly took up the issue of the missing persons in December 1982 and adopted a new resolution in which it expressed concern over the lack of progress towards the commencement of the investigative work of the Committee on Missing Persons and invited the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances of the Commission on Human Rights to recommend ways and means of overcoming the pending procedural difficulties.

The Turkish Cypriot leader, Mr. Denktash, reacted strongly to the adoption of this resolution and stated that it was binding on the Turkish Cypriot side.

The political Affairs Committee of the European Parliament also took up the issue of the missing persons, following a report by the British Europarliamentarian Lady Elles, Vice-President of the European Parliament and Rapporteur of the Political Committee of the European Parliament on Questions of Missing Persons.

On 11 January 1983 the European Parliament overwhelmingly passed a resolution on the situation in Cyprus in which it "emphasizes that the families of the missing people have a right to know the truth and urges the Foreign Ministers meeting in political cooperation to redouble their efforts to find a positive solution", to this humanitarian problem. Furthermore, it "draws the Minister's attention to the need to find a final solution to this painful problem without delay, particularly through the release of those missing people who might be detained in prison".

The need to resolve this purely humanitarian issue as quickly as possible was underlined by the Special Coordinator on Cyprus at the State Department. Ambassador Ledsky, who recently stated that "I think it is high time that the missing persons issue was resolved".

The C.M.P. in its April 11, 1990, extensive Communique recognizes that no real progress has been made in the results of its work and appealed to all concerned to pursue with renewed vigour their assistance so that the Committee can accomplish its humanitarian mission. What is required is conclusive evidence and information that would enable the Committee to reach conclusions which would be convincing to the families concerning the fate of their loved ones as well as to the international community.

MISSING PERSONS

Missing Persons	Men	Women	Total
Reservists/Soldiers	992	--	992
Civilians	511	116	627
Total	1503	116	1619

Age	Over 60	40-60	16-39	Under 16	Total
Men	257	226	995	25	1503
Women	58	15	41	2	116
Total	315	241	1036	27	1619

"Milliyet Halk Gazetesi"
23 Haziran 1976

Translation of the Article in Milliyet.

In the issue of the Instanbul daily, Milliyet of 23rd June, 1976 (page 5) Mr Mehmet Ali Birand, the Turkish journalist who visited Cyprus, writes under the heading ALLOW US TO SEARCH FOR THE MISSING PERSONS:

"One of the problems created after the war is the missing Greek Cypriots" question. In order to find these missing persons the Greeks have formed a Committee. Formed after the pattern of similar committees during the British administration of Cyprus, the Committee is working very efficiently.

The President of the Committee, Mr Fysentzides, has appealed to Turkey and to the Turkish community in Cyprus to help them locate these missing persons.

Mr Fysentzides has said in his appeal:"Relying on the pictures published in the Turkish press and on the documents and lists submitted by the UN and Turkish authorities, we have established that 2,000 of our compatriots are missing after the Turkish military operation. They are our fathers and sons. As families we are in distress. We want to know whether or not they are dead. If they are, we will try to remedy our grief. However, the Turkish leadership is refusing to answer our call. This has nothing to do with propaganda. If the Turkish authorities agree, we will send four or five people and under the Turkish army's supervision, we will search for them, because we have established from the list submitted to us that they are alive. Try to understand our suffering and help us".

The Pancyprian Committee of Parents and Relatives of Undeclared Prisoners of War and Missing Persons bases its arguments on pictures published in the Turkish press and on UN name-lists of prisoners to be returned. The Committee believes that the missing persons are still alive and perhaps it could locate and find some of them. "We are ready to obey all your orders", says the Committee's President".

Under this interview a picture is published in which four Greek National Guardsmen are shown surrendering to the Turkish forces. Mr Birand writes:

"The Greeks are continuing their propaganda, especially on missing persons and POWs. People visiting Cyprus are handed brochures in which the above picture is included. The following is printed under the picture:` This picture was taken by a Turkish war correspondent captured by Greek National Guardsmen'.

When I returned to Turkey, Mr Ergun Konuksever saw the picture by chance and quickly recognised it and said:` It was I who took this picture when I was wounded in Kuchuk Kaimakli (Omorphita) and taken prisoner by Greeks. They seized my three cameras and films. In spite of the UN's decision, they did not return them to me when I was freed. I remember very well taking this picture in Serdali (Chattos village) during the tank operation. These are the Greek POWs captured by the tank crew MERIC I and the soldier in the foreground is Corporal Mustafa from SAMSUN offering cigarettes to the POW's".

SPECIAL - N E W S - B U L L E T I N

Special NEWS BULLETIN (a Turkish Cypriot Publication), Wed- nesday 4 September 1974

Greek Cypriot POW's during lunch hour. They were visited yesterday by the Representatives of the Turkish Red Crescent who toured all Prisoner of War Camps in the Turkish controlled region of the island to ascertain the needs of the prisoners.

The following persons, identifield in the photo, are still missing:

1. Korellis Antonakis tou Michael, age 30, from Kythrea
2. Nicolaou Paniccos tou Chrysostomou, age 26, from Achna
3. Skordis Christoforos tou Georghiou, age 25, from Dhali
4. Papayiannis Ioannis tou Charalambous, age 24, from Anglandjia
5. Hadjikyriakos Philippos tou Stephani, age 19, from Famagusta

Names of persons arrested by the Turks who conveyed messages to their families over the illegal Turkish Cypriot "Bayrak" while in captivity and whose present whereabouts are unknown:

Name Surname

1. ANDREOU SOTIRIS
2. CHRYSILIOU ANASTASIOS
3. CONSTANTINOU COSTAS
4. DRAKOS GEORGHIOS
5. GEORGALLAS GEORGHIOS
6. HADJIKYRIAKOU GEORHIOS
7. KALAPODAS CHRISTAKIS
8. KORELLIS ANTONAKIS
9. KOUSPOU SOTERIS
10. MICHAEL GEORHIOS
11. MOUSCOU CHRISTAKIS
12. PAPACHRISTOFOROU ALEXANDROS
13. PETRI CHRISTOS
14. PYRKOS DEMETRIOS
15. YAGOUMETTIS IACOVOS
16. ZAMBAS MICHALAKIS

TESTIMONIES DOCUMENTING MESSAGES BROADCASTED ON BAYRAK FROM PERSONS STILL MISSING

Summary of testimony given by Kiki Andreou Symeonides from Kythrea

During the course of the second phase of the Turkish invasion, that is on 14.8.74, Kiki Andreou together with her family went to Kalopanayiotis. On 15 or 16 August 1974 and at about 20:00 while she was listening to the Greek broadcast of the illegal Turkish Cypriot radiostation BAYRAK, the announcer said that at that moment messages by captured national guardsmen would be broadcast. Among those who spoke she heard her co-villager Antonakis Korellis, whom she knew very well say: I am Antonakis Korellis from Kythrea, we are doing fine.

Both her family and herself were certain that the person who spoke was indeed her co-villager, Antonakis Korellis.

Summary of testimony given by Yiannoula Paviou Argyrou from Kato Lakatamia

On 8 or 9 August 1974 and at about 20:00, after the news bulletin of the illegal Turkish Cypriot radio station BAYRAK, Yiannoulla heard messages by Greek Cypriot prisoners. Among those who delivered a message was someone named Demetrios Pyrkas from Mammari. He stated his name, that he was from Mammari and that he was fine. She herself did not know this missing person.

Summary of testimony given by Costas Georgi from Assia village

During the course of the Turkish invasion he was working for MACHI and THARROS newspapers and among his duties was the monitoring of the illegal Turkish Cypriot radio station BAYRAK broadcasts. On 4 or 5 August 1974 and at around 20:15 after the news bulletin and BAYRAK commentary, he heard five Greek Cypriots speaking and saying that they were doing fine with the Turkish Cypriots. One of the five was the missing Christakis Kalapodas from Kakopetria. He did not know Kalapodas.

________________________________________________________
|                                                       |
|         INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE OF THE RED CROSS      |
|                       Tracing Agency                  |
|                                                       |
|                                       Nicosia 20.9.74 |
|                                                       |
|                        ATTESTATION                    |
|                        ~~~~~~~~~~~                    |
|                                                       |
| The Tracing Agency certifies that according to        |
| information in its possession.                        |
|                                                       |
| Name, first name   GEORGHIOU ANDREAS                  |
| Date of birth      22 yrs old                         |
| Place of birth     Famagusta                          |
| Father's name      Petrasides Georhios                |
| Rank                  -----                           |
| Unit                  -----                           |
| Service number        -----                           |
| was taken prisoner on -----                           |
| and interned in    at Seray Police Station where he   |
|                    was visited by ICRC Delegates on   |
|                    23.8.74                            |
| Under POW number   Unknown                            |
|                                                       |
| the above information is based on the following       |
| documents:                                            |
|                   List sent by ICRC Delegate on       |
|                   23.8.74 and filed under ref:        |
|                   EZY 282B/58                         |
|                                                       |
|                                                       |
|                              (signature)              |
|                              M. Baumgartner           |
|                      Head of tracing Agency Nicosia   |
|_______________________________________________________|

Note:
Petrasides Georghiou Andreas, 22 years old, from Famagusta, IS STILL "MISSING", although he was visited and listed as Prisoner of War at the Turkish Prison of Seray, by Delegates of International Committee of the Red Cross on 23.8.74, in accordance with the above attestation.

Additional List of Prisoners seen by the ICRC on 28/8/1974 at Pavlides Garage

1/1974 EZY 284D

1. HADJINICOLAOU Takis
2. HADJIDEMETRIOU Pavlakis
3. KALLIS Savvas
4. ELIA Odysseas
5. ANDREOU Takis
6. NEOPHYTOU Stelios
7. KEMEKIS Panikos
8. PARASCHOU Michalis
9. KOUNOUROS Panayiotis
10. HADJIDEMETRIOU Georhios
11. TSAPARELLIS Takis
12. KAPHOURI Savvas
13. LIASI Savvas
14. ONOUPHRIOU Nicos
15. NICOLAOU Andreas
16. PROCOPIOU Glikerios
17. KAPHORI Vasos
18. FLOURENTZOU Nicos
19. PALLARI Kyriakos Lysandri
20. KOSMA Pepis

Note:
The above list was published in the press early in September 1974 by the International Committee of the Red Cross. Unfortunately of the twenty (20) persons who were listed by the ICRC as prisoners at the Turkish prison "Pavlides Garage", the following were not released and ARE STILL "MISSING":

1. HADJINICOLAOU Takis (No.1 of the above list)
2. HADJIDEMETRIOU Pavlakis (No.2 .................)
3. KALLIS Savvas (No.3 .................)
4. ELIA Savvas (No.4 .................)
5. ANDREOU Takis (No.5 .................)
6. NEOPHYTOU Stelios (No.6 .................)
7. KEMEKIS Panicos (No.7 .................)
8. PARASCHOU Michalis (No.8 .................)
9. KOSMA Pepis (No.9 .................)

Credibility of the E.U.

I remember reading a Turkish news article that talked about Turkey's accession to the European Union. The article complained about possible brief restriction on Turks moving westward into the bloc once Turkey joins. The Turkish article hammered away ... the E.U. is a restricted private club. Interestingly enough ... no mention was made in that article on Turkey pushing for and receiving even harder restrictions on Greek Cypriots going to the North as envisioned in the Annan Plan. Now we see that it’s the credibility of the E.U. that keeps the Turkish FM awake at night. Wasn't Turkey's EU accession suppose to set the country on a course of dramatic transformation? Wasn’t Turkey suppose to normalize relations with its neighbors, particularly with Greece, Armenia and Cyprus before it joins the union? Turkey, a country that has violated UN and SC resolutions now numbering over 120, is worried about the credibility of the EU. The hypocrisy of it all...


From the Cihan News Agency:

Published: Friday, December 09, 2005
zaman.com

Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul urged the European Union to aid solving the problem in Cyprus.

"The EU should just help to solve the problem but should not exhibit an attitude which promotes non-solution. This will damage its credibility," Gul told a Brussels news conference on Thursday.